Nigel P This is a film that revels in its very low budget: Doctor Marlowe's (Christopher Lee) quarters are cramped, tatty and cluttered, the location filming is frequented by only a handful of extras and the effective soundtrack is performed by a tiny ensemble. These are not complaints – such things enhance the intimacy of what is one of the most faithful and entertaining filmic adaption of RL Stephenson's 'Strange Case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde' novella.Two things marred any potential success this may have had upon release. To begin with, Stephen Week's production was intended as a 3D release, but the process was abandoned mid-filming. This lends many scenes a curiously fluid movement which again enhances its uniqueness. Secondly, the central character of Jekyll/Hyde was renamed Marlowe/Blake – although all other supporting characters have names taken from the book. Probably this was due to Amicus' concerns that audience confusion would otherwise arise between their film and Hammer's upcoming 'Dr Jekyll and Sister Hyde'.And yet, there is a top-notch cast. Peter Cushing joins Lee as Utterson, Richard Hurndall as Lanyon, Susan Jameson as patient Diane and Mike Raven provides his best horror performance as Enfield. Yet it is Lee as the kind but starchy Dr Marlowe who steals the show. His descent into the initially mischievous Blake, with the death's head grin and increasingly macabre sense of frivolity is terrific, despite the unconvincing hairpiece. He becomes frightened of the increasing power of his unsightly alter-ego in a tremendous scene in a leaf-strewn park. His earlier blurred-faced attack on a young girl in the street is surprisingly sinister. There is a finely balanced sense of sympathy/danger about Blake that is skilfully conveyed and carried through to the violent finale.

Claudio Carvalho In the Nineteenth Century, in London, the psychologist Charles Marlowe (Christopher Lee) researches a new drug capable to release inhibitions and uses his patients as guinea pigs. He discusses the principles of Freud with his friend Dr. Lanyon (Richard Hurndall) and decides to experiment his drug in himself. He becomes the ugly and evil Edward Blake and his friend and lawyer Frederik Utterson (Peter Cuhsing) believes Blake is another person that might be blackmailing Charles. Meanwhile Charles loses control of his transformation."I, Monster" is another version of the classic story of Dr. Jekyll & Mr. Hyde. The art direction is very beautiful and the great attractions are certainly Christopher Lee and Peter Cushing. My vote is six.Title (Brazil): "O Soro Maldito" ("The Damned Serum")

lemon_magic While I enjoyed Paul Massie and the Hammer version of the "Jekyll and Hyde" story ("The Two Faces Of Dr. Jekyll"), I admit that this version from Amicus Studios may actually be the better film. I suppose it depends on what you are looking for in your "Jekyll/Hyde" adaptation. "I,Monster" is pretty subtle (for a horror film) in its approach to telling the story. The director lets events unfold in an unhurried, meticulous way that allows the viewer to gather all the details without ever being sensationalist or lurid. Everything is present - the debate about the true inner nature of man; the London surroundings; the increasingly violent and degenerate deeds of the good doctor's alter ego; and the sad end. (I won't say "tragic", because this doesn't have the "feel" of a tragedy to me - it feels like a cautionary tale, and the protagonist is hardly a hero undone by fate.)Here's how good and solid the movie is: "Marlowe" (this movie's name for Jekyll) doesn't actually inject himself until nearly 30 minutes into the movie, and when he does...well, you haven't seen "unsettling" until you've seem post-transformation Christopher Lee puttering around his lab with a huge smile of malicious glee on his face, and then picking up a lab mouse with one hand and a scalpel in the other.The copy I saw (on YouTube) was a bit blurry and smeared, but it wasn't bad enough to keep me from noting some really nice camera work, costumes and scenery that reinforced and sometimes foreshadowed the developments in the movie...especially the scene in the daffodil laden park when "Marlowe's" ugly alter ego reasserts itself without the drug. Peter Cushing is a definite 2nd fiddle in this, but he's still a class act. And the rest of the cast keeps up nicely, especially the actor who play's Lee's mentor.This was a fine, fine example of what Amicus could do at its best and would reward the time spent by anyone who has a taste for British horror from previous decades.

ferbs54 The makers of the "deluxe" "I, Monster" DVD apologize on screen at the film's beginning for the quality of the presentation, explaining that they used the best video and audio sources available. And an apology certainly is in order, as the look of this eagerly awaited release (it was released for the first time on DVD in January '05) is quite grainy, revealing what was most likely lousy 16mm print sources. Flesh tones are uneven, sound quality is so-so, and the crisp look that DVD viewers have come to expect is wholly lacking. Extras on this "deluxe" release are comprised of one trailer (in execrable shape) and five or six stills. Anyway, that's the bad news. The better news is that the movie itself turns out to be not half bad. Christopher Lee plays Charles Marlowe, a psychotherapist in 1906 London who injects himself with a serum to wipe out his superego inhibitions. Only problem is, he keeps turning into a progressively ugly and more violent beast (one called "Mr. Blake") every time he does so. Sound familiar? Yes, this IS Stevenson's Jekyll & Hyde tale repeated again for the umpteenth time. So why not just call it Jekyll & Hyde? Who knows? Stevenson IS credited, after all! Anyway, Lee is darn good in his dual role, and Peter Cushing is dependable as always as his suspecting friend. Some very unusual music by Carl Davis adds some strange atmosphere, and a very streamlined screenplay avoids unnecessary clutter (such as characterizations). There's really not much to this movie, actually, besides Lee going bonkers, and without his and Cushing's presence, it certainly would be less than watchable. Still, I suppose we should be grateful for what little we have here, as any opportunity to see Cushing and Lee together is one that all fans of classic horror should pounce upon. Just don't expect anything on the order of "Horror Express"!