Frequently Bought Together
What Other Items Do Customers Buy After Viewing This Item?
Product details
|
Tags Customers Associate with This Product(What's this?)Click on a tag to find related items, discussions, and people.
|
Customer Reviews
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
37 of 37 people found the following review helpful
Format:DVD
This DVD contains both the 1941 Spencer Tracy version and the 1932 Fredric March version. Believe me, the latter is far superior to the former. In fact, in viewing Tracy's film, the only reason I could find for maintaining my attention was the incredibly magnetic Ingrid Bergman. Basically, Spencer Tracy's acting is not up to scratch. He doesn't actually seem to change much when he becomes Mr. Hyde. He doesn't seem particularly threatening and the film plods along rather than sweeping you up and carrying you with intrigue, terror and delight. In addition, there are lots of irritating Freudian arty scenes which simply do not belong.
But flip the disc over and you'll find the brilliant Fredric March version, never bettered since 1931. Notice how inventively shot it is for the 1930s: Dr. Jekyll is shown from a first person view for the whole of the start of the film including a wondrous mirror shot when he prepares himself. This is later used again when he abuses the very substances that will bring about his transition. The film, too, was pre-censor and is far more daring. The prostitute that Mr. Hyde stalks practically strips off for Dr. Jekyll when he takes her home.
But the reason why the film is so good is that it has insight without ever tripping over itself because of it. Fredric March's interpretation of Mr. Hyde as being primitive and ape-like is incredible. There is simply no resemblance between himself and Dr. Jekyll. People comment on how the make-up looks silly to the modern viewer. But they fail to notice just how much like a primate Mr. Hyde is being depicted as. March's performance itself is astounding. The scene when he beats the waiter in the bar for asking for a tip and then mocking him is terrifying: Mr. Hyde is truly mankind unhinged, at its most dangerous.
The standout scene for myself, however, is when Mr. Hyde walks outside in the rain for the first time. March plays him brilliantly animal-like, absorbing the feeling of freedom, unashamadly gleeful where other Victorians would have fled for shelter. And, for the record, the effects when he changes were revolutionary and still look excellent. They really do.
The extras included are a Bugs Bunny cartoon based (very loosely) on the famous horror tale and a commentary by some American film historian whose calm, controlled voice might just grate with you. However, I believe it is testament to the brilliant 1932 flick that he only provided a commentary for that film and not the 1941 Tracy version.
It really is one of those films that you should see, especially if you are a fan of good horror movies. These people were writing the book that modern film-makers seem to have misplaced.
But flip the disc over and you'll find the brilliant Fredric March version, never bettered since 1931. Notice how inventively shot it is for the 1930s: Dr. Jekyll is shown from a first person view for the whole of the start of the film including a wondrous mirror shot when he prepares himself. This is later used again when he abuses the very substances that will bring about his transition. The film, too, was pre-censor and is far more daring. The prostitute that Mr. Hyde stalks practically strips off for Dr. Jekyll when he takes her home.
But the reason why the film is so good is that it has insight without ever tripping over itself because of it. Fredric March's interpretation of Mr. Hyde as being primitive and ape-like is incredible. There is simply no resemblance between himself and Dr. Jekyll. People comment on how the make-up looks silly to the modern viewer. But they fail to notice just how much like a primate Mr. Hyde is being depicted as. March's performance itself is astounding. The scene when he beats the waiter in the bar for asking for a tip and then mocking him is terrifying: Mr. Hyde is truly mankind unhinged, at its most dangerous.
The standout scene for myself, however, is when Mr. Hyde walks outside in the rain for the first time. March plays him brilliantly animal-like, absorbing the feeling of freedom, unashamadly gleeful where other Victorians would have fled for shelter. And, for the record, the effects when he changes were revolutionary and still look excellent. They really do.
The extras included are a Bugs Bunny cartoon based (very loosely) on the famous horror tale and a commentary by some American film historian whose calm, controlled voice might just grate with you. However, I believe it is testament to the brilliant 1932 flick that he only provided a commentary for that film and not the 1941 Tracy version.
It really is one of those films that you should see, especially if you are a fan of good horror movies. These people were writing the book that modern film-makers seem to have misplaced.
17 of 17 people found the following review helpful
Format:DVD
two versions of "dr. jekyll and mr. hyde" for the price of one. a very good deal.
on side a, the 1932 film (filming was actually completed in 1931) is by far the best adaptation of the novel, and certainly far better than the one with spencer tracy.
fredric march gives an outstanding performance in the title roles. slightly too theatrical at times, but great nevertheless - especially as hyde. his evil side really shows.
for the time, there was some remarkable camera work during the transformation scenes. they still hold up extremely well after all these years. different lighting filters were used to change the colours on fredric march's face by over-lapping them or something like that.
previous editions have been censored quite heavily. i once read that the only copy available ran for about 80 minutes. luckily, this is not the case now. when released on video back in the mid-90s, the cuts had been restored and that is the version that is on this d.v.d.; running time is 92 minutes. this is a true classic, both in the horror genre and in cinema history.
sadly, the 1941 film with spencer tracy lets the side down. he is simply not suitable for the part. he is too gruff an actor and too rough round the edges to bring any kind of conviction or impact. ingrid bergman is better as the luckless ivy.
i saw this film back in the early 90s, but i have forgotten how cheap looking this is. the film sets are too small and they also look rather flimsy. the running time on this one is rather shorter than i expected. this runs for 108 minutes, but the time for general release was 122 minutes. still, this film is rather slow and boring no matter how long. not a success as far as i'm concerned.
special features are slim; trailer for the '41 film, a rather pointless cartoon of bugs bunny based on the "jekyll and hyde" theme and audio commentary by a film historian. the latter is the best feature.
watch the version with fredric march and be thrilled, fascinated and entertained.it's worth five stars on its own. watch the spencer tracy film and be bored and disappointed.
on side a, the 1932 film (filming was actually completed in 1931) is by far the best adaptation of the novel, and certainly far better than the one with spencer tracy.
fredric march gives an outstanding performance in the title roles. slightly too theatrical at times, but great nevertheless - especially as hyde. his evil side really shows.
for the time, there was some remarkable camera work during the transformation scenes. they still hold up extremely well after all these years. different lighting filters were used to change the colours on fredric march's face by over-lapping them or something like that.
previous editions have been censored quite heavily. i once read that the only copy available ran for about 80 minutes. luckily, this is not the case now. when released on video back in the mid-90s, the cuts had been restored and that is the version that is on this d.v.d.; running time is 92 minutes. this is a true classic, both in the horror genre and in cinema history.
sadly, the 1941 film with spencer tracy lets the side down. he is simply not suitable for the part. he is too gruff an actor and too rough round the edges to bring any kind of conviction or impact. ingrid bergman is better as the luckless ivy.
i saw this film back in the early 90s, but i have forgotten how cheap looking this is. the film sets are too small and they also look rather flimsy. the running time on this one is rather shorter than i expected. this runs for 108 minutes, but the time for general release was 122 minutes. still, this film is rather slow and boring no matter how long. not a success as far as i'm concerned.
special features are slim; trailer for the '41 film, a rather pointless cartoon of bugs bunny based on the "jekyll and hyde" theme and audio commentary by a film historian. the latter is the best feature.
watch the version with fredric march and be thrilled, fascinated and entertained.it's worth five stars on its own. watch the spencer tracy film and be bored and disappointed.
2 of 2 people found the following review helpful
Format:DVD
OK, two very different versions of the same story.
The SPENCER TRACEY version (made 70 years ago), is a slower paced more thoughtful version. Certainly less use of special effects and make up. The most obvious difference between Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde is the good and evil personalities. This was not everybodies cup of tea, at that time.
However, the FREDERICK MARCH version (made 80 years ago) is, even now, considered the diffinitive version of the story, and there has been many. Visually, it is almost impossible to believe that the same actor played both parts. Jekyll is a kindly, thoughtful member of society. Hyde is a deranged monster that has newly been let loose. The censors cut out bits of this years ago, but this is the full version. Given the limited technology at the time, this is a masterpiece.
The SPENCER TRACEY version (made 70 years ago), is a slower paced more thoughtful version. Certainly less use of special effects and make up. The most obvious difference between Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde is the good and evil personalities. This was not everybodies cup of tea, at that time.
However, the FREDERICK MARCH version (made 80 years ago) is, even now, considered the diffinitive version of the story, and there has been many. Visually, it is almost impossible to believe that the same actor played both parts. Jekyll is a kindly, thoughtful member of society. Hyde is a deranged monster that has newly been let loose. The censors cut out bits of this years ago, but this is the full version. Given the limited technology at the time, this is a masterpiece.
Most Recent Customer Reviews
dissapointing
loved this when i first saw it as a child many years ago. alas it has not for me at least retained its appeal. its dated.
Published 13 months ago by e suffolk
Really surprised
I fancied watching a classic B/W film and having done a bit of research purchased this double movie DVD. Read more
Published 17 months ago by R. Lawrence
A true horror film
This film, with a wealth of talent is directed brilliantly by Victor Fleming. A fine performance by Spenser Tracy in the lead role (as Jekyll and Mr. Read more
Published on 15 Dec 2009 by Rama Rao
What's to say
Simply put, THE best adaptations to date of the world classic The Strange Case of Dr.Jekyll and Mr. Hyde by Stevenson.
The two of them, awesome moviemaking for the era.
The two of them, awesome moviemaking for the era.
Published on 7 Nov 2009 by Ricardo Miranda
"I'll show you what horror means"
Rouben Mamoulian gives us an erotic, scary vision of man as beast, illustrating the dangers of sexual repression with a hairy paw. Read more
Published on 21 May 2009 by rhinocerosfive
A double dose of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde
This is definitely a good value for money DVD. You get both the MGM 1941 (with Spencer Tracy, Ingrid Bergman and Lana Turner) and the Paramount 1932 (with Fredric March and Miriam... Read more
Published on 6 Jun 2005 by Miguel M. Santos
Dr Jekyll and Mr Hide. 1932
For any horror movie collector this film has to be a must. It's got great atmosphere and is very raunchy and suggestive for its time. Read more
Published on 11 Jan 2005
Customer Discussions
|
This product's forum
Active discussions in related forums
Search Customer Discussions
|
Related forums
|
Listmania!
|
|
Look for similar items by category
Look for similar items by subject
Feedback
- Would you like to update product info or give feedback on images?
|
