Claysaba Excellent, Without a doubt!!

ThedevilChoose When a movie has you begging for it to end not even half way through it's pure crap. We've all seen this movie and this characters millions of times, nothing new in it. Don't waste your time.

TrueHello Fun premise, good actors, bad writing. This film seemed to have potential at the beginning but it quickly devolves into a trite action film. Ultimately it's very boring.

Logan By the time the dramatic fireworks start popping off, each one feels earned.

HotToastyRag I don't know how many versions of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde they've made, or how many you've seen, but I'd never seen it before I watched the Michael Caine version. I didn't even know it was going to be a horror movie, so I was in for quite a surprise! Besides the blackouts that signal an impending commercial break, there's no other indication that this was a television movie. The acting is very good and the production values and costumes are beautiful. Immediately at the opening credits, you're immersed in the world of 1800s England. Michael Caine plays the respected Dr. Jekyll, and when he saves the life of a little girl, you're sure of two things: he's the good guy in the story, and he'll be cast as the iconic Dr. Larch nine years later in The Cider House Rules. Michael is ostracized from his father-in-law, Joss Ackland, who believes his experimentation in alternative medicine killed his daughter, and to make matters even more complicated, he's falling in love with his sister-in-law Cheryl Ladd! Where does the scary part come in, you ask? Well, you'll have to watch the movie—or already know the very famous Robert Louis Stevenson story—to find out. Definitely put the kids to bed before watching this version, though, because it's pretty spooky. Depending on how much you love him, it can be tough to watch Michael Caine in those scenes, but just keep telling yourself it's a movie and not real life—and then watch Hannah and Her Sisters afterwards. Cheryl Ladd is incredibly beautiful, and she and the other ladies in the film get to wear absolutely gorgeous gowns, designed by Raymond Hughes. There's also a pretty strong supporting cast, which is always a nice surprise in a TV movie, including David Schofield as the slimy reporter, Miriam Karlin as the corrupt brothel owner, and Frank Barrie as the handsome butler.Kiddy Warning: Obviously, you have control over your own children. However, since it's a horror movie, I wouldn't let my kids watch it.

Leofwine_draca After their successful collaboration on JACK THE RIPPER, director David Wickes and star Michael Caine teamed up again for yet another Victorian-set horror story. Visually, the two films are very similar indeed, with exactly the same atmosphere of public fear and with villains running through fog-bound streets. I wouldn't be surprised if they used the same sets, too. While spoiled by some serious flaws, JEKYLL & HYDE is still a pretty enjoyable movie, mainly because of the good cast and the authentic-looking setting.The major flaw with this film is the misjudging of the horror scenes. They may be violent, but the character of Hyde is so ridiculous-looking that he isn't scary in the slightest. Instead the makeup guys really went overboard with Caine's appearance, covering his face and hands with air-sacks in order to make his rubbery flesh expand and pulsate. The comical scenes of Caine transforming seem more like something out of THE INCREDIBLE HULK than a serious horror film, which this tries to be, and the two different methods are at odds; on one hand you have the atmosphere-building and scene-setting, and on the other a series of cheap shock tactics designed to make the viewer jump. It doesn't work, and Hyde just ends up being laughable and a big disappointment.The acting, though, on the other hand, is fine, even if most of the cast indulge in television-movie histrionics and go over-the-top at times. Caine is fine as the romantic lead, but he really goes overboard sometimes when he transforms. Cheryl Ladd is given a rather dumb blonde to play, but she does it well and convincingly. Joss Ackland appears as a rival doctor to Caine's Jekyll, and is pretty good, as are all the familiar British faces supporting the cast, especially David Schofield as the sleazy journalist, Snape. Watch out for an ancient Lionel Jeffries briefly appearing as Jekyll's father. In all, this is a well-shot and directed drama, but as a horror it falls short. The shorter running time than JACK THE RIPPER means that there are none of that film's pacing problems, and a wealth of action means that JEKYLL & HYDE never becomes boring; just stupid occasionally. In all, an average adaptation, seriously flawed but with its fair share of points in its favour.

jacobjohntaylor1 This a great film. Doctor Jekyll discovers a potion that brings out his evil side. This is very scary movie. It is one of the scariest movies ever made. This movie has a great story line. It also has great acting. It also has great special effects. It is very intense. Micheal Caine is a great actor. And this got to be his best movie. If you like a good horror movie then you need to see this movie. If don't like this movie then you probably don't know what good horror movie is. 6.2 is to low of a rating for this movie. It is a true horror classic. Cheryl Ladd is a great actress. Joss Ackland is a great actor. This is one of the best TV movies I have ever seen.

gavin6942 In August 1884 London, the respected Dr. Henry Jekyll (Michael Caine) experiments with a potion that turns him into the monstrous Mr. Hyde. The Hyde part is not such a nice character, though, raping, murdering and breaking stuff if it comes into his path.Reviews tend to be less than favorable for this film, with Mike Mayo calling it "tepid" and saying that it "never really gets to the heart of the matter." He even blasts the special effects, saying that "the Hyde makeup looks like a lumpy onion with a bad attitude." I accept that the Hyde character is a bit too unhuman, but Mayo mistakes what "the heart of the matter" is.The story is not centrally concerned with Jekyll or Hyde, but rather the world of technology and science against religion and Victorian values. There is a constant social commentary that the world moves forward and science replaces ignorance, as men increasingly become like gods. Whether this message is right or not is beside the point: it is the argument Jekyll makes to his class against his father-in-law.I love Michael Caine and everything that he does, but it is Edward Snape, the snooping news reporter, that is by far the most interesting character in this television film.I thought the film was fun and quite good, regardless of the naysayers. If a version existed with audio commentary or some further insight into the film's background, that would be wonderful. But as it stands, it's a fine film, and a very welcome version of the Jekyll and Hyde story.