FuzzyTagz
If the ambition is to provide two hours of instantly forgettable, popcorn-munching escapism, it succeeds.
Jim Fitch
I am watching Jekyll in America on Netflix (Netflix has a lot of British programming available). I'm an American married to a Brit.I've watched 4 of the 6 episodes so far and enjoying the series. Nesbitt plays a convincing split personality and good unhinged Jekyll building that personality as the show progresses. It is interesting how different Jykell appears visually from Jackman without much apprent change in makeup etc. Some of this is surely due to Nesbitt's acting talent lending you to believe he is a different person.The weakest link in the early episodes is Benjamin played by Paterson Joseph. I immediately knew he was a Brit although he was trying to fake an American southern accent. I've heard a lot of Brits do very convincing American accents but this one was horrible, painful really, and the only real major fault in the series for me so far.
rwk2
This series is like a set of six sprints. First episode was OK but pacing itself. Nothing too extraordinary, just gathering steam. It really hits its stride during episodes two through four. So much so that right there it's clear whose going to win the race. Hence, at the tail end episodes five and six are still solid but not as wicked cool as the middle ones. I was nervous in the beginning of number six, looked like it was going to go way cliché, but it came back strong.A little sample of some of the coolest lines (and there are MANY):"Trust me, I'm a psychopath!" and "My Daddy wants to have a word with you."One of the things this series pulls off amazingly well is the use of flashbacks. It was clearly plotted out from the get-go (unlike LOST) and hence it all fits together perfectly. I haven't been this impressed by a whole series in a good long while.Awesome.
rorshach9
The only way I can imagine that so many people think so highly of this series is if they only watched the first episode and didn't bother with the rest. The entirety of this mini series is nothing but a lot of build up, threats and promises of activities that would make this a good show with no payoff whatsoever.The first episode is really good. There is so much potential for a great story. But the creators spent years shopping the premise around to various studios before finally getting the green light and after watching all of the episodes one gets the impression that they only wrote the first episode and then slapped the rest of them together after funding came in.During all of the episodes Hyde makes continual threats of violence, cannibalism, sexual abuse, acts of debauchery, etc. Outside of them pointing out that he frequents prostitutes none of these things ever happen. Hyde beats up some bad guys. That's it. That's all. Spoiler alert! Instead of building up to a shocking finale Hyde sacrifices himself for his wife. Nothing else. We watch him for six hours spitting insults and promises about the vicious and savage proclivities that permeate his thoughts and he does little more than barking without biting.I'm the first person to say there's no call for violence for violence's sake. I'm the first person to point out that story is far above explosions and machine guns and gratuitous sex. But don't have the lead character promise all of the above and give us none. Sucks to be you in the BBC won't air things like that but, as with the prostitutes, there are ways around anything. The best horror movies are those that do not show you the creature/monster/whatever until the end if at all. By the same token this line of thinking can be extended to anything that would prompt censors to baulk at whatever behavior hits the screen.All in all don't make promises you can't keep and if you're going to write and rewrite a pilot episode for years the least you could do is have some concept of how to finish the damned series. As for everyone who seems to think this show is great... well I just don't know what to say for you. Or to you for that matter other than how bad is the stuff you're watching now if you think this show is great?
AdnanZian
It's one of the most brilliantly engaging, twisted, hilarious, morbidly fascinating pieces of television writing in ages. "Jekyll", very unlike Steven Moffat, also falls apart a bit at the end. At least, it does if you consider it a stand-alone mini-series. That Moffat has written a second series of the show does not matter if it never appears on our television screens, and it appears from interviews and such that Moffat regards the second series as a 'sequel' to this, which suggests this should be able to stand alone. And it does, for the most part. The final episode, however, solves most of the questions and gives satisfying answers to the questions so brilliantly posed by Mr. Moffat during the first five episodes... then goes and throws in a few new questions, including one huge mystery posed by the epilogue of the series, one which causes the answers which previously made sense to be questioned, and yet is worked so intricately into the fabric of the elaborate plot Moffat lays out that it is impossible to ignore or dismiss as a cheap sensationalist shock moment. It would be an effective teaser for an upcoming series if the upcoming series were anything approaching a certainty, but since this was, to some extent, supposed to stand alone it is a tragically poor ending, beyond the initial jolt of the moment.There is so much going on in "Jekyll" psychologically, so much going on in the writing, layers of meaning and layers of narrative devices being used at all times, that one could write a dissertation in many different fields in Humanities, Social Sciences, and Sciences on just six episodes of television. That is impressive, but almost not as impressive as Moffat taking a literary classic with huge popularity and truly making something that is almost entirely his own from it. This is not an 'adaptation', this is pretty much an original script with characters (and not even really that) and a central plot (and not really even that) we're familiar with. It is originality in a field of unoriginality, and proves with great finality that modern-day adaptations don't have to be dull. There's no point in even comparing this to Stevenson, whose story had different concerns and a different ideology. Jekyll and Hyde here serve as the basis of a different (and much more modern) exploration of duality than in Stevenson's novel.With his "Doctor Who" episodes and with later series of "Coupling", Moffat displayed a knack for being clever with structure and with story. His scripts have always worn their complexity on their sleeves, which is great when the thing works organically and completely. "Jekyll" is five episodes of absolutely some of the most dazzling, brilliant storytelling ever on television, and one of the most unique takes on a literary classic I can think of, then... Maybe, just maybe, Moffat tried to be too clever and lost the thread a bit. There are several plot issues, but let's not bother with those. Hopefully we will see what Moffat had in mind for the second series in some form. If left unproduced, perhaps the scripts will somehow find their way online. As it stands right now, "Jekyll" is 97% of an astonishing television classic, and that 3% is a lot harder to ignore than you'd think.
