SCIFIHISTORY.NET
  • MAINPAGE
  • About
  • Reviews

Stardate 10.23.2023.D: The Duality Of Man - A Review Of 1931's 'Dr. Jekyll And Mr. Hyde'

10/23/2023

0 Comments

 
Picture
At a time when Universal Pictures were achieving the unthinkable, unimaginable success in creating some of film’s most enduring Horror creations, Paramount Pictures kinda/sorta slipped one in under the radar and – gasp – even made film history … but some might not ever know it.
 
1931’s Dr. Jekyll And Mr. Hyde – directed by Rouben Mamoulian – certainly wasn’t the first adaptation of Robert Louis Stevenson’s The Strange Case Of Dr. Jekyll And Mr. Hyde (first published in 1886); and yet the motion picture does have a few ‘firsts deserving of mention and celebration, especially given that’s precisely what we do in this space on SciFiHistory.Net.  According to IMDB.com, this Jekyll had the honor of being the first picture screened at the first first film festival ever: the Venice Film Festival came into being in 1932, and it continues hosting some of the screen’s best nearly a century later.  Furthermore, at a time when Universal’s productions were thrilling and chilling American audiences, it was Jekyll’s Fredric March – in the guise of the medicinally-tormented physician turned madman – who won Horror’s very first Academy Award ever.
 
Those are two feathers in an incredible cap, indeed.
 
Alas, it wasn’t even a decade after the film’s release that it was nearly forgotten, and such an oversight was deliberate.  As Fate would have it, Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer secured the rights to produce their version of the Stevenson story; and – in the process – they went out of their way to have the 1931 incarnation suppressed.  Wikipedia.org suggests that the studio went so far as to local and destroy what they believe to have been all prints of March’s star-turning performance; and the feature was believed for many years to have been lost.  Thankfully, it survives to this day despite a rather nefarious campaign to see it unnecessarily removed from history.
 
(NOTE: The following review will contain minor spoilers necessary solely for the discussion of plot and/or characters.  If you’re the type of reader who prefers a review entirely spoiler-free, then I’d encourage you to skip down to the last few paragraphs for the final assessment.  If, however, you’re accepting of a few modest hints at ‘things to come,’ then read on …)
 
From the film’s IMDB.com page citation:
“Dr. Jekyll faces horrible consequences when he lets his dark side run wild with a potion that transforms him into the animalistic Mr. Hyde.”
 
As impressive as the 1931 incarnation of Dr. Jekyll And Mr. Hyde is – and make no mistake as this one is very impressive for its day and endures quite well even today – it still includes some curious choices that I think lessen the experience.
 
In ways, it’s almost like director Rouben Mamoulian was experimenting at times with other ways to craft his narrative; and – as interesting as they might be – I thought the visual trickery occasionally got in the way of the story being told.  There are a few sequences captured as if they’re intended to be first person – told directly from the point of view of Dr. Jekyll – and I found myself wondering why on more than once.  For example, when he’s in the world of Mr. Hyde, such flourish makes more sense – the audience gets transported in such a way that they see the world through the eyes of a lunatic.  But there just weren’t enough differences between the two perspectives – Jekyll vs. Hyde – to have the technique register as smartly as it probably could have, making it a bit of a misfire for me.
​
Picture
Additionally, Mamoulian employed some other wipe dissolves, a way of deliberately showing the demarcation between two scenes while an obvious bar separates them for clarity’s sake.  (As this dissolve evolved in film, the bar became much less noticeable, thankfully.)  Essentially, it would appear that the director wanted to demonstrate (rather obviously) the duality of the story and its various circumstances, perhaps doubling down on the motif of two personalities that ties directly to the central subject matter.  Sure, it’s a nice way of showing what’s going on simultaneously with different characters, but I thought it grew tiring after the first few uses.  Later in the flick, it’s almost downright parodic the way Mamoulian chose to hold two opposing viewpoints for so long; if the point can’t be made in a few seconds, then perhaps it should’ve been jettisoned.
 
Setting aside my reservations with the finished product, there is just so much remaining that’s worthy of some unquestioned love.
 
Because this was made before the Hays Code went into effect (1934-1968), this Jekyll retains an incredible and noticeable undercurrent of human sexuality, something later iterations would temper if not ignore completely.  For example, Dr. Jekyll expends a great deal of heartfelt expressions of traditional love for his fiancé, Muriel Carew (Rose Hobart).  He speaks somewhat profoundly and poetically about his feelings for her, and she responds with equal almost Shakespearean aplomb.  But such flowery language has no place in the exchanges between Mr. Hyde and Ivy Pearson (Miriam Hopkins as a bar-singing temptress); he’s prone to violence and torture in their moments alone, driven somewhat obsessed with her voluptuousness.  Though I’ve read these romantic entanglements were not part of the original Stevenson tale, they’re introduced and handled so elegantly here one might wonder how they were ever possibly left out.
 
Still, what works best in all of this is March, so much so that his Academy Award win makes perfect sense.  He handles the dual roles here with incredible ease, imbuing Hyde with an almost animalistic propensity to every subtle gesture while allowing Jekyll to possess that world-serving high-mindedness whenever he’s on screen.  The actor clearly foisted this whole affair onto his capable shoulders, and I’ve read that audiences of the day loved it, making it stand alongside Universal’s monster universe as it should.
 
This one definitely earned its place in history despite the efforts of some who would rather have had it forgotten for all the wrong reasons.
 
Dr. Jekyll And Mr. Hyde (1931) was produced by Paramount Pictures.  DVD distribution (for this particular release) has been coordinated by the fine folks at Warner Bros. via the WB Archive Collection.  As for the technical specifications?  While I’m no trained video expert, I thought the pictures sights and sounds were very good from start-to-finish.  As for the special features?  Given the fact that I viewed this one on television, there were no special features under consideration.
 
Highest recommendation possible.
 
In the interests of fairness, I viewed Dr. Jekyll And Mr. Hyde (1931) from a recent airing on Turner Classic Movies; and I was in no way, shape, or form beholden to anyone to produce a review.  I did this one entirely because I wanted to, and I’m glad I did.  This version is, arguably, one of the best out there.

​-- EZ
0 Comments

Your comment will be posted after it is approved.


Leave a Reply.

    Reviews
    ​Archive
    ​

    Reviews

    Daily
    ​Trivia
    Archives
    ​

    January
    February
    March
    April
    May
    June
    July
    August
    September
    October
    November
    December

    mainpage
    ​ posts

    June 2025
    May 2025
    April 2025
    March 2025
    February 2025
    January 2025
    December 2024
    November 2024
    October 2024
    September 2024
    August 2024
    July 2024
    June 2024
    May 2024
    April 2024
    March 2024
    February 2024
    January 2024
    December 2023
    November 2023
    October 2023
    September 2023
    August 2023
    July 2023
    June 2023
    May 2023
    April 2023
    March 2023
    February 2023
    January 2023
    December 2022
    November 2022
    October 2022
    September 2022
    August 2022
    July 2022
    June 2022
    May 2022
    April 2022
    March 2022
    February 2022
    January 2022
    December 2021
    November 2021
    October 2021
    September 2021
    August 2021
    July 2021
    June 2021
    May 2021
    April 2021
    March 2021
    February 2021
    January 2021
    December 2020
    November 2020
    October 2020
    September 2020
    August 2020
    July 2020
    June 2020
    May 2020
    April 2020
    February 2020
    January 2020
    December 2019
    November 2019
    October 2019
    September 2019
    August 2019
    July 2019
    May 2019
    March 2019
    February 2019
    January 2019
    December 2018
    November 2018
    October 2018
    September 2018
    August 2018
    June 2018
    May 2018
    March 2018
    January 2018
    December 2017
    November 2017
    October 2017
    September 2017
    August 2017
    July 2017
    June 2017
    May 2017
    April 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    January 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016
    August 2016
    July 2016
    June 2016
    May 2016
    October 2015
    September 2015
    August 2015
    July 2015
    June 2015
    May 2015
    March 2015
    February 2015
    January 2015
    December 2014
    November 2014
    October 2014
    September 2014
    August 2014
    July 2014
    June 2014

    RSS Feed

Proudly powered by Weebly