Review of I, Monster

I, Monster (1971)
5/10
middling, somewhat faithful Jekyll/Hyde adaptation w/name changes, and some Freud added
15 February 2005
I saw the Retromedia DVD of this, presented in widescreen. The picture quality left a lot to be desired - grainy and faded.

The movie is a fair adaptation of the original story. Parts of it seem to be almost verbatim, particularly the scene where the story of the young child being trampled is related. It's told rather than shown, as in the story, though it is partially depicted in a nightmare a character has. Why the Jeckyll/Hyde names were changed when the lesser characters' names were maintained is a mystery. If someone ever meets Lee at a convention, maybe they could ask him?

Some reviews play up the drug use and Freudian psychology angles. It's true the potion was injected rather than imbibed, but that didn't seem to be too significant. Freud gets some mentions in the first third or so of the film, and the Doctor does seem to be treating patients with some of his theories, possibly, but after that it isn't in the forefront.

Lee's transformation is one of the more minimalist ones. He gets a silly grin that keeps his upper teeth exposed, and a jaunty walk. In later transformations, his hair becomes more unkempt, thin, and gray; his walk becomes less jaunty and a little stooped; his skin becomes whiter and a little warty. At no point, however, could anyone mistake him for a different person. That makes the failure of his friends to recognize him after the injection, from either the front or back, rather bizarre.

If a potential viewer is interested in seeing some of the more faithful screen adaptations of this story, they might check this one out. Otherwise, there wouldn't be too much point - it's nothing exceptional.
3 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed