Daughter of Dr. Jekyll (1957) User Reviews

Minor Amusement For Fans of 1950s "B" Horror

[gftbiloxi · 5/10 · 11 June 2007]

Edgar G. Ulmer began his career as a set designer to the famous theatrical impresario Max Reinhardt; by 1920 he was working in films, and although often uncredited labored on such legendary films as Fritz Lang's DIE NIBELUNGEN and METROPOLIS. By 1927 he was in Hollywood, and set design work led to assignments as a director. In 1934 Ulmer brought the full force of his talents upon Universal's THE BLACK CAT--a brilliantly realized film that many consider among the finest horror films of that decade. But Ulmer's affair with script girl Shirley Castle, wife of a studio executive, resulted not only in his termination at Universal but placed him on an industry-wide blacklist as well. He would never work at a major studio again.

But Ulmer had a knack for getting the most out of a tiny budget, and he soon found himself in demand as a director at second-string studios and for independent productions. Between his dismissal from Universal in 1934 and his death in 1972 he would direct more than forty films, and he was often noted for his ability to bring a remarkable artistic vision to the screen in spite of low budgets and questionable casts.

All that said, the 1957 DAUGHTER OF DR. JEKYLL was, according to daughter Arianne, a project undertaken for the sake of a paycheck; it is far from Ulmer's most memorable. Even so, as 1950s B-horror flicks go, it is far from the worst--in spite of tenth-rate special effects Ulmer manages to endow the movie with an entertaining atmosphere and the occasional jab of humor, and it is considerably more coherent than most of its kind.

The story concerns orphaned Janet Smith (Gloria Talbott), who has now reached her twenty-first birthday and arrives at the home of her guardian Dr. Lomas (Arthur Shields.) She brings with her future husband George Hastings (John Agar), who soon wins Dr. Lomas' approval, and all seems pleasant. But Janet is in for a surprise: Dr. Lomas tells her that she is heiress to the estate, left to her by her father, the notorious Dr. Jekyll, and no sooner is Janet in residence than corpses begin to crop up. Has she somehow inherited her father's chemically-induced evil? The script here is extremely transparent, and you'll know what's going on long before Janet does. It is also more than a little odd, managing to wrap ideas about vampires and werewolves into the whole Dr. Jekyll package. Add to this extremely obvious miniatures awash in dry ice, mediocre special effects, and a cast that tends toward the obvious at every possible turn--well, the overall effect is somewhat hooty, to say the least.

THE DAUGHTER OF DR. JEKYLL will never rank along side the likes of Ed Wood's PLAN 9 FROM OUTER SPACE in the "so bad it's good" cult movie derby--Ulmer is too much of an artist to permit tipsy tombstones--but it is actually amusing in its low-rent efforts. Recommended to fans of the genre.

GFT, Amazon Reviewer

No "Black Cat" But Not Bad

[ferbs54 · 5/10 · 7 December 2007]

Not to be confused with "Dr. Jekyll and Sister Hyde" (1972) or "Dr. Jekyll and Ms. Hyde" (1995), "Daughter of Dr. Jekyll (1957) is a moderately interesting quickie from legendary Poverty Row director Edgar G. Ulmer. In this one, Gloria Talbott--who would find the role for which she is perhaps most fondly remembered in the following year's "I Married a Monster From Outer Space"--learns, on her 21st birthday, that she is the eponymous daughter of the infamous scientist. This causes her and her fiancé, 1950s sci-fi stalwart John Agar, some understandable angst, especially when a series of murders commences in the nearby village... To be painfully honest, there really is nothing much to this movie, but Ulmer directs with so much panache, and Talbott, as usual, is so pretty and appealing, that these two elements put the film over. Especially effective are two surrealistic nightmare episodes suffered by Talbott, as well as Ulmer's use of fog and swirling mist; his cloud-covered moon shots are a real thing of beauty, too. On the down side, we have a surprise ending that is not much of a surprise, and a plot that would have us believe that Jekyll's alter ego Hyde was really a bloodsucking werewolf! This film is certainly not the horror masterpiece that Ulmer's "The Black Cat" (1934) turned out to be. Still, it IS fun, and this DVD is as crisp and clean looking as can be. Modern-day interviews with Agar and with Ulmer's daughter make for nice extras, too.

So Mr. Hyde was some sort of werewolf/vampire combo monster?

[bensonmum2 · 5/10 · 28 October 2007]

On her 21st birthday, Janet Smith (Gloria Talbott) discovers she has inherited an estate and a large sum of money. She's suddenly a wealthy woman about to be wed to the man of her dreams, George Hastings (John Agar). But she learns something else. She learns her father's secret. She discovers she is the daughter of the infamous Dr. Jekyll. And she begins having vivid nightmares of killing people in the most horrible of ways. She wakes to find herself covered in blood, her clothes torn, and her shoes muddy. Has she somehow inherited a dark, split-personality from her father that turns her into a snarling maniac?

For anyone who has seen both Daughter of Dr. Jekyll and Universal's She-Wolf of London, am I alone in comparing the two? I hate to give too much away about either movie, but there's no denying the similarities – two women about to be married, both under the impression that they turn into killers when the moon is full, slowly being driven mad, yet neither is responsible for the acts they are accused. It's too much of a coincidence to be just dumb luck. Oddly enough, though, I prefer Daughter of Dr. Jekyll to She-Wolf of London. It's not a great movie by any stretch of the imagination, but it is slightly more enjoyable to me than the earlier movie. Chief among the reasons that I prefer this movie is the female lead. June Lockhart is one of my biggest complaints with She-Wolf of London. Gloria Talbott is far more believable in the similar role.

My biggest complaint with Daughter of Dr. Jekyll is the changes it makes to the Jekyll/Hyde storyline. Hyde is now referred to as a werewolf that had to be staked through the heart to kill him. Huh? So now he's some sort of werewolf/vampire creature? News to me! And I never quite understood how his daughter was supposed to have inherited his "curse". Wasn't Dr. Jekyll's "curse" self-induced? It doesn't seem that something that could be passed from one generation to the next.

Not a bad little movie...

[babeth_jr · 6 December 2005]

I read some of the other comments regarding this movie, and I have to disagree with them...I found this obscure movie starring Gloria Talbott and John Agar to be entertaining. Granted, this a low budget movie so I didn't have a lot of expectations. But I found the atmosphere to be appropriately spooky and I thought it was an interesting twist on the Jekkyl and Hyde story. The plot line is rather predictable, and the special effects are not great, but if you are a fan of low budget 1950's horror flicks, or love John Agar and Gloria Talbott, you should enjoy this movie. I am a fan of low budget horror movies so this probably made a difference in the way I viewed this movie. Gloria Talbott was very pretty and capable in her role, although John Agar looked like he wanted to be anywhere than in this movie. (What was with the striped jacket he had to wear throughout the whole movie?!!) I found this movie to be fun. Just don't expect too much and you will enjoy this.

Atmospheric horror from director Edgar G. Ulmer.

[AlsExGal · 5/10 · 6 May 2023]

Couple Gloria Talbott and John Agar travel to her father's secluded manorvestate to inform him of their engagement. Only her father (Arthur Shields) tells her that he's not her father, he only raised her, as her real father was the notorious Doctor Jekyll. Gloria wants to call off the wedding, but John insists they stay together, even when mysterious murders begin to take place around the manor grounds, with the finger pointing toward Gloria.

The budget is obviously limited, but Ulmer and crew do an admirable job of creating menace and eerie unease. The plot holds no surprises, however, and the "twist" is ruined by the movie's opening shots. For some reason they keep referring to the Jekyll curse as being a "human werewolf". They also manage to pronounce the name JAY-cull, GEE-cull, and JEH-cull.

I enjoyed watching "Daughter Of Dr. Jekyll"

[richard_espinor · 7/10 · 13 June 2007]

I saw this movie when it was originally released in 1957. I was eight years old and I think I was a little frighten when I saw "Daughter Of Dr. Jekyll" on the big screen. I rented the video recently and now I am fifty-eight years old in 2007 and I found the movie to still give me a little bit of chills. I think I understand other reviewers did not like the movie,yet it was a low budget film and I think the performers did it good job. Actress Gloria Talbott did it good job in her role as the daughter of Dr. Jekyll; actor John Agar may have not liked playing his role in the film, but he did not do a bad job. Actress Gloria Talbott plays Janet Smith who discovers she has inherited her late father's estate. She discovers her late father was the infamous Dr. Henry Jekyll;I like the dream sequence where she looks like a vampire on a rampage in the village woods. There is a comical sequence when Dr. Lomas transforms into a werewolf and runs through the village woods and peers in a neighbor's open window and sees a woman in her undergarments putting on her nylon stockings. finally, the hero and heroine help the villagers stop the murderous Dr. Lomas and put a stake in his heart to stop his full moon werewolfism.

Worth a look, but it's no Ulmer classic

[macabro357 · 4/10 · 22 July 2003]

Not one of Edgar G. Ulmer's best, but I'm glad they saw fit to release this one on DVD. However, if you're looking for another little Ulmer classic like BLUEBEARD (1944) or DETOUR (1945), you'd better look somewhere else 'cause this ain't it.

Gloria Talbott, the daughter of the late Dr. Jekyll, is slowly being hypnotized and pumped full of drugs into believing that she is the killer of a couple of women who were found near her late father's estate. She is slowly being driven mad by the real killer who wants her to take the blame for it.

Of course she isn't the one because she's the heroine and we can't have the heroine turn out to be a bad guy. This is the 50s, after all.

We also have John Agar as the Talbott's fiancée and Arthur Shields as the weirdo who is the executor of the late Dr. Jekyll's estate. They don't really add much of anything to all this beyond chewing up some film time. That is, until the very last 5 minutes of the film.

But what's really a bummer is that the killer is revealed in the very first flashback of the film, so why Ulmer threw away the element of surprise is a real mystery. I guess you'll just have to see it for yourself.

And considering the fact that Allied Artists didn't always use the best of film stock, the digital remastering looks as good as can be expected for a low budget film like this. No more excessively grainy prints to look at.

I'll give it a 4 out of 10 for at least being worth a look, especially if you're into Ulmer's films like I sometimes am.

Arrre youuu suuure?

[BA_Harrison · 6/10 · 31 October 2020]

Daughter of Dr. Jekyll takes Robert Louis Stephenson's classic tale and mixes in a little werewolf and vampire lore for good measure; the result is a mildly entertaining and very different take on the oft-told tale of mad scientists and deranged alter-egos.

The very lovely Gloria Talbott plays Janet Smith, who travels to the home of her guardian Dr. Lomas (Arthur Shields), accompanied by her beau George Hastings (John Agar, whose character has a penchant for loud jackets made from deck-chair fabric). Janet tells Dr. Lomas that she and George are engaged to be married, but what Dr. Lomas has to tell Janet is far more shocking: she is the daughter of the infamous Dr. Jekyll, and she may have inherited his condition (not quite sure how, but let's just go with it).

Janet wants to call off the wedding, but George is determined to make her see sense (he's no doubt well aware that she has a rocking body, and thinks that the risk is worth it). However, when Janet starts to suffer from nightmares, awakening to find herself bloody, and local girls from the village start to turn up dead, it looks like she is following in her father's footsteps.

What is really happening shouldn't come as much of a surprise since the supposedly kindly Dr. Lomas is clearly up to no good, hypnotising Janet when no-one is looking, and keeping her drugged up at night-time. In the final reel, George discovers that it is Lomas who has been doing the killing, having taken his old pal Jekyll's potion, transforming himself into a werewolf-like creature that sucks the blood of the living. The nasty doctor has been pinning the blame on Janet, but comes a cropper when the locals pick up burning torches and form a mob, and see the hairy doctor fighting with George. Lomas's handyman ends the terror by impaling the mad scientist through the heart with a big wooden stake.

Directed by Edgar G. Ulmer, who gave us the classic noir Detour (1945), this is a cut above most poverty-row horrors, with bags of creepy atmosphere, a fine central performance from Talbott, and a wonderfully eerie theramin score. The plot might be predictable B-movie tosh, but Ulmer makes the most of things anyway, adding a sense of style to proceedings, while the cheesy looking monster (complete with rubber fangs that wobble) and some unconvincing miniatures only add to the charm. The result is an enjoyably daft film, perfect for Halloween viewing.

DAUGHTER OF DR. JEKYLL (Edgar G. Ulmer, 1957) **

[Bunuel1976 · 4/10 · 13 October 2006]

This is a low-grade horror film which has been culted into a reputation beyond its worth because of its director's involvement. The plot is strikingly similar to that of another notorious potboiler - SHE-WOLF OF London (1946) - but, at least, here the monster is seen (albeit ineffectively made-up): despite the titular reference, the script pays little to no credit to previous cinematic incarnations of the R.L. Stevenson novella - opting, instead, to indiscriminately incorporate elements of lycanthropy and vampirism which make no sense at all...but which lend the film value as a unique curio and one which, in view of its sheer audacity, it is difficult to hate (indeed, the whole misguided enterprise reminded me of the contemporaneous FRANKENSTEIN 1970 [1958])!

Despite the ultra-cheap production, the film makes the most of its foggy atmosphere and the hallucination sequences are effective in a naïve sort of way. Casting is below-par but, at least, Arthur Shields (who also appears in a silly book-end in full monster make-up - but, then, as Gloria Talbott's legal guardian spends the rest of the film trying to convince her that she is the werewolf!!) and John Dierkes (as a particularly vehement believer in the Jekyll 'legend' despite being in their employ - or, so it seems, since he's always hovering about the estate!) enter gleefully into the spirit of the thing.

I had been toying with the idea of purchasing the All Day DVD of this one ever since it was released; I'm glad I managed to catch up with it eventually without having to purchase the disc - being shown on late-night Italian TV, as part of a Jekyll & Hyde marathon which included snippets from a variety of films based on the venerable tale (I was especially gratified by the inclusion of a couple of scenes from Jean Renoir's THE TESTAMENT OF DR. CORDELIER [1959], which I've been yearning to see forever, and also ABBOTT & COSTELLO MEET DR. JEKYLL & MR. HYDE [1953], which I haven't watched in ages - I really ought to get down to purchasing either the R1 or R2 DVD releases of the films featuring the comic duo!)...

A missed opportunity

[marksimmons23 · 6/10 · 23 June 2019]

Strangely this has little to do with the classic tale of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde : rather it's a werewolf film, but with a plot based on folklore closer to the Universal style of vampire movie. I suspect that Edgar G. Ulmer (who also made the brilliant "The Black Cat", and the Noir favourite "Detour") really wanted to make a vampire film, but ended up having to use the more marketable and helpfully out of copyright Dr Jekyll theme due to the studio's insistence. Low budgets probably also didn't help. Despite this mismatch, there's plenty for the fan of old horror films, and occasional flashes of the director's potential . Agar and Talbott are watchable regardless of having little to work with, there's some atmospheric dream sequences with excellent cinematography, and a proto-slasher murder of a woman on a telephone which undoubtedly influenced later filmmakers. I can't help but wonder what classic Ulmer could have turned in if he'd had a decent budget and less interference?

An obvious goof

[rwagn · 5/10 · 23 June 2011]

Technically this should be listed under "Goofs" as it not so much a review. While watching the film I noticed during the two scenes that occur around the breakfast table if you look out the window, just past the fake foliage, you will notice late 1950's cars whisking by on an obviously very busy street. The story is set on an isolated wooded estate 20 years after the death of Dr. Jekyll which should put this in the early 1900's. Gloria Talbott is seen wearing a corset and a bustle with high button boots and John Agar wears a striped jacket like those worn by barber shop quartets. Obviously there should not be sedans whizzing by the estate. The only reason I wanted to see this film was due to the participation of Gloria Talbot-a real 50's fave and quite the knockout. She did not disappoint.

Mystery involving the offspring of the famous doc.

[martinflashback · 8/10 · 29 October 2010]

Ulmer must have dug deep to find a script this simple. Behind the daffy dialog, he clutters up his frame with all manner of junk, diligently waded through by the admirably serious actors. The picture really drowns in brick a brac and set ornament: in tea cups, foam relief, fire places, fake gravestones, so on, infinitely. Most of this is shot from the hip, giving the strange impression that Agar and Talbot are furniture or hand- puppets, their secret hidden by a false bottom. Every so often great mists are rolled out, lap dissolves and wipes erase or shift figures in time, and people dash through pasteboard sets shot at frightening angles. All of these effects are sequenced in a mongoloid semi-plot which moves heedlessly and energetically along like a hypnotic piece of music from Mars. Two of the best ecstatic sequences: a murder, with a memorable use of the phone, boldly edited as if it were a Leger, and a chase over the moors at the hour of the wolf which marries tin pot Gothic to the feel of newsreel documentary. These haunting fits of grand mal guignol attack the ludicrous plot of the film, jarring the etiquette of the B- film programmer and loosing a manic poetic force on the gutter proceedings. At the end, we are told the whole Carrollian epic is a just a joke, in a sort of cheapie Pirandellan bookend which makes the unreal reality of Ulmer's ecstatic ride all the more inscrutable. He certainly chose to make films like this, subordinating plot, dialog, and anything else by then considered crucial to the whole film to the giddy trapeze of a perpetually moving modernism. Ulmer can't sit still. People talk about auteur films. 'Daughter of Dr. Jekyll' is far more auteur than any of them'. Ulmer accepts the necessity of whatever idiotic limitation the script and budget entails and wends his way around them, through them, burrowing into them. That is why he always had his say in the set design and lighting, often doing them all: the details excited him.... He sees the script as irrelevant, a too- literary artifact that would one day become extinct according to the essentially visual nature of cinema. He made films in Yiddish, a language he didn't understand, and also movies for a Black audience, both markets that were at the margins of the popular cinematic experience. And naturally, he embraced pulp horror and science fiction, a far more hospitable place for his expressionist art than the middle- brow armpit sweat of the heavy message movie or the sentimental big budget swirling romance. As a foreigner, here is where he was most at home. This Jekyll's kid film would make a fine double bill with 'Meshes of the Afternoon', another fantasy of objects and mirrors that unfolds in the lunacy of the broad daylight.

Ulmer on a budget

[garyvannucci-99224 · 6/10 · 20 August 2021]

To me this movie was entertaining far from a classic. Agar said he dsid it for the money. It was atmospheric with the fog special effects. One question that haunts me to this day where did they get the stripped coat that Agar wore in the movie. I've sat through worse.

A cheap 50s horror film with John Agar AND Gloria Talbott!

[planktonrules · 4/10 · 21 February 2017]

During the 1950s and 60s, John Agar made a ton of lousy horror/sci- fi films. Gloria Talbott also made quite a few as well...and in "The Daughter of Dr. Jekyll" you get to see them both together. The difference is that Talbott managed to make a few really good films in the genre--including the classic "I Married a Monster From Outer Space"--whereas Agar just seemed to have a habit of making nothing but schlock. So which is it going to be here....classic horror or schlock or something in between?

The story is a confusing affair and has the basis of a good story. When Janet Smith (Talbott) arrives at her family manor to claim ownership, she learns a terrible secret--that her father was the infamous Dr. Jekyll. What follows are a series of violent murders and Janet starts to worry that she might have committed them due to some evil gene within her! Her fiancée (Agar) and a nice doctor (Arthur Shields) seem to be the only ones who will defend her, as soon the villagers begin accusing her as well.

The story above doesn't sound bad, does it? And, the mood for the picture is appropriately scary and brooding. However, the writing really was a serious problem as again and again they kept mixing up stories. While Dr. Jekyll created his alter-ego Mr. Hyde, in this movie they keep talking about this story as if Mr. Hyde was a werewolf-vampire!! There's talk about Talbott turning into the creature when the moon is full and how they have to kill her with a stake in the heart!! This has absolutely nothing to do with the Dr. Jekyll story...nothing. I was almost expecting them to toss in some mummy and Frankenstein lore into the film as well!!

Overall, a confusing story to say the least but it IS an entertaining one. My advice is if you see it, turn off your brain and just enjoy it without thinking through the plot too much! A bit of a disappointment for Talbott fans...and an artistic triumph for Agar fans. No, this isn't because Talbott was bad in the film and Agar wasn't...it's just that compared to Agar's other horror films this is practically "Masterpiece Theatre"!

By the way, the familiar Irish character actor Arthur Shields was actually Barry Fitzgerald's brother.

Scary

[possumopossum · 29 November 2006]

I haven't seen this movie since I was ten years old, but it scared the hell out of me then. That was over forty years ago. Seeing Gloria Talbot standing in front of that mirror and see herself seemingly transform into a werewolf gave me the creeps, and then the cut to the full moon rolling through the clouds. Mighty scary stuff. It was made even more scary by that eerie music that played into the background. I thought this movie would never end. I wish I could remember more of it, but it's been so long since I've seen it. I would love to see this on DVD, it's been so long since I've seen it. It's probably tame by today's standards, but if you're a ten year old kid looking for something to give you a good scare, then this movie will do it. It did for me.

Seen on Pittsburgh's Chiller Theater in 1963

[kevinolzak · 5/10 · 31 March 2019]

1957's "Daughter of Dr. Jekyll" was one of director Edgar G. Ulmer's lesser lights, not entirely his fault as the entire cast is hamstrung by a Jack Pollexfen script regurgitating the same plot he devised for Columbia's 1951 snooze fest "Son of Dr. Jekyll," itself only a rehash of identical 1946 releases, PRC's "Devil Bat's Daughter" and Universal's "She-Wolf of London." Here, we already know from the title the true identity of ingenue Janet Smith (Gloria Talbott), and the villain is revealed in the opening gag scene so what's new? For a start we are told that Mr. Hyde was not only Jekyll's alter ego but also a werewolf, which can only be killed by a stake through the heart like a vampire (I'm confused!). Janet arrives at the ancestral castle by car, then for the rest of the film we seem to be trapped in some Gothic abode surrounded by superstitious villagers. When her guardian (Arthur Shields) reveals all to Janet about her late father she spends the rest of the picture in bed, dreaming of misty attacks on unsuspecting victims, much to the consternation of fiancée John Agar. The rugged Agar gets top billing in his first role since leaving Universal, while fellow John Ford alumnus Arthur Shields contributes the best remembered performance. There's virtually nothing to differentiate this Allied Artists release from the titles previously mentioned, except that in this case there truly is a monster, a light haired werewolf who at least engages in something big bad wolves are noted for, peering at little red riding hoods through open windows while they're dressing (!). Gloria Talbott is too strong a screen presence to look as wimpy as Rosemary La Planche or June Lockhart, famous for "The Cyclops," "The Leech Woman," and especially Paramount's "I Married a Monster from Outer Space," always a credible actress as well as quite the looker. It had only been three weeks since viewing Edgar G. Ulmer's best 50s entry "The Man from Planet X," with "The Amazing Transparent Man" and "Beyond the Time Barrier" still ahead; all he can do is drench the studio exteriors in the same kind of fog that worked in "Planet X," far less effective here.

Daughter of Dr. Jekyll may have mixed some monster legends, but it's enjoyable enough anyways

[tavm · 7/10 · 28 June 2018]

This is yet another of the obscure werewolf movies I've been reviewing lately. It stars Gloria Talbott-who'd later star in a cult classic called I Married a Monster from Outer Space, John Agar who appeared in plenty of these genre films during this time, and Arthur Shields whose more famous brother Barry Fitzgerald won the Oscar for Going My Way. Ms. Talbott inherits the house of her father, the famous Dr. Jekyll. He's being described as once having turned into Mr. Hyde who in this version is a werewolf who can be killed by a stake in his heart. Talk about mixing legends! Despite that mixed-up premise, this was quite an enjoyably atmospheric thriller that only runs an hour and 10 minutes. The direction by Edgar G. Ulmer was good enough for making the material as believable as possible. So that's a recommendation of Daughter of Dr. Jekyll.

Should be better

[Leofwine_draca · 4/10 · 19 July 2019]

DAUGHTER OF DR. JEKYLL is a typical B-movie programmer of the late '50s, starring none other than genre stalwart John Agar. The title writes the plot for you; set twenty years after the Stevenson novel, this features the daughter of the infamous scientist going out of her mind as she comes to believe that she's responsible for a series of brutal murders. Sadly, the story is hampered by the usual budgetary constraints of this genre, with very little in the way of action and even less in the way of FX, schlocky or otherwise. There's some melodrama at the climax, wrapped up with a twist ending, but overall you can't help but feel they should have done better.

Surprisingly Atmospheric Enjoyable 1950s Horror Film

[soren-71259 · 6/10 · 26 November 2018]

I wasn't expecting too much from this 1950s horror film but the idea that Dr. Jekyll was an innocent victim of another man's scheming to get his money and estate and this other man happened to also be...wait for it...a werewolf was clever and unique. The film's plot however becomes obvious and most viewers will guess what's going on at the get-go. Arthur Shields, brother of Barry Fitzgerald, is annoying and cloying right from the outset as he portrays a man who claims to represent the late Dr. Jekyll's best interests but who is actually a rampaging fiend who seeks to trick Jekyll's daughter in the same way he tricked her father and obtained the vast Jekyll mansion and estate. Emphasis throughout is on atmosphere with fluid dissolves and what the Germans called stimmung or heavy atmosphere in the silent film days. The entire film appears to be seen through a haze and Gloria Talbot't's visions of herself as a werewolf are overlaid so as to make everything appear to have occurred in a nightmare. This is very effective and beautiful, especially the camera tilts that make her world seem to be slipping away from her. Some oddities do occur. John Agar wears a bizarre striped sports jacket in the latter part of the picture which seems incongruous. He is also slow to reason out what is going on around him even though the audience is way ahead of him. Arthur Shields, just like his brother, Barry Fitzgerald is incredibly irritating and annoying throughout with his unctuous comments all done in Irish brogue. It's almost like being tied down and forced to watch Going My Way again starring his brother. And the oddest thing is that Shields' real teeth are so bad that when he turns into a werewolf his teeth actually improve. I believe that's the only time that a werewolf's dental work got better during a transformation sequence in the history of the cinema. Gloria Talbott looks lovely and contributes a solid performance here. She was a queen of fifties horror but was versatile enough to play many roles. In fact she was omnipresent on early television and was also a star of many many western programs due to her athletic ability. John Agar was also a constant horror film star and also a frequent veteran of westerns, part of the John Wayne entourage, and he was Shirley Temple's ex-husband! Agar was never a very good actor and he doesn't contribute much to the success of this film but part of that is the script that makes him appear dull witted and his plan for surprising a werewolf with a big club is just plain stupid. All things considered this is a surprisingly entertaining film played partly as a mystery more than a shocker. The unnecessary comic monster intro and finale feel put in by the producer to goose up the film as does the scene where a half-naked extra girl is leered at by the werewolf, a scene thrown in to the coming attractions for this movie to make it seem more lurid than it actually was. None of that tampering was necessary. I liked the look of the film. Ulmer could create a mood in the old Germanic sense-- it resembled more Nosferatu (1922) and The Golem (1920) more than the rather flat clear look of most fifties films such as Creature From the Black Lagoon or The Hypnotic Eye. It's a throwback to a style that Ulmer was familiar with from his early days in the German silent cinema and this film should be remastered and presented on a large screen where its striking visual beauty could be better appreciated, especially since it was achieved with an amazingly limited budget.

Anemic horror outing not worth your time

[InjunNose · 3/10 · 12 December 2010]

"The Daughter of Dr. Jekyll" is a confused jumble of horror film clichés in which the savage Mr. Hyde is repeatedly referred to as a "human werewolf" (!) who could only be killed when a stake was driven through his heart (!!). There are lots of things wrong with that premise, but the one unforgivable sin committed here is the infliction of dullness upon the viewer: "Daughter" is truly one of the most toothless, uninteresting horror movies I've ever seen. Pretty Gloria Talbott (the titular daughter) and dignified, reserved Arthur Shields (the seemingly kindly Jekyll family retainer whose true intentions are anything but wholesome) can't save it. As Talbott's husband-to-be, John Agar is strictly phoning it in; by all accounts he hated doing this film and I don't blame him one bit. Everything about "Daughter" is utterly pedestrian. Director Edgar G. Ulmer (beware, Ulmer fans: this is a far cry from "The Black Cat" or even "Bluebeard") and his cast made no serious attempt to rise above the mediocrity of Jack Pollexfen's script. They just shot the picture, called it a day, and went home. Naturally, no one expects these little genre films to be masterpieces, but you do expect them to hold your attention. With a lack of scares and atmosphere, and laughably unrealistic action scenes to boot, "The Daughter of Dr. Jekyll" is an all-around stinker. (I've seen worse movies, but rarely have I seen a more boring one!)

Edgar G. Ulmer's peculiar rendition , loosely based on the Robert Louis Stevenson's macabre story

[ma-cortes · 6/10 · 27 January 2022]

It is the early-1900s , we are somewhere in England, the movie opens with the narration about the story of the deceased Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde and the arrival of a couple inn old car pulls up to the mansion . As George Hastings (John Agar) helps his girlfriend Janet Smith (Gloria Talbott) out of the car , she results to be daughter of Dr. Jekyll . There they meet , Dr. Lomas (Arthur Shields) who lead them across the big house . The doc's daughter believes she may have inherited her father's evil curse when several of the locals are found dead . A bit later on , things go wrong when there takes place a mid-transformation , subsequently executing criminal acts and violent incidents . Blood-hungry spawn of the world's most bestial fiend! Blood Hungry She-Beast . A Good Woman! A Bad Woman - who needed the love of both!.Are You a descendant Jeykll or a Hyde? Do you have secret longings that you dare not reveal? If you do, it's the Mr. Hyde in you . He loved two women...one was good...the other bad...their struggle for mastery of his soul brings unforgettable drama storming from the screen! . Are You a Jekyll or are You a Hyde ? There is a little bit of both in everybody!.It chills you! Half-Man ! Half-Monster !

. Acceptable but neither notable , nor extraordinary horror movie , containing thrills , suspense , chills , mystery , romance , terrifying scenes , all of them you can find out all about it from this Allied Artists Pictures (1957)'s revealing film . This 1957 vintage picture by Edgar G Ulmer freely based on the famous novella by Robert Louis Stevenson, published in 1886 and titled: "Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde" boasts a passable cast , such as Gloria Talbott, John Agar , Arthur Shields and John Dierkes . Low budget Allied terror meets Robert Louis Stevenson in this popular story dealing with sinister experiments lead to release a ruthless alter ego who becomes a raging beast driven to terrible deeds with creepy results, but here combining with werewolf legend and Dracula myth . This routine retelling was originally released in theaters on a double bill with ¨Dr. Cyclops¨. The classic and known story of the famous novelist Robert Louis Stevenson in which Hyde pits everyone against each other , has been really modified in favor of a twisted intrigue with psychological and emotional consequences . Actors are pretty good , giving attractive interpretations . Main and support cast are adequate and well-fitted to roles . What's more important is the relation among the three main characters : Gloria Talbott , Joan Agar and Arthur Shields . And a notorious secondary playing small part , John Dierkes , among others . Special mention for atmospheric cinematography in black and white providing a splendid impression of the foggy environment and swirling mist . As well as thrilling and evocative musical score . The motion picture was regular but professionally directed by Edgar G. Ulmer , though it's marred by its short budget . He was a prolific filmmaker who made all kinds of genres , directing acceptable films and here providing an intense pace though it results to be some dated. Adequate and professionally shot , being filmed in short time . Edgar was born on September 17, 1904 in Olmütz, Moravia, Czech Republic as Edgar George Ulmer. He was a notorious and prolific director and writer. At his beginnings he was blackballed from Hollywood work after he had an affair with Shirley Castle -he eventually married her and she became known as Shirley Ulmer-, who at the time was the wife of B-picture producer Max Alexander, a nephew of powerful Universal Pictures president Carl Laemmle. That's why Ulmer spent the bulk of his remaining career languishing at "Poverty Row" studios. He signed a long-term contract there in 1943 after directing the "big-budget" Jive Junction (1943), being especiallly known for Satanás (1934), Bluebeard (1944) , Detour (1945) , The Strange Woman (1946), People on Sunday (1930) , Aníbal (1959) , The Amazing Transparent Man (1960) , Beyond the Time Barrier (1960) , among others. Rating : 6.5/10.

This classy Robert Louis Stevenson novel has been adapted a large number of times : the first silent 1920 rendition performed by John Barrymore . 1931 adaptation by Robert Mamoulian with Frederic March, Míriam Hopkins . The considered to be one of the finest film versions : Dr. Jekyll and Hyde (1941) by Victor Fleming with Spencer Tracy, Ingrid Bergman , Lana Turner . The two faces of Doctor Jekyll 1960 by Terence Fisher with Paul Massie , Dawn Addams and Chistopher Lee. 1968 by Charles Jarrot with Jack Palance , Denholm Elliott , Oscar Homolka . 1971 by Roy Ward Baker with Martine Beswick , Ralph Bates , Gerald Sim. 1973 by David Winters with Kirk Douglas , Michael Redgrave , Donald Pleasence , Susan George . 1995 by David Price with Sean Young , Tim Daly , Harvey Fierstein. 1999 by Colin Budds with Adam Baldwin , and several others.

This is one deadly dull Daughter

[Eegah Guy · 3/10 · 20 October 2000]

I've read plenty about director Ulmer being some poverty-row genius but this flick is only 70 minutes long and is still boring. Mixing the Jekyll monster with werewolves may sound like a fun idea but the treatment here leaves much to be desired. The new widescreen DVD of this movie looks real soft throughout much of the movie which might be a fault of the original movie or just a bad transfer.

This is a very scary movie.

[jacobjohntaylor1 · 10/10 · 31 May 2019]

This is really scary movie. It has a great story line. It also has great acting. This is scarier then The Exorcist. It is a great movie. It is a true classic. This is one the best horror movies ever.

Daughter of Dr. Jekyll

[BandSAboutMovies · 6/10 · 27 October 2023]

Janet Smith (Gloria Talbott) and her fiancee George Hastings (John Agar) arrive at the English manor house that she will inherit the next day. They're met by her guardian Dr. Lomas (Arthur Shields), housekeeper Mrs. Merchant (Martha Wentworth), groundskeeper Jacob (John Dierkes) and Maggie (Molly McCard), who is Janet's personal maid. They're worried that she's getting married so quickly, as she's inheriting a sizeable sum of money, as well as another inheritance: she's the daughter of Dr. Jekyll who was a werewolf, which is something new on me.

That night, Lomas hypnotizes Janet. Before bed, Maggie warns her that this is the night that her father rises from the tomb. When she sleeps, she dreams that she's killed a woman. She wakes up to blood all over herself and a werewolf in her mirror. Ah, but is she just seeing things because of Lomas? Or has she really become a lycanthrope?

Shot in a house on 6th Street in Los Angeles, near Hancock Park, you can occasionally see late 50s cars through the windows, despite this being set in the past. After playing double features with The Cyclops, this was sold to TV by Allied Artists as part of their 22-film Sci-Fi for the 60s package which includes Terror In the Haunted House, House On Haunted Hill, Not of This Earth, The Hypnotic Eye, The Brain from Planet Arous, The Atomic Submarine, Attack of the Crab Monsters, Attack of the 50 Foot Woman, The Bat, Caltiki the Immortal Monster, The Cyclops, The Cosmic Man, The Disembodied, Frankenstein 1970, World Without End, War of the Satellites, From Hell It Came, The Giant Behemoth, The Indestructable Man, Spy In the Sky and Queen of Outer Space. Obviously, Pittsburgh's Chiller Theater purchased this package of films.

Daughter Of Dr. Dud

[oldblackandwhite · 1/10 · 14 June 2012]

I didn't expect to find an example of the 1950's monster movie revival that could possibly be worse than The She Creature (1956 --see my review), but Daughter Of Dr. Jekyll is so bad, it makes The She Creature look like an Academy Award nominee. Daughter of Dr. Jekyll is simply awful in every department -- terrible script with insipid dialog, bad acting, draggy pacing, uninspired cinematography, papier mache sets. Not to mention shabby special effects. This movie was so cheap, they couldn't even afford a decent artificial fog machine for the what-should-have-been atmospheric outdoors on the moors scenes. At times it looked like they had simply fogged the negative to get a murky effect. Other times it seemed as if someone was sitting under the camera smoking a cigarette and letting the smoke curl upward. I would not kid about something like this!

I haven't mentioned incompetent direction yet, but we're getting there. Edgar G. Ulmer has a cult following among some of the auteur worshipers which regards him as an unappreciated genius who could rise above the low budgets of his projects and put his personal stamp on them. This Ulmer mystic is primarily based on a half-dozen pretty good ones out of a gazillion crummy ones he directed. The Black Cat (1934) and Bluebeard (1944) are widely and deservedly recognized as minor horror classics, while Detour (1945) is worshiped all out of proportion to its modest merits by the nihilistic wing of the noir groupies. Personally, I thought The Strange Woman (1946), one of Ulmer's biggest budget productions, better than most rate it. But with its cast, which included Hedy Lamarr and George Sanders, it occurred to me that it would likely have been better if someone else had directed it.

To get to the business at hand, Ulmer's bumbling direction in Daughter Of Dr. Jekyll must shoulder the blame for a competent cast, including John Agar and Arthur Shields, acting so poorly. It seems as if Ulmer told them they had to say their lines as quickly as possible, because they were in danger of running out of film. Maybe there was a doubtful, bought on the cheap, microphone, as well. Everyone shouts his our her lines with a frantic haste. Shields, normally almost as good an actor as his look-alike Accademy Award winning brother Barry Fitzgearald, in this turkey screeches, grimaces, and even waves his arms like one of the rejected try-outs in a high school play. Agar is even worse. He just seems angry, no matter what emotion he is supposed to be portraying. No doubt he was sore about being reduced to such penny ante productions. Well, he was an "A" actor at one time, and he should have laid off the whiskey if he wanted to stay one. Buxom female lead Gloria Talbot has her moments as the tormented title character, but it is only tall, craggy John Dierkes who rises above Ulmer's wacko direction to turn in a creditable performance as the sullen manor servant bent on righting the Jekyll wrongs.

This picture is a serious stinker. Only for Ulmer cultists, die-hard fans of 'fifties horror, and desperate insomniacs. Others should avoid Daughter of Dr. Jekyll as if it were a skunk crossing the road.