John Carl Buechler and his MMI company did most of the effects in all the old Empire pictures for Charles Band, and this is a very direct throwback to that style of schlock. Badly directed, paced and written, with guest star actors that look lost, it never the less manages to be kind of fun in it's earnestness. And Tony Todd does seem to enjoy playing Mr.Hyde. It's actually one of the better Hydes. other than the overdone makeup and general nod and wink attitude. Slap a 1986 date on it rather than 2006 and it would be in good company.
13 Reviews
Wow... Just Wow...
odupoptart29 September 2006
I'm not going into the story, as I'm sure most people are familiar with the story of Dr. Jeckyll & Mr. Hyde already, so I'm just gonna go with the technical aspects. The film looked like a film school student's attempt to make a full-length feature. The actors were sub-par, the settings looked fake (I mean come on... a chief of police should have an actual OFFICE, not a CUBICLE!!), the dialog was amazingly horrible (listen to the dialog between Utterson, who is the chick detective, and the chief of police... it is so bad, it's hilarious!) and the special effects were low-quality. Mr. Hyde's make-up looked ridiculous... I think they used 2 wigs for Hyde, as in some scenes it looked black and in other scenes, it looked brown. The ending (which, as I said, I will not divulge)... well... what I will say about the ending is that it didn't tie the story up for me in a neat little package. In fact, the whole story was so jumbled up and it's obvious that the script needed at least one or two more revisions. Overall, it was confusing and it looked cheaply made. However, if you're stuck watching it with your boyfriend because he has to screen it for work, as was my case, it was a lot of fun joking the movie the whole time. But otherwise, I wouldn't pay to see this movie.
My Review
joemamaohio23 July 2008
Warning: Spoilers
Renowned horror legend Tony Todd ("Candyman") brings to life...once again...the story of Dr. Jekyll and his monstrous alter-ego, Mr. Hyde. Only this time, it's in modern times, and he's a scientist who's working with animals to discover something (I don't remember what it was, the movie was THAT bad).
The violence is extremely toned down, the storyline is so overdone that it's simply boring, and the ending (SPOILER): Jekyll turns into Hyde...and then turns into a giant monkey-man.
Once again, I feel that Robert Louis Stevenson is rolling over in his grave.
The violence is extremely toned down, the storyline is so overdone that it's simply boring, and the ending (SPOILER): Jekyll turns into Hyde...and then turns into a giant monkey-man.
Once again, I feel that Robert Louis Stevenson is rolling over in his grave.
Terrible abuse of good actors
JoeB13123 June 2008
Warning: Spoilers
Well, we all know the story. Kindly scientist takes a drug that turns him into a debauched killer. Been done a hundred times and there was no real good reason to do it again.
Tony Todd and Tracy Scoggins are good actors, but they are really abused here. Note to Ms. Scoggins. You are a mature, accomplished actress. You can stop taking these roles that should be going to 20 year-olds.
Todd fares little better. He seems to really be having fun doing the scenes as Hyde. His Jekyll seems to be subdued and not really into it.
Much of the plot seems contrived, especially the parts to get Jekyll/Hyde into the costume that we'd traditionally expect to see Mr. Hyde in. I don't even want to go into the ending, where Todd converts into an ape and becomes bulletproof.
Tony Todd and Tracy Scoggins are good actors, but they are really abused here. Note to Ms. Scoggins. You are a mature, accomplished actress. You can stop taking these roles that should be going to 20 year-olds.
Todd fares little better. He seems to really be having fun doing the scenes as Hyde. His Jekyll seems to be subdued and not really into it.
Much of the plot seems contrived, especially the parts to get Jekyll/Hyde into the costume that we'd traditionally expect to see Mr. Hyde in. I don't even want to go into the ending, where Todd converts into an ape and becomes bulletproof.
Todd is Great
Michael_Elliott14 July 2008
Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, The (2006)
** (out of 4)
John Carl Buechler (Friday the 13th 7) wrote and directed this updated version of Robert Louis Stevenson's classic novel. In the film, Dr. Jekyll (Tony Todd) is experimenting with chimps when he decides to take the drug himself, which of course turns him into the murderous Mr. Hyde. If it weren't for the excellent performance from Todd, who most people will remember from Candyman, this movie would have been a lot worse. These types of horror movies are made each and every week but not all of them feature some a great performance so it's rather sad to see Todd wasted in a pretty weak film with an even weaker screenplay. There are a few switches from the original novel but for the most part this film is pretty faithful and since we've seen this story countless times the original aspects here aren't good enough to keep the film moving. The supporting cast are all pretty bland to bad and this really sticks out when you see them acting with Todd. Buechler's direction is a tad bit all over the place as well. It's never quite clear what he's trying to do with the material even though he wrote it. At some points it seems like he's wanting to make a suspenseful story but then at other times it appears he wants to throw tons of gore at us. Another problem with the film is the use of some bad, fast editing and poor CGI effects. Back to Todd, he alone makes it worth watching the film as he pulls off both roles very well. Like Christopher Lee, I think Todd could branch out into more serious roles but most of the time he's wasted in films like this.
** (out of 4)
John Carl Buechler (Friday the 13th 7) wrote and directed this updated version of Robert Louis Stevenson's classic novel. In the film, Dr. Jekyll (Tony Todd) is experimenting with chimps when he decides to take the drug himself, which of course turns him into the murderous Mr. Hyde. If it weren't for the excellent performance from Todd, who most people will remember from Candyman, this movie would have been a lot worse. These types of horror movies are made each and every week but not all of them feature some a great performance so it's rather sad to see Todd wasted in a pretty weak film with an even weaker screenplay. There are a few switches from the original novel but for the most part this film is pretty faithful and since we've seen this story countless times the original aspects here aren't good enough to keep the film moving. The supporting cast are all pretty bland to bad and this really sticks out when you see them acting with Todd. Buechler's direction is a tad bit all over the place as well. It's never quite clear what he's trying to do with the material even though he wrote it. At some points it seems like he's wanting to make a suspenseful story but then at other times it appears he wants to throw tons of gore at us. Another problem with the film is the use of some bad, fast editing and poor CGI effects. Back to Todd, he alone makes it worth watching the film as he pulls off both roles very well. Like Christopher Lee, I think Todd could branch out into more serious roles but most of the time he's wasted in films like this.
Worse than B grade
sandro202017 April 2010
You get the feeling this movie is going to be a forgettable experience after the first few minutes of viewing, production qualities are terrible from the outset and you will see better acting on a Demtel Infomercial. From a B grade movie perspective it's not even funny.
Don't even watch this out of curiosity, it's a waste of 90 minutes of your life. If ever you had put off going to that slide night at a friend's place then just substitute the 90 minutes you would watch this movie and sit through it with the comforting thought that sitting through those 641 holiday snaps is a much more rewarding experience than watching this movie.
You really wonder why movie studios release these types of movies but by packaging it in a glossy title then you definitely get the feeling they're just out to make a quick buck. I will however remember "Vendetta Films" and "RedAnt" who released it and approach any movies made or promoted by them very suspiciously in future.
Don't even watch this out of curiosity, it's a waste of 90 minutes of your life. If ever you had put off going to that slide night at a friend's place then just substitute the 90 minutes you would watch this movie and sit through it with the comforting thought that sitting through those 641 holiday snaps is a much more rewarding experience than watching this movie.
You really wonder why movie studios release these types of movies but by packaging it in a glossy title then you definitely get the feeling they're just out to make a quick buck. I will however remember "Vendetta Films" and "RedAnt" who released it and approach any movies made or promoted by them very suspiciously in future.
Innovative, creative and .....Lame
Nprnuno24 May 2008
The immortal story of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde gets an update as we so often see with so many classics. The movie is a low budget adaption of the story that most of us are so familiar, either by other films, theater or the novel itself. Within the first few minutes, viewers are introduced to eeriness, horror and gore......Suspense has been built, and you simply got a taste of the horror to come; It can only get better. Right? Well, not quite.
Tony Todd plays the dual role of Jekyll/Hyde and my respect for such a talented actor made me refrain from shutting this movie off early. Disregarding the low budget appearance of some scenes and it's questionable dialog throughout, it's still difficult to enjoy this horror film. Some of the biggest problems I had with this remake, was the horrendous job on Mr. Hyde's makeup. In some scenes, Mr. Hyde looks so fake you almost anticipate and imagine Tony Todd taking off his mask. I haven't seen such terrible makeup work, since The Howling 3 and the Wishmaster's sequels. The tag-line for this film is "Release the Beast".....Well, if you somehow enjoy this film up to it's conclusion, than maybe you can make better sense of the word "Beast" being used better than I did.
Tony Todd's acting isn't that bad but it can't save this overall bad film. Another veteran in this film, is Vernon Wells; you remember the infamous Bennet villain from Commando? If you do, you will shake your head in disbelief as to how irrelevant his Dr. Dennis Lanyon character is in this. This update is creative and a twist to the original story. It starts with suspense and gore........It has decent Tony Todd acting.......but as it goes on, it gets closer to mediocrity. In my opinion, this movie failed miserably to capitalize on the excitement and suspense it introduced in the opening sequences.
I rate this movie 2 out of 10. For Tony Todd's attempt to save this, and the creative retelling of a timeless classic story.
Tony Todd plays the dual role of Jekyll/Hyde and my respect for such a talented actor made me refrain from shutting this movie off early. Disregarding the low budget appearance of some scenes and it's questionable dialog throughout, it's still difficult to enjoy this horror film. Some of the biggest problems I had with this remake, was the horrendous job on Mr. Hyde's makeup. In some scenes, Mr. Hyde looks so fake you almost anticipate and imagine Tony Todd taking off his mask. I haven't seen such terrible makeup work, since The Howling 3 and the Wishmaster's sequels. The tag-line for this film is "Release the Beast".....Well, if you somehow enjoy this film up to it's conclusion, than maybe you can make better sense of the word "Beast" being used better than I did.
Tony Todd's acting isn't that bad but it can't save this overall bad film. Another veteran in this film, is Vernon Wells; you remember the infamous Bennet villain from Commando? If you do, you will shake your head in disbelief as to how irrelevant his Dr. Dennis Lanyon character is in this. This update is creative and a twist to the original story. It starts with suspense and gore........It has decent Tony Todd acting.......but as it goes on, it gets closer to mediocrity. In my opinion, this movie failed miserably to capitalize on the excitement and suspense it introduced in the opening sequences.
I rate this movie 2 out of 10. For Tony Todd's attempt to save this, and the creative retelling of a timeless classic story.
Just... gah, I don't know
mikemdp15 May 2013
Warning: Spoilers
Holy moly. Here I am exactly 17 minutes into the film and I'm already regretting spending three bucks for it at Big Lots. Three bucks! At Big Lots, that's a helluva lot of KitKats I gave up in favor of this awful film, and boy, do I feel cheated.
Tony Todd? Good in "Candyman" and nothing else, including this. As the titular doctor he's bland, boring and uninteresting. As the titular monster, he's laughable -- equal parts Jerry Lewis in the original "Nutty Professor" and Eric Roberts in anything.
Tracy Scoggins has grown old to look like Lily Munster. Except, the actress who played Lily Munster had to work at it. Damn, that's sad.
I won't insult you by recapping the plot. You know the story, and none of the differences in this film matter, anyway.
There's lots of college coeds in early-'90s lip gloss who don't take anything off. At least they could have given us that. But director John Carl Buechler, who is just... oh, just awful, has such contempt for anyone who would drop three smackers at Big Lots for this garbage he doesn't even give us a peek.
Not that a little T&A would have made up for a nonsensical script, molasses-in-Alaska pacing, and the worst acting I've ever seen since that '80s cult VHS classic "Evil Toons" (which was better than this movie).
And I want to reiterate -- though the late Roger Ebert would have likely disapproved -- I've come to these conclusions after just 17 minutes into this rotten, rotten movie. I turned it off after deciding my life was worth more than spending time on this.
I've read in other reviews Jekyll turns into a giant monkeyman at the end.
Not worth it, folks. I'm going to bed. And I hope Big Lots exchanges this for three bucks in KitKats tomorrow.
Tony Todd? Good in "Candyman" and nothing else, including this. As the titular doctor he's bland, boring and uninteresting. As the titular monster, he's laughable -- equal parts Jerry Lewis in the original "Nutty Professor" and Eric Roberts in anything.
Tracy Scoggins has grown old to look like Lily Munster. Except, the actress who played Lily Munster had to work at it. Damn, that's sad.
I won't insult you by recapping the plot. You know the story, and none of the differences in this film matter, anyway.
There's lots of college coeds in early-'90s lip gloss who don't take anything off. At least they could have given us that. But director John Carl Buechler, who is just... oh, just awful, has such contempt for anyone who would drop three smackers at Big Lots for this garbage he doesn't even give us a peek.
Not that a little T&A would have made up for a nonsensical script, molasses-in-Alaska pacing, and the worst acting I've ever seen since that '80s cult VHS classic "Evil Toons" (which was better than this movie).
And I want to reiterate -- though the late Roger Ebert would have likely disapproved -- I've come to these conclusions after just 17 minutes into this rotten, rotten movie. I turned it off after deciding my life was worth more than spending time on this.
I've read in other reviews Jekyll turns into a giant monkeyman at the end.
Not worth it, folks. I'm going to bed. And I hope Big Lots exchanges this for three bucks in KitKats tomorrow.
Execrable!
lampley4 March 2011
Warning: Spoilers
Total CRAP! Waste of Talent, Waste of Money, Waste of Time.
(Spoiler) Any time a minor character tells another minor character in the beginning of the movie that the Major character is "Gorgeous" and we've already seen him as a possibly charming but homely lug, we are in BIG trouble.
The makeup man is the director and it's terrible makeup.
Poor Tracy Scoggins, normally a beautiful woman, looks like a retired hooker with that shaved eyebrow blue streak eye shadow stretching back to her temples.
Tony Todd is just not equipped to rescue this celluloid miscarriage.
Nuthin' but offensive Pimpaganda.
Pheeww! Somebody open a window!
(Spoiler) Any time a minor character tells another minor character in the beginning of the movie that the Major character is "Gorgeous" and we've already seen him as a possibly charming but homely lug, we are in BIG trouble.
The makeup man is the director and it's terrible makeup.
Poor Tracy Scoggins, normally a beautiful woman, looks like a retired hooker with that shaved eyebrow blue streak eye shadow stretching back to her temples.
Tony Todd is just not equipped to rescue this celluloid miscarriage.
Nuthin' but offensive Pimpaganda.
Pheeww! Somebody open a window!
Excellent adaptation of the Robert Lewis Stevenson novella
tobydammit-16 October 2006
We should always beware when Hollywood attempts to "update" the classics, and we are usually disappointed when they do. The new film "The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde is the exception to the rule. Though the original novella was considered groundbreaking and shocking for it's time, by today's standards it is tame and not as earth shattering as it once was. Perhaps this is because of the many stage, and film adaptations based on the original work. Most are dull and boring. To be sure, there are some classic movies and television plays, including the great, silent John Barrymore version, the wonderful Frederick March film, and the Dan Curtis produced TV version starring Jack Palance. We may now add a new winning adaptation to the lexicon of Jekyll and Hyde. This is a contemporary retelling of the story and this adaptation takes some liberties in translating it to the screen. --But then again, what screen adaptations don't take liberties? This is a fun, fast paced, horror film that delivers the goods! Writer/director John Carl Buechler is no stranger to horror icons. He directed Friday the 13th part 7, and created the stunning visual and make-up effects for numerous horror classics in the 1980's, including; Nightmare on Elm Street, and the Halloween movie franchises. In many ways he has structured is vision of the literary classic as a sort of retro nod to those vintage eighties horror pix. It is fast, furious, often funny, and absolutely terrifying at times. In the first few minutes of the movie, the screen explodes with action, mystery and gore. I don't want to reveal the excellent new slant this picture brings to light, but suffice to say the picture is both inventive and spine tingling. Perhaps the reason that this picture works so well is that as an independent film, it was made on a modest budget, with no studio interference. Either way, Tony Todd is great in the dual roles of Jekyll and Hyde, his ability to combine humor and pathos is nothing less than genius. Se it on the big screen with a full house if you can.
Worst Jekyll and Hyde adaptation!!!
criticj17 May 2021
This movie is a modern day adaptation of the classic novella.
image-23 October 2006
Warning: Spoilers
Dr Jekyll and Mr. Hyde for the new Millennium. A clever adaptation of the book, the film updates the characters to fit into the modern Los Angeles setting. Horror fans should love the gore content in the first kill. A young woman is virtually torn to bits. Blood and guts splatter everywhere. The movie also pays homage to the classic horror films of the past. Reminiscent in many ways to the Universal and Hammer films approach to horror movies, the finale has recreated the classic look of Mr. Hyde complete with opera cape, tails, and top hat. This is obviously a small independent film, but the fast paced direction, witty writing, fine photography, special effects and Tony Todd's characterization make it a stand out. The titanic struggle between Jekyll and Hyde at the film's climax is not to be missed. In conclusion his version of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde is enjoyable and totally entertaining!
Great new version of the classic!
tom-21836 October 2006
Warning: Spoilers
Release the beast! The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde is a terrific treat. To be honest, I expected very little from this independent remake when I went to see it on the big screen, but I was pleasantly surprised. Tony Todd is amazing. I always loved him in the Candyman movies, and here he did not disappoint. He is excellent in this low budget yet resourceful version of the story. His over the top bravura performance as Edward Hyde shines in contrast with his sensitive, understated portrayal of Dr. Henry Jekyll. This is a man in turmoil. In a clever plot twist, we as the audience actually gets to see inside Henry Jekyll's mind. As a paranoid schizophrenic, we actually come to realize that he believes that "Hyde" is another person. The screen really comes alive when we watch Jekyll and Hyde fight it out with each other. These two characters struggle with each other till the end of the movie, where it becomes an all out war of wills, culminating in a spectacular special effects studded finale. Highly recommended!
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
