Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde (1931) revisited in Golden Age Horror Forum

0 Points

Forum Jump

Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde (1931) revisited

Author	Comment
HalLane		#101	[-]
Oct 8 10 1:03 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	clore103051 wrote: I'm having a lot of trouble with this site the last few days. Working OK for me, but that's the duality of Yuku's nature. Perhaps you must do some penance.
	Remove this ad
Wich2		#102	[-]
Oct 8 10 1:51 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	"Hail Yuku, full of *&?#!!!+..."
RonM		#103	[-]
Oct 16 10 9:52 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Here's how Disney interpreted the 1931 Hyde...from the 1933 cartoon, Mickey's Gala Premier. I always thought it was funny that Disney artists drew Frankenstein with the pre production "horns". Last Edited By: RonM Oct 16 10 10:50 PM. Edited 1 times.
clore103051		#104	[-]
Oct 16 10 10:37 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	HalLane wrote: Working OK for me, but that's the duality of Yuku's nature. Perhaps you must do some penance. I uninstalled and then re-installed AdBlock Plus and all of a sudden it appears to have stopped. I've had no trouble today.
n0s4a2		#105	[-]
Oct 25 10 12:47 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	For those in Los angeles, LACMA is showing the '32 Hyde in 35mm on Tuesday Oct 26th for $2 admission in the luxurious museum theater. Last Edited By: n0s4a2 Oct 25 10 10:40 PM. Edited 1 times.
marbpl2.ozclubforums	more Disney Hyde	#106	[-]
Oct 25 10 10:33 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	RonM wrote: Here's how Disney interpreted the 1931 Hyde...from the 1933 cartoon, Mickey's Gala Premier. I always thought it was funny that Disney artists drew Frankenstein with the pre production "horns". http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D1XpygUHbXI Go to 2:50
wilbursbrain		#107	[-]
Oct 25 10 1:38 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	When I was a kid in the late 70s, I had a very biased liking for the March version before ever seeing it. My first and only real exposure to Jekyll and Hyde up to that point were the Abbott and Costello movie and the Aurora model kit. When I started to collect monster books and magazines and saw that the '31 Hyde was the only one with the similar, simian-like appearance, I was sold that it was the only true version of Mr. Hyde. I even dressed as Hyde for Halloween on two separate occasions – once in a lab coat and once with a cape, top hat and cane. After getting the chance to see the Barrymore, March and Tracy versions many years later, my heart still holds a special place for the March version. There is also a very good radio adaptation from CBS Radio Mystery Theater from June 18, 1974 that stars Kevin McCarthy. It supposedly comes closer to Stevenson's novel than any other adaptation (to that date).
Elisabeth		#108	[-]
Oct 27 10 2:28 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	I'm right down the middle...(lol). I like everything about the 1931 film except for Mr. Hyde. Tracy's Mr. Hyde was more realistic as a human being, and therefore more terrifying...at least to me. Your Signature ... "....I do hope he won't upset Henry..."
Liz.stoogeworld		#109	[-]
Oct 28 10 2:34 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	This film is a classic. An absolute classic. I finally watched this movie after days/months of Fredric March withdrawals, and it is an absolute classic. By far the best adaptation of the book and my favorite movie of all time. Freddie March does an amazing portrayal of Jekyll, and of Hyde. He is still sexy to this day. Wonderful, wonderful lesson taught, and Rouben Mamoulian does a terrific job of foreshadowing and the transformation scenes were absolutely stunning. I truly believe that if Hyde were not being controlled by Jekyll, and if Jekyll were not conducting an experiment, and if Hyde were a separate person, that he would not be evil, because really, all this is is Jekyll testing his theory that there are two sides to a person. Hyde would not be acting this way if he weren't inside Jekyll's body. I love this movie because it is a black horror; it is scary and fun to watch, but also makes us think about what would happne if we were to unleash our bad side and give in to temptation. Also, I think Mr. Hyde is kind of cute. Kind of. XD.
zogstar67		#110	[-]
Oct 28 10 10:31 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	March's acting as Hyde is simply unbelievable. I just can't believe that that is Frederick March doing all that under the make-up. What a complete transformation. I always find the "domestic abuse" aspect of the Hyde/Ivy relationship particularly disturbing and get just as nervous as she does whenever he comes into the room, especially on the first viewing or 2 when I really did not know what would happen. Chris Herzog "The Devil's on the loose and he's dancin' with the Mummy!!!"
	Remove this ad
Joe Karlosi		#111	[-]
Oct 28 10 12:22 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Liz wrote: Also, I think Mr. Hyde is kind of cute. Kind of. XD. Cuter than Dwight Frye?
Liz.stoogeworld		#112	[-]
Oct 28 10 12:36 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Joe Karlosi wrote: Liz wrote: Also, I think Mr. Hyde is kind of cute. Kind of. XD. Cuter than Dwight Frye? No, of course not. No one tops him! hahaha
thejimdoherty		#113	[-]
Nov 2 10 3:49 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	I tend to think that the penance sequence is more a result of direction rather than an acting choice on March's part. You can see March in films made after, and more to the point, BEFORE Jekyll, and his acting is usually more realistic and restrained.
Liz.stoogeworld		#114	[-]
Nov 3 10 8:46 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	zogstar67 wrote: I always find the "domestic abuse" aspect of the Hyde/Ivy relationship particularly disturbing and get just as nervous as she does whenever he comes into the room, especially on the first viewing or 2 when I really did not know what would happen. As a woman, these scenes frighten me as well. Because I've seen it so many times, the movie as a whole is no longer frightening, but those particular scenes are really frightening, and (as a woman), disgusting to me. That's one of my pet peeves: a man putting his hands on a woman. And sadly, there are men like that in this world.
Rick		#115	[-]
Nov 3 10 8:51 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	True, Liz. There are real horrors around us. And sadly, there are men like that in this world And they are men only in the biological sense.
Liz.stoogeworld		#116	[-]
Nov 5 10 4:58 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Rick wrote: True, Liz. There are real horrors around us. And sadly, there are men like that in this world And they are men only in the biological sense. Indeed.
Colossus Rex		#117	[-]
Nov 8 10 1:07 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	I was just re-reading Greg Mank's wonderful HOLLYWOOD CAULDRON, which has a chapter that covers both the March and Tracy versions. Mank actually comes out for favoring the Tracy version, although almost a little apologetically. I'm a partisan of the March version... the frank sexuality as opposed to the overblown Freudianism of the latter version. March's performance is great, as is the makeup. Also, March's version is the ONLY one I've ever seen in which I believe in Hyde as a completely different person ... which I think is crucial to the believability of the plot.
Joe Karlosi		#118	[-]
Nov 8 10 6:14 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Colossus Rex wrote: Mank actually comes out for favoring the Tracy version, although almost a little apologetically. Is there any other way to favor the Tracy version?
Wich2		#119	[-]
Nov 8 10 10:46 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	"March's version is the ONLY one I've ever seen in which I believe in Hyde as a completely different person" CR, have you seen this one?
Colossus Rex		#120	[-]
Nov 8 10 11:27 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Have to admit, no.
	Remove this ad

<< Previous Topic Next Topic >>

Add Reply

Yuku free message boards

Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde (1931) revisited