Close Search Close

 

  • Comics
  • Theatre
  • Site News

Streaming Shuffle

Dr. Jekyll and Sister Hyde

I'm here for Hyde.

I’ve seen a post—it was widely circulated, so you may well have seen it too—where a woman showed pics of herself before and after her transition to highlight how miserable she used to look, how enervated, lifeless, and scared, compared to how happy, vibrant, and unselfconscious she looks now. The first photograph looks like a candid shot, with an unhappy deer-in-the-headlights stare. The second looks like a selfie. There’s a kind of happiness, one most of us too rarely find, that comes on as a genuine celebration of the self. Some days you can be so happy to be you, and so pleased with what being you looks like.

Dr. Jekyll and Sister Hyde is not a progressive masterpiece, what with it being a 1971 Hammer Horror picture. It was a pun that unexpectedly got greenlit, and I’m sure the studio embraced its salacious potential—one more woman for a little softcore Hammer nudity!—before anything else. The genderbending let them spice up a familiar Victorian tale, and that was good enough.

But movies can be a kind of alchemy, first in the collaboration between all their different creative forces—screenwriter Brian Clemens, director Roy Ward Baker, and actors Martine Beswick and Ralph Bates, to name of the most major—and then in the more gradual and distant collaboration between the film and its various audiences. And sometimes this ends with nuggets of gold.

Here, there’s an exquisite contrast between Jekyll’s pallid, buttoned-up chastity—he is shoehorned into having a love interest, his upstairs neighbor Susan (Susan Broderick), but he doesn’t court her so much as he’s chased and worn down by her, like the fox in a fox hunt—and his body-denying life of the mind and Hyde’s (Beswick) vibrancy, her obvious euphoria at being in her own skin, her bright colors, her lustful wanting that easily matches Susan’s brother’s. It’s the before and after photos all over again.

And the truth is, Hyde is no more monstrous than Jekyll, whatever he believes. The transformative elixir is made from the bodies of murdered women, but Jekyll is the one who starts the killing. In fact, in this muddled mash-up with Jack the Ripper and Burke and Hare1, he begins as he will go on, by denying his part in it all, contracting out the deaths and willfully deciding to know nothing about them. His rejection of his own body, conscious or not, is so completely rendered here that even when he must eventually do his own dirty work, he’s absolutely horrible at remembering to wash the blood off his hands—and of course those hands, bloodied or not, will become one of Jekyll and Hyde’s ways to see when an unwilling transformation is kicking in.

Again, it’s not fair to make the argument that this is some shining beacon of pro-trans sentiment: that the elixir comes from the bodies of murdered women, and that Jekyll at one point willingly transforms himself into Hyde so his victims will think themselves safe with her, is all probably enough for transphobic viewers to watch this quite comfortably. But it’s easy to find trans people who have embraced it2, especially for the strength and vivacity of Beswick’s performance. She commands the screen, and when her Hyde insists that she is real and it is Jekyll who must fade away, it’s impossible for me not to agree with her.

Dr. Jekyll and Sister Hyde is streaming on Tubi and Amazon Prime.

  1. I’m trying to stay focused, but the plot of this movie is a bit bananas. My favorite detail is that Jekyll’s friend scares him into believing that he might die before finding a cure for, say, diptheria, so Jekyll decides he’ll gain more time for his research by curing aging and death instead. Immortality: famously quick and easy to achieve! And indeed he does give himself sexy, sexy longevity within about a week. ↩︎
  2. This piece by Carmilla, currently the film’s top-rated review on Letterboxd, is both moving and invigorating in that regard. ↩︎