Close Search Close

 

  • Comics
  • Theatre
  • Site News

Streaming Shuffle

Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde

An all-time banger.

I’m a fan of classic Hollywood, but my pre-Code experience is limited. In a way, I’m glad of that: it means these films can still astonish me.

1931’s Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, directed by Rouben Mamoulian and starring Fredric March, Miriam Hopkins, and Rose Hobart, still packs a phenomenal punch. Its creamy, shadowy black-and-white cinematography and luminous, familiar stars act as the velvet glove, but what I feel is certainly the steel fist. This is uncompromising, a bleak look at violent, insatiable selfishness and the hypocrisy and lack of self-knowledge that so often aid and abet it. It’s smart, it’s scary, and it moves.

March stars–at first–as Jekyll, who has his worse instincts leashed but can’t help using science to poke almost idly around the idea that maybe he doesn’t have to. He’s impatient for wedding bells to finally ring for him and his devoted intended, Muriel (Hobart), and in short, he’s horny. But he’s neither self-denying enough to wait nor self-accepting enough to simply take a mistress. If he did that, he might have to feel guilty about it. Instead, he comes up with his famous solution.

The dream, as he espouses it to a raptly attentive class, is that this will allow his “good” half to triumph, free of every evil impulse. But that’s not what we see, and I have to conclude it’s not what he experiences–or even what he truly wants. Hyde may be the repository of Jekyll’s unrestrained id–a gleeful, capering, monstrous animal who freely indulges in every sensation that comes his way, whether it’s rain on his face or a vulnerable woman’s terror–but he spares Jekyll nothing. When the drug wears off, Jekyll becomes a full person again, not a “better half.” Hyde is tucked away, recontextualized, and hindered, but not gone. When he’s fully in control of himself, Jekyll would never do what Hyde does, but he makes the choice to become Hyde, again and again, even though he knows Hyde is a living horror to Ivy (Hopkins), the young woman he forcibly keeps as his “mistress.” Jekyll won’t sleep with Ivy, but he’ll allow himself, as Hyde, to rape and terrorize her; it’s fine, because he’s the gentleman who will courteously buy her off with fifty pounds after he decides to consign his alter ego to the grave. There’s no moral betterment, just compartmentalization and freedom from consequence.

The film observes this central drama of conscience as sharply as anything ever has, perfectly picking out Jekyll’s distress when Ivy comes to his door (to thank him and beg for his help, never knowing how intimately he’s aware of her troubles): Hyde, “learning” of the encounter, is simply full of hatred and possessive jealousy, but Jekyll is tense, his nerve endings revealing the complicity his mind has tried to deny. It’s never been easier to understand how Jekyll could start lapsing into Hyde without ever taking the drug. Gratification becomes a habit, and it’s a lot less demanding than a civilized man’s intellectual gymnastics. But if Jekyll was a moral coward who had to run and Hyde1, Hyde is a physical coward–he’s not smart enough to fear more than death and a trap–who ends by running to Jekyll. He tried to have what he wanted without either guilt or punishment, and in the end, he gets both.

But for all the moral clarity of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, it’s more famous, and rightly so, for two particular cinematic and dramatic touches. The first is the incredible makeup work that transforms March’s mild, attractive face into Hyde’s simian sneer2, which looks like it’s straight out of The Big Book of British Smiles. Per TCM, red filters let the already-applied makeup slowly reveal itself through camerawork and lighting changes, so even now the transitions (especially the early ones) look almost flawlessly smooth, without the awkward pauses of stop-motion. If it’s remarkable to see such an accomplished effect in an “old” film, it’s even more jaw-dropping to see the frankness of Miriam Hopkins’s performance, from Ivy’s open, earnest sexuality–I audibly gasped at her baring her bruised thigh for Jekyll’s inspection–to the terrifying pathos she gains once in Hyde’s clutches. The violence he subjects her to is almost easier to take than the constant, obsessive demands that she perform the emotions he wants from her, forcing her to sing “for joy” and say she loves him and beg him to stay, watching her like a hawk so he can lash out at even the slightest hint of visible resentment or relief at his going. It’s easy to see the evil in a beating; Hopkins excels because, even more than March, she forces the audience to see it in the call for a song.

Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde is streaming on Tubi, HBO Max, and Plex.

  1. Look, if I took this drug, the resulting creature would make even worse and more frequent puns. ↩︎
  2. He also has a slightly swarthier complexion as Hyde, which is sadly consistent with racist cinematic language for conveying “good” vs. “evil” physical characteristics. ↩︎