elshikh4 Robert Louis Stevenson's (Strange Case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde) summarizes the immortal conflict of good and evil inside the human. Its sad ending has penetrating melancholy which makes it a tragedy of the human weakness in front of evil. That's why I believe that it is one of the most lasting novels in the history of humanity. Actually as times goes by, it develops insisting presence, because, as the devil said it better in The Devil's Advocate, "Don't try to deny that the 20th century is mine". Obviously, Hyde – as the novel predicted perfectly – prevails, yet so many times lately ! Now this is not "based on", but "derived from" the famous novel. It's a TV movie, namely – this time – simple, talkative and a bit poor (Hyde's mask was "apparently" a mask!). But I loved the first transformation's scene, it freaks out. The plot is interesting with Cheryl Ladd's storyline. And surely Michael Caine adds a lot to it.Back then Caine was seduced by historical and based upon famous literary pieces, especially done for the TV. Between the end of the 1980s and the end of the 1990s he played : Chief Insp. Frederick Abberline in Jack the Ripper (1988), Dr. Jekyll / Mr. Hyde in Jekyll & Hyde (1990), Captain Nemo in 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea (1997). Not to mention that in the same period's cinema he played Sherlock Holmes in Without a Clue (1988), and Ebenezer Scrooge in The Muppet Christmas Carol (1992).His presence gives (Jekyll & Hyde) an electrifying sense. He makes it memorable. I can't forget his moment running in the street screaming for help while his last transformation into Hyde.The movie displays tender movie-making, especially the cinematography. However, what really stands alone is the last shot. It's one of the most shocking endings, rather moments, I have ever experienced. The truth of the son Dr. Jakell leaves as Hyde's is so cleverly written and directed. And on a deeper level it assures that the world will be for Hyde not Jakell. Naturally I think, since we're all the breed of Cain !Nice movie altogether, with a majestic Michael Caine, and some dark twist which leaves unmistakable bitter feel.

dwindler-652-298703 I watched Jekyll and Hyde Movie featuring Michael Caine, It was amazing, This Version of Stevenson's Classic took the dark side of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, Michael Caine portrayed as Dr. Jekyll is Brilliant, In this movie Dr. Jekyll is troubled man, His wife died, His friendship between him and Dr. Lanyon is destroyed, So he created a portion that bring transformation of mankind, That bring us to Mr. Hyde. The Transformation in this movie was awesome, Br Jekyll goes by his self to Ugly Mr. Hyde in seconds, The Cast in this movie are amazing as well, Michael Caine did excellent job as both Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, Cheryl Ladd is good job as Sara Crawford a daughter of Dr. Lanyon who Played by Joss Ackland, Who have feud against Dr. Jekyll after his other daugther dies who also Dr. Jekyll Wife and Ronald Pickup is Brilliant as Jeffery Utterson as well. This is outta a doubt a best adaptation of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde story.

rose-294 This TV movie starring Michael Caine and Cheryl Ladd has nothing to do with the plot of Robert Louis Stevenson's 1885 story Strange case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde, it is just an excuse for writer/director David Wickes to show 'Orribly Gothic melodrama set in late 19th century London. Hyde (Caine in a bad make-up) terrorizes prostitutes and Jekyll's beloved Cheryl Ladd and while the film is ridiculous as Hell, it has also lots of not too subtle charm. Ladd gets to parade in some lovely period costumes, sets are good and Miriam Karlin as red-dressed Madam is another proof how make-up department in this film really went over-the-top.

TBJCSKCNRRQTreviews Now, it's not really that this has absolutely nothing to offer... it's really more that it takes an idea with such massive promise, and not only fails to deliver, but actually ruins parts, adds and changes without doing anything, at least positive. I have not read the original by Stevenson, but I am not certain anyone working on this did, either. There's marvelous conflict in the very idea of the character, and this barely manages to realize that at all. The look of Hyde is just bad, and the design of the transformation, the concept used, seems dumb. Much is unintentionally silly(as the other reviewer comments, this would have been good for Mystery Science Theater 3000). I've seen excellent films using non-linear time-lines, but this plays around with time so much, and for so little point(some setting up the final twist, which could have been considerably better, as with the rest of them)... the plot has enough threads, with little to nothing, most notably *not* the main subject of the character(I did notice that the credits said "derived from", not "based on", when listing the book), actually resolved or properly addressed. It also has too many things going, at the same time. The dialog has select moments that are noteworthy, with the rest, the very most part, being utterly preposterous. The acting is seldom commendable, save for Caine, and even he has weak instances. Effects tend to be poor. Ladd's character and what she brings to the story is worse than useless, it hurts the movie. Music is unimpressive, and portions are far too loud. Attempts at comedy are ironically the least funny bits in the film. A lot of things happen without this ever engaging or interesting the(or at least this) viewer. Editing and cinematography cut corners and has so little to offer, you have to wonder why they bothered to make any effort at all. This may also feature the least helpful/discreet(in unexpected situations, at least) servants I've ever seen, even if they do(at times) seem to have good intentions. I recommend this to... well, those people who just *must* watch every adaptation and/or Michael Caine feature out there. The rest of us, please remember that just because it's TV, it doesn't have to mean it's bad; this is outdone even by productions in the same(financial and whatnot) class. 5/10