I wonder how many movies there are out there going by the title of “Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde.” There are certainly more than I would have thought plus plenty more using variations on the title. I can’t even just refer to it as “the old black-and-white Jekyll and Hyde movie” because there are at least a handful that fit that description.

This particular movie from the 20's stars John Barrymore, is a silent film, and is an adaptation of the classic novella. Jekyll is a generous doctor trying to help mankind. He’s so wrapped up in his work that his friends start taunting him about getting a life, and they introduce him to the world of carnal pleasures. Now with a moral struggle in himself Jekyll starts getting the idea of creating a second self (something like a forced split personality though more extreme) – one that can embody his sinful desires while keeping his Jekyll self pure. He develops something that will do the trick and becomes a completely different person in both actions and appearance. Now he battles between good and evil sides of himself, but the Hyde side may have grown too strong to stop.

This movie certainly has its high moments well deserving of praise, but overall I thought it was slow and disjointed. The narrative flow is poor jumping around in the story without sufficient development. What’s more is that the movie tries too hard to turn Jekyll’s musings into the ultimate moral question without actually managing to do so sufficiently.

On the positive side is an impressive Jekyll to Hyde morph considering the age of the piece. Barrymore does such a good job with the different characters that I looked up the cast list to verify that he was indeed both Jekyll and Hyde. In fact, Hyde is one of the creepiest characters I’ve ever seen on screen. He made my flesh crawl unlike the vast majority of the goriest undead creatures CG has been able to create. That’s a testament to Barrymore’s talents.

Unfortunately despite the great job with Hyde and the well-conceived general notion of evil swallowing a good man despite his justifications to avoid such a thing, I just didn’t find anything else engaging. Part of this may be because of the musical score. It may very well differ depending on the release you get, but in my version it lacks. At first it is rather gothic sounding and seems to be matched to the action on screen. Eventually it becomes more generic and boring, poorly accenting any of the visuals. I might enjoy it more if I just turned the sound off.

Besides that, though, I don’t think the story does a very good job of establishing Jekyll’s relationship with his supposed lady-friend. Nor is his descent into temptation of the flesh particularly believable. He sees one lady in a bar and suddenly has this idea of creating a second self to embrace a sinful nature? It’s really not until towards the end when Hyde turns to murder and finds himself hunted by the police that the pace begins to flow smoothly. By then the viewer has a good idea of Hyde as evil, Jekyll as trapped by Hyde, and his woman’s desire to get him out of the isolation he’s imposed upon himself lest his evil nature rear its head and hurt someone.

As a fan of the book I couldn’t help but notice some differences. One of those it the rearranging of the narrative. The book is told mostly from the viewpoint of Utterson, Jekyll’s friend and colleague. There is a lot of mystery about who Hyde is and what his connection to Jekyll is, not just for the characters but for the reader as well. I guess now that everyone knows the twist there’s no point in making it mysterious. So rather than starting in the middle of Hyde’s story as the book does the movie starts prior – showing Jekyll’s downfall which, in the original story, is not discussed until towards the end. The movie, being a visual medium, also must fill that section in more, depicting it rather than mentioning. If only it fleshed it out better. It seems to me that the moments that are closest to the original story are the best of the movie.

Another big departure from the book, one that is not dictated by the technicalities of a medium adaptation, is the introduction of a love interest for Jekyll. There is no such relationship in the book. In fact, there are no major female characters at all. Maybe the movie makers felt like they needed a leading lady. I don’t suppose that hurts the movie, but neither do I think it helps enough to warrant the departure from the source.