FREDRIC MARCH won his first Oscar for DR. JEKYLL AND MR. HYDE and it is the kind of showy role that usually results in at least an Oscar nomination. Although he's a fine actor, this was 1931 and even the best screen actors had not yet toned down their performances from either the stage or the silent screen. There are moments when he's clearly over the top, by today's standards, and of course the exaggerated make-up by Wally Westmore (with the aid of special lighting filters) gives March a Simian countenance more suitable for a "Planet of the Apes" type of thing.
Still, the actor has to be credited with giving a strong performance, full of athletic leaps as he attempts to get away safely from those trying to trap him. And it certainly helps that he gets strong support from MIRIAM HOPKINS as the cabaret singer who is frightened by his Mr. Hyde personality as well as his gruesome disguise.
ROSE HOBART is a strange choice to play the society girl that March is romantically involved with. She's even more bland than Lana Turner was in the MGM version of the '40s, if that is possible. She offers no real passion to the part or charm and his infatuation with her never seems plausible. She would go on to play character roles for the bulk of her career.
The mostly British cast does well by the script and the vintage B&W photography simulating London interiors and exteriors is fine.
In the Spencer Tracy/Ingrid Bergman/Lana Turner version, Tracy's make-up was never concealing enough--you could always see him beneath the bushy brows and the jagged teeth. It made you wonder why others around him didn't see through to Dr. Jekyll. March has gone to the opposite extreme, and therein lies the weakness in my opinion. He's too much in the other direction.
However, having said that, it's a good enough version of the Stevenson story in view of the fact that it's strictly a film of the '30s in style and performance.
Still, the actor has to be credited with giving a strong performance, full of athletic leaps as he attempts to get away safely from those trying to trap him. And it certainly helps that he gets strong support from MIRIAM HOPKINS as the cabaret singer who is frightened by his Mr. Hyde personality as well as his gruesome disguise.
ROSE HOBART is a strange choice to play the society girl that March is romantically involved with. She's even more bland than Lana Turner was in the MGM version of the '40s, if that is possible. She offers no real passion to the part or charm and his infatuation with her never seems plausible. She would go on to play character roles for the bulk of her career.
The mostly British cast does well by the script and the vintage B&W photography simulating London interiors and exteriors is fine.
In the Spencer Tracy/Ingrid Bergman/Lana Turner version, Tracy's make-up was never concealing enough--you could always see him beneath the bushy brows and the jagged teeth. It made you wonder why others around him didn't see through to Dr. Jekyll. March has gone to the opposite extreme, and therein lies the weakness in my opinion. He's too much in the other direction.
However, having said that, it's a good enough version of the Stevenson story in view of the fact that it's strictly a film of the '30s in style and performance.