The Story of Dr.Jekyll and Mr Hyde in general is good. The books is great. There have been some great films based on it. Dr. Jekyll and Mr.Hyde (1931) is a great film. Dr. Jekyll and Mr Hyde (1920) is a great film. Dr. Jekyll and Mr Hyde (1941) is a great film. This one is very disappointing. The story line is awful. And it has an awful ending. It is very slow. The hole thing became a court room drama trying to prove that Dr. Jekyll and Mr Hyde are not same person. It was based on the book but it did not say very true to it. Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde (1912) is great. But this is pooh pooh. This is a big stinky fart. Don't wast your money.

Dr. Henry Jekyll (Dougray Scott), unable to stop himself from transforming into the murderous Edward Hyde, wants his attorney to secure him a speedy trial, a guilty verdict and a quick execution.The star power in this film is Tom Skerritt, which does not say much for this film. But we also have Kim Bubbs (as a secretary), a friend of Killer Reviews. So, that was good enough reason for me to watch it! (See Kim in "The Thing".) The horror part is pretty average -- this story has been told so many times, you really cannot add a new element to it any more. (What is interesting, at least to me, is that this film seemingly exists in a world circa 2008, but that would be a world where the classic Jekyll/Hyde story never existed... weird.) The trial scenes... wow, big fail. There is no cross-examination, there is too much conjecture from the defense attorney outside of closing arguments. The person who wrote this film is not familiar with court procedures apparently. There are worse court scenes in films, but this still makes the list of bad ones.

I'm quite actually not sure how i feel about this one yet,, there are some parts that i like,, and some i don't ,, first i think that Dougray Scott is a fine actor,, but someone else should have played that role,, second,, they could have at least set it in London,, not the states,, i liked some of the modernization,, with the computers, and him at the hospital as a Dr. and stuff, and mixing all of those compounds together, to try and get the anti-dote. but some of the stuff i didn't' like is when he turns to the lawyer for help,,, why did the writers go in that direction,, but okay,, that aside,, it does get better after the half way point,, when they all get in the courtroom,, very intense there,,without giving away the ending,, i did like the ending very much,, i just think that this could have been written better, set somewhere else,, and this could have been a great movie,, as is,, it's just you're average late nite TV fair.

Since I'm always fascinated with anything Jekyll & Hyde, I never pass up an opportunity to see a movie version when it's on. And I must say that I didn't find this version disappointing at all. In fact, I found it quite interesting and intriguing.This is a modern approach on the struggle between good and evil, and in this movie the struggle didn't turn out to be as much of a failure as in most versions. In this story, Dr. Henry Jekyll (played by Dougray Scott) turns himself in to an attorney named Claire Wheaton (Krista Bridges). Even though she is willing to help him, when he tells her his condition, she doesn't quite understand or believe him until she sees it for herself. One thing leads to another and many twists and turns follow.I found this version of Jekyll & Hyde to be a good one. It's a more original take for one, and it's really suspenseful. I won't give away the ending, but it's an ending you wouldn't normally expect. I look forward to seeing it again in the future. 10/10