Salem Press

Back More

Article Citation
Save this article
Print this Article/Save as PDF
Email this article
Copy Permalink to this Article to Clipboard✓

Novels Into Film: Adaptations & Interpretations

Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde (1931)

by Robert C. Evans, PhD

The Novel

Author: Robert Louis Stevenson (1850-94)

First published: 1886

The Film

Year released: 1931

Director: Rouben Mamoulian (1897-1987)

Screenplay by: Samuel Hoffenstein, Percy Heath

Starring: Fredric March (1897-1975), Rose Hobart (1906-2000), Miriam Hopkins (1902-72), Holmes Herbert (1882-1956)

Context

The 1931 film version of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde appeared during one of the great periods of Hollywood horror movies. Frankenstein, starring Boris Karloff, and Dracula, starring Bela Lugosi, were both released that same year. The Mummy, starring Karloff, appeared in 1932; and King Kong and The Invisible Man would be issued in 1933. Americans frightened by the all-too-real facts of the Great Depression (which had begun in 1929) seemed to enjoy being terrified by imaginary monsters, perhaps as a way of temporarily escaping the grim realities of life outside the theaters. Both the 1931 film and the original novel, however, also tapped into enduring human appetites for mystery, horror, and fear—all safely contained within the pages of a book or the dimensions of a big screen. Dr. Jekyll, in fact, has been filmed dozens of times since 1908 and has been adapted to various other media. The story’s continuing popularity and its repeated transformation into film both suggest that the plot, characters, and themes of Stevenson’s story all tap into archetypal thoughts, desires, and fears.

Both the original novel (first published in book form in 1886) and the 1931 film version present a famous and respectable London physician and scientist (Dr. Jekyll) who creates a secret potion by which he can transform himself into his evil, uninhibited alter ego (Mr. Hyde), who indulges in all the vices that the virtuous doctor resists. Both the novel and the film played upon audiences’ interests in suspense, horror, the macabre, and the gothic. The film, in particular, could openly and dramatically show the horrors the novel could only describe. In depicting the transformation of Dr. Jekyll into Mr. Hyde, the film could also use sophisticated special effects unavailable to the novelist. The film is one of the great early horror movies; the novel, meanwhile, takes advantage of numerous techniques of mystery writing and detective fiction.

Film Analysis

The novel and the 1931 film both explore such themes as the complexity of the human psyche, the battle within each person between the forces of good and evil, the temptation to abandon morality in favor of personal pleasure, and the piercing guilt that can result from such abandonment—especially if doing so harms others. The film as a whole must have made great sense to anyone familiar, in 1931, with the work of Sigmund Freud. Hyde is the personification of the selfish, pleasure-seeking, amoral Freudian id, while Jekyll personifies both the rational ego and, occasionally, the moralistic superego.

Poster for the theatrical release of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde.

Novels_p0087_1.jpg

Both works also raise intriguing questions about the dangers of reckless scientific experimentation; the rejection of traditional moral and religious values; the desire to break free of conventional social inhibitions; and the deeply rooted human desire to hide our flaws and transgressions. The name “Hyde,” in fact, seems perfectly appropriate both in the novel and in the film: the villainous persona spends much of his time hiding as he seeks to escape detection and apprehension. His activities are more visible in the movie, however, since it is not until the end of the book that readers learn the whole, true story of what has been happening throughout the text. Stevenson hides most of the key facts until the novel’s last chapter; the film may be less mysterious but gains action.

The film version differs considerably from the original book in other ways as well. In particular, two female main characters are added and two subplots are introduced about their respective relationships with Jekyll/Hyde—one romantic, the other perverse. Whereas the novel describes Dr. Henry Jekyll as an aging bachelor in his fifties, Dr. Jekyll in the film is played by Fredric March, who was in his thirties when the movie was shot. Stevenson’s Jekyll is a reclusive scientist who lives in a London townhouse, while the film’s Jekyll is an esteemed physician who resides in an enormous mansion. Rather than being reclusive, in the film Jekyll addresses huge, prestigious gatherings of other doctors in between helping the lame and treating the poor, and attends large fancy parties full of rich and powerful people.

Above all, however, the film’s Jekyll has a definite love interest: a beautiful young woman named Muriel Carew (Rose Hobart), the daughter of a wealthy, old-fashioned retired British general. She, too, lives in a mansion and, like Jekyll, is ensconced in high society. She and Jekyll, in fact, are engaged to be married. They continually ask her father for permission to move up their wedding date. The general repeatedly refuses, citing social custom. It is partly because Jekyll is denied sexual release through marriage that he becomes interested in the beautiful but poverty-stricken Ivy Pearson (Miriam Hopkins), who sings popular songs while drinking beer and displaying her flesh in a down-market music hall. Jekyll coincidentally happens to treat her after he sees her being beaten in the street. He carries her up to her room, where she soon strips naked (although she makes him turn his back while she does so) and where she then tries to seduce him as she lies under the covers. She tantalizingly swings her bare leg back and forth over the side of her bed—an image Jekyll later cannot get out of his mind. When Jekyll transforms into Edward Hyde, the first thing he does is track down Ivy. He manipulates her into an abusive relationship and puts her up in fancy rooms so that he can rape her at will.

Fredric March played both titular roles.

Novels_p0088_1.jpg

In all these respects, the movie is nothing like the book. The only significant female characters in the novel are a little girl (whom Hyde knocks down while dashing home) and a maid who happens to witness Hyde beating to death a powerful politician in the street beneath her window. In the movie, Jekyll courts Muriel with flowery phrases and stolen kisses; Hyde sadistically tortures Ivy, physically, sexually, and psychologically. The fact that Jekyll merely gives in to taking Ivy’s offered kiss helps illustrate his self-discipline (and his loyalty to Muriel). When, later, as Hyde he tracks down Ivy and essentially imprisons her, his lust is all too clear. But the pleasure he takes in abusing her verbally is, if anything, just as repulsive and terrifying. Eventually he brutally strangles her, but not before subjecting her to further verbal abuse.

The movie version also differs from the book in its use of special effects to convey the horror of Jekyll’s transformation. Director Rouben Mamoulian shows this transformation repeatedly, and the special-effects wizardry is impressive. When Jekyll turns into Hyde, he does not merely become ugly but looks subhuman. His nose flares out; his eyes darken; and he grows massive, pointed teeth. Mamoulian enjoys playing all kinds of tricks with the camera; this is not a movie that looks like a filmed stage play. Close-ups frequently fill the screen, both to emphasize the good looks of Jekyll, Muriel, and Ivy, and to highlight the horrible ugliness of Hyde. Split screens allow the director to accentuate the split in Jekyll’s personality, as when Muriel is shown waiting forlornly for him at their engagement ball while Jekyll, having involuntarily turned into Hyde, lopes across a London park. The director also takes advantage of the fact that the film is shot in black and white. The scenes shot in Muriel’s father’s home are always bright and well lit, while the inside of Jekyll’s house tends to look gray and gloomy, and London, during Hyde’s nighttime excursions, is depressingly dark. At one point, when Hyde is being chased by police, the director shows huge black silhouettes moving against a floodlit wall.

If Stevenson’s novel can sometimes strike a modern reader as painfully slow-moving, the film is anything but. In the film, Hyde swings like a flying monkey whenever he needs to escape pursuers. In one memorable scene he leaps over a banister and lands right in front of Ivy to keep her from escaping her room. This is literally a moving picture whenever Hyde appears, and the director also makes full use of sound and sound effects. It was only in 1927 that the first film with sound, The Jazz Singer, appeared, but in the film version of Dr. Jekyll sound is used expertly, especially when Jekyll—twisting, choking, and gagging —turns into Mr. Hyde.

Significance

When it was first released, the 1931 film version earned back nearly twice as much as its estimated budget of $535,000. Fredric March’s performance was highly lauded, and he tied for the best actor Oscar at the 1932 Academy Awards. The film itself was highly commended by critics and remains one of the most popular films of the early 1930s. The success of this version helped prompt later producers and directors to try their own hands at retelling Stevenson’s story, but some critics believe that the 1931 adaptation has never been surpassed.

The make-up used to depict Hyde in this film has influenced many later renderings of the character, both in print and on film. The transformation from Jekyll to Hyde hid nothing: it was not done off camera, in darkness, or in any way that obscured the process. Instead, it was boldly lit and shown in startling close ups, thus demonstrating the kind of magic that cinema could work and thereby helping to intensify Hollywood’s love affair with special effects. Ironically, the film itself illustrated how scientific developments could be used to entertain and entrance, even as Jekyll’s experiments reminded viewers—not long after World War I—how scientific “progress” could sometimes lead to disastrous results.

This film also arguably contributed to Hollywood’s obsession with the sexual objectification of women. The scene of Ivy in bed, her bare leg dangling temptingly outside the covers, pushed the limits of what could be tolerated in the 1930s. (Her brief nude scene was widely censored in later releases of the film.) The gazes of Jekyll, Hyde, the camera, and the audience are all on Ivy’s near-nakedness and are an early instance of sexploitation. But the film is also remarkably frank in showing the ways men, at their worst, can abuse women. The scenes in which Hyde takes an erotic delight in terrifying and torturing Ivy make him one of cinema’s earliest psychopaths.

This, in short, is a psychologically sophisticated horror film, and it still has the power to disturb the conscience rather than merely shock the senses. In this respect it almost foreshadows some of the later films of Alfred Hitchcock.

Bibliography

Campbell, Charles. “Women and Sadism in Strange Case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde: ‘City in a Nightmare.’” English Literature in Transition, 1880-1920, vol. 57, no. 3, 2014, pp. 309-23. Literary Reference Center Plus, search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=truedb=lkhAN=96136776site=lrc-plus. Accessed 8 May 2018.

King, Charles. “Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde: A Filmography. (Cover Story).” Journal of Popular Film Television, vol. 25, no. 1, Spring 1997, p. 9. Literary Reference Center Plus, search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=truedb=lkhAN=9708045114site=lrc-plus. Accessed 8 May 2018.

McDonald, Neil. “Four Faces of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde.” Quadrant Magazine, vol. 49, no. 11, Nov. 2005, p. 72. Literary Reference Center Plus, search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=truedb=lkhAN=18948827site=lrc-plus. Accessed 8 May 2018.

Citation Types

MLA 9th

Evans, Robert C. "Dr. Jekyll And Mr. Hyde (1931)." Novels Into Film: Adaptations & Interpretations, edited by D. Alan Dean, Salem Press, 2018. Salem Online, online.salempress.com/articleDetails.do?articleName=Novels_0028.

APA 7th

Evans, R. C. (2018). Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde (1931). In D. Alan Dean (Ed.), Novels Into Film: Adaptations & Interpretations. Salem Press. online.salempress.com.

CMOS 17th

Evans, Robert C. "Dr. Jekyll And Mr. Hyde (1931)." Edited by D. Alan Dean. Novels Into Film: Adaptations & Interpretations. Hackensack: Salem Press, 2018. Accessed April 05, 2026. online.salempress.com.

Table of Contents