|
|
Post by claudius on Jul 7, 2021 23:13:20 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on Jul 7, 2021 23:45:57 GMT
1932.
|
|
|
|
Post by phantomparticle on Jul 8, 2021 0:34:47 GMT
I saw the Tracy version during a re-issue in 1956 when MGM still had the 1932 Paramount film under lock and key and had to wait until it finally became available in the 1980's.
The Rouben Mamoulian film is a nightmare fantasy laced with pre code sexuality. March's no holds barred portrayal of Hyde earned him an Academy Award, an honor with he was forced to share with Wallace Berry's performance in The Champ (the only time in Hollywood history that has happened). The makeup is continually adjusted so that Hyde becomes increasingly horrific as his crimes mount and his final transformation is truly hideous. It is one of only two times that I was actually frightened by an image as an adult (the other was the double face in The Exorcist).
Tracy had a different approach to the role. He was a periodic alcoholic and wanted to slant the character in that direction. The MGM film is slicker and more refined than its predecessor. Tracy's subdued makeup is more believable than that of March. You can picture Tracy/Hyde walking the streets, mostly unnoticed. That is not not possible with March.
I have nothing but praise for both Miriam Hopkins and Ingrid Bergman as the doomed Ivy. Hopkins's electric sexuality burns up the screen. Bergman's coquettish warmth intensifies the tragedy of her ultimate fate.
Both movies rank high on my Favorite Classic Horror Film List, but the 1932 version is the superior.
|
|
|
|
Post by mgmarshall on Jul 9, 2021 19:08:28 GMT
There's like 40 other movie adaptations of the story, though.
|
|
|
|
Post by claudius on Jul 9, 2021 19:44:30 GMT
But these two versions are based on the same screenplay (as I noted in the poll title): the same cast of characters, plot lines and resolution.
|
|
|
|
Post by mgmarshall on Jul 9, 2021 21:41:39 GMT
But these two versions are based on the same screenplay (as I noted in the poll title): the same cast of characters, plot lines and resolution. Ah. My mistake, I completely overlooked that somehow. |
|
|
|
Post by claudius on Jul 9, 2021 23:16:24 GMT
I typed nothing; just my inability to post pictures. Those are links to the posters.
|
|
|
|
Post by OldAussie on Jul 10, 2021 2:52:53 GMT
1932.
|
|
|
|
Post by Prime etc. on Jul 10, 2021 16:29:02 GMT
I wanted to see the 1932 version for ages--but didn't get it until around 1990.
I have never seen the Tracy version--the makeup didn't impress me.
|
|
|
|
Post by claudius on Jul 10, 2021 16:53:33 GMT
That appears to be the issue with Tracy's Hyde- he resembles Jekyll too much. Author Somerset Maugham visited the Set, and is said to have looked at Tracy's Hyde and reacted with "Which one is he now?" To be sure, the film does play with this: after her reunion with Jekyll where she denounces Hyde and his abuse, Ivy notes a resemblance to the man & 'Welcome to Dumpsville, Population: Beatrix' thinks she sees Jekyll returning to reconcile, only to discover it's Hyde.
|
|
