Frederick March or Spencer Tracy?
Which portrayed the title character better, and which was the better movie? I thought March's performance was the better of the two, but that Lana Turner made Tracy's version just as good a movie.
share[deleted]
Though I like both March and Tracy's versions which I have on a two sided DVD in one case, you all seem to forget one thing: Unlike Spencer Tracy, Fredric March won an Academy Award for best actor for his portrayal of Jekyll and Hyde. March gave a great performance as both a doctor who later becomes horrified by the evil menace he unleashed from himself and on London society and a tormented soul when the Hyde persona started taking over his transformations.
sharePersonally, I like both versions.
Strengths of both:
-March/Tracy as Jekyll & Hyde.
-As Ivy, Hopkins and Bergman were apples and oranges. Both exhibit the sexual power that push Jekyll into temptation. Although Bergman is more restrained in her tortured situation, I find no fault in Hopkins' near-hysterics in her own bad situation. Both make sense.
-The cinematography. '31's metaphors, dissolves, double-images, etc., '41's fog-shrouded London, the Freudian hallucinations, etc.
-The production values.
-The portrayals of the two interfering father-in-law-to-be. General Carew narrow-minded stuffshirt (making his demise somewhat deserved) and Sir Charles Emery's stern-but-sympathetic parent (making his demise undeserved).
1931 over 1941:
-The pre-code tone of the film.
-The transformation scenes, from the red-blue filters to rather simple piece of Jekyll's encloaked backside expanding to Hyde.
-The make-up. Yes, although one can argue the neanderthal can be a bit much, at least it definitely distinguishes between the two halves much better than Tracy's make-up. At times, it appears that only Tracy's hair is doing the change.
-The climax, from Hyde attacking the Carews to the final skirmish in the laboratory (with Hyde going all over the place) was much better staged.
1941 over 1931:
-Franz Waxman's music (a bonus, not an advantage)
-Ian Hunter's disapproving-but-overall-bro Dr. Lanyon over Holmes Herbert's ALWAYS-disapproving holier-than-thou.
-Hyde's unexpected return on the eve of Jekyll's engagement party is better portrayed here: Jekyll attempting to whistle the Emery waltz tune but keeps on returning to Ivy's "Dance the Polka" tune.
-No bad child actress scene.
I had seen the 1941 Spencer Tracy version a couple of times over the years but never watched the 1931 Frederic March version until tonight. While I can see why many fans prefer the 1931 version(it's the original of the two and largely a basis for the 1941 version and the bigger landmark in cinema history with Mamoulian's direction), I think I prefer the 1941 version myself thanks to the Franz Waxman score and the superstar trio of Tracy/Bergman/Turner. I think Tracy's more subtle take on Hyde makes him even more disturbing. Plus, the MGM gloss makes it a smoother and more polished viewing experience.
I do think that John Lee Mahin should not have received sole scriptwriting credit for the 1941 version. The credits should have added Samuel Hoffenstein and Percy Heath's(the 1931 version's scriptwriters) names alongside John Lee Mahin's.