Mary Reilly | | Cast : | Julia Roberts, John Malkovich | | Director : | Stephen Frears | | Studio : | Columbia Tri-Star | | Format : | Color, Closed-captioned, Widescreen, Dolby | | Released Date : | February 23, 1996 | | DVD Released Date : | September 12, 2000 | | Language : | Unknown (Dubbed), English (Dubbed), French (Dubbed), English (Subtitled), Spanish (Subtitled), French (Subtitled), Spanish (Dubbed) | | Audience Rating : | R (Restricted) | | | BUY THIS DVD FROM AMAZON |
Customer Reviews
| Rating |  | | Date | January 04, 2005 | | Summary | "He came out of the dark like he was made of it." | Content
 | In the great tradition of Gothic horror films, Mary Reilly updates the classic Robert Louis Stevenson novella, Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. The screenplay by Christopher Hampton, from the novel by Valerie Martin, changes the focus from the bizarre transformation of Dr. Jekyll into Mr. Hyde, his evil alterego, and creates instead a tension-filled relationship between the dark and "misunderstood" Dr. Jekyll and his young and proper housemaid, Mary Reilly. Despite (or perhaps because of) the abuse she has suffered at the hands of her father, Mary does not run from Dr. Jekyll, though she always seems fearful. He confides in her about his research and gives her a sense of value which she does not receive from any other source.
Julia Roberts as the very repressed Mary, plays most of the film through her expressive eyes, which reveal her fear and her moods. Little dialogue is necessary, as John Malkevich, as both Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, sneers, threatens, and dissembles, while also conveying a vulnerability to which Mary Reilly responds. The cast of other house servants is outstanding, but Glenn Close as the off-the-wall madam Mrs. Farraday, steals the show, playing the role in her nastiest Cruella DeVille mode. The Victorian setting is beautifully conveyed, from the claustrophic interiors of the bawdy house to the stark black and white interior of Jekyll's laboratory, and the costuming reflects the same color palette.
The cinematography takes advantage of architectural components, filming from above catwalks in Dr. Hyde's laboratory, through windows, around doorways and halls, and from under tables. Additional scenes of dark, foggy weather are used to great advantage as a contrast to the brightness and butchery in the markets, hospital autopsy rooms, and Mrs. Farraday's accommodations.
The psychological portrait of Dr. Jekyll and his "evil twin," Mr. Hyde have been discussed for over a hundred years, and this film does not add anything new to that portrait. The inclusion of Mary Reilly, however, is a new twist, one which might have been more believable if her own psychological motivation for remaining in Dr. Jekyll's household had been more fully developed. The special effects as Dr. Jekyll wrestles with his inner demon are compelling and unique, but the ending just peters out, offering no emotional resolution or intellectual conclusion regarding Mary Reilly. Great fun for fans of Gothic horror. Mary Whipple
|
| Rating | | | Date | October 15, 2004 | | Summary | dark atmosphere in this chilling little story | Content
| This movie is so, so creepy and gothic and weird, without being too bloody or too gratuitous. It's silently creepy and disturbing, that's its power.
I didn't buy the Jekyll and Hyde being two different guys because anybody with half a mind can see its Malkovich in both roles, so I find it hard to believe that Mary Reilly and others wouldn't recognize that, they should have disguised him better, not just different hair color.
Other than that, everything in the film works great. Malkovich is superb as always in his subdued sophisticated decadent villain acting mode, and Julia Roberts really shows her range as an actress, playing this timid mousy little maid with a sad past. |
| Rating | | | Date | September 27, 2004 | | Summary | Awesome! | Content
| I absolutely loooove this movie! Julia Roberts' BEST performance is right here folks! And John Malkovich just makes it so insanely amazing! Trust me when I say that if you liked From Hell or Mary Shelley's Frankenstein, you will LOVE this movie! |
| Rating | | | Date | June 20, 2004 | | Summary | Interesting Film! | Content
| I don't really understand what everyone is talking about when referring to Ms. Robert's performance. I thought it was exceptional. It was nice to see her stretch. Anyway Malkovich was fantastic! This story was great and I thought it was well executed on film. Close had an interesting role also and I loved hearing her accent. See this one. |
| Rating | | | Date | June 08, 2004 | | Summary | Disappointing... | Content
| This movie should have been a LOT better than it turned out to be! One can imagine the meeting at the producer's office at which it was pitched: "OK! We're going to retell the story of
Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde... only from the point of view of Dr. Jeckyll's maid, Mary Reilly! Let's get Julia Roberts in the title role and John Malkovich to play Jekyll and Hyde!" Sounds like a winner, no?No! One is never quite sure who is to blame for all the missed opportunities here; whether the studio wanted to make one film and the director another, or whether director Stephen Frears just made bad choices, but this movie never quite jells. Indecision seems to plague it at almost every turn. When it should be scarey, it settles for being merely creepy. When it should be creepy, it is merely weird. When it should be suspenseful, it goes conventional.
Julia Roberts seems more constrained in this picture than Winnona Rider and Sadie Frost do in their corsets in "Bram Stoker's Dracula." She stays in her "wounded bird" persona throughout the entire film. The trouble is we are given no preamble to explain why should be that way, and no development to explain why she should stay that way.
John Malkovich, ever the unconventional actor, makes an astounding choice with his character, choosing to play Dr. Jekyll
not as the obsessed mad scientist we're so familiar with, but as a doomed Byronic romantic. His Mr. Hyde is just the flip side of that doomed romanticism, blatently sexual, full of spontaneous, unrestrained libido. It's a brilliant choice. If
Frears had picked up this cue and run with it, we would have had an interesting film about the "fallen angel syndrome" which has been the bane of the dating scene for the last 50 years. Some of the single women in the audience might have actually stopped asking: "Where are all the good men?" long enough to ask themselves: "Why am I always so attracted to bad boys?" Alas! Hollywood today is either incapable or unwilling to make a movie that asks its audience to think!
So, instead we get a film which can never make up its mind whether it wants to be a horror movie, a "doomed love" story or a "Julia Roberts vehicle." By trying to be all three at once, it fails to be any of the above.
How disappointing! |
|
Picture 01 (20)
