Dr. Jekyll & Mistress Hyde
Dr. Jekyll & Mistress Hyde
| 06 January 2003 (USA)
Watch Free for 30 Days

Stream thousands of hit movies and TV shows

Start 30-day Free Trial
Dr. Jekyll & Mistress Hyde Trailers

Dr. Jackie Stevenson is a Los Angeles based therapist and scientist who tries to invent a serum to separate the pure from the lustful side of the female psychosis. After she has an unsuccessful experiment with a female client named Martine, which drove her patient to insanity and to a mental hospital, Jackie tries part of the serum on herself and becomes her lustful alter ego Heidi Hyde; a voracious lesbian who prowls the streets of L.A. after dark looking for carnal pleasures.

Reviews
Solemplex

To me, this movie is perfection.

ChicDragon

It's a mild crowd pleaser for people who are exhausted by blockbusters.

View More
Hulkeasexo

it is the rare 'crazy' movie that actually has something to say.

View More
Derry Herrera

Not sure how, but this is easily one of the best movies all summer. Multiple levels of funny, never takes itself seriously, super colorful, and creative.

View More
Michael Ledo

If you have read the classic, you might notice a slight deviation in plot. I am confused by the second disc. Does anyone really want the soundtrack to this movie?If your idea of Jekyll and Hyde is a lot of girl on girl action, then this movie is for you. Misty always seems to wear the same outfit in all of her movies: a Catholic school girl uniform with stockings and heels. Not that it looks bad on her, but can we move on to another fantasy? It was hard to judge the acting because there was little dialogue.In the trailers I was surprised to discover there was an actual script for the movie. Imagine getting paid for writing this. Wouldn't you feel guilty cashing the check? Unless of course they slipped some over hormone teen a Jackson for it.

View More
serialhag76

I'll make this short and sweet: Dr. Jekyll & Mistress Hyde is definitely worth watching at least once, but the making-of featurette (which curiously runs longer than the actual movie) is a doozy. Watch Misty Mundae chain smoke in the car, in the hotel room, on the set, etc. See Julian Wells' ripped up granny panties and deliver a hilarious 9/11 Q&A session with the director. And is Ruby Esmerelda LaRocca always so damned hyper? Misty is even more adorable in her glasses, sans makeup, hanging out in her room and taking a stroll down the Strip. Oh my God, could I be in love? It's very possible. Too bad she's into guys, too. Sigh...

View More
Son_of_Mansfield

It should come as no shock that this film bears little resemblance to the book it is based on. This film throws out most of the plot, characters, thought, and language of the book. But it does add boobies, so hope all is not lost. Julian Wells, Misty Mundae, Ruby Larocca, Andrea Davis, and a very ugly man star in this movie. I will never understand Tony Marsiglia's need to have a man in his movies, but at least he is only in two scenes. Ruby gets the shaft in this movie...I mean she is only in the two scenes with vum. Ruby gets no orgy this time? Was she bad? If Andrea Davis could work on her "acting" a little, she could do very well in these movies. She has pretzel nub nipples. Some of the sex looks fake and the drab locations are no fun. Stick with Marsiglia's superior Sin Sisters.P.S. If I don't stop humming "Something's Come Over Me," from the DJ&MH soundtrack, I may have to dance.

View More
MovieLuvaMatt

I'm not going to lie and say this movie is good for anything for than softcore porn. One of my friends told me that this is not like most softcore flicks, because it actually has a good story. I don't happen to agree one bit. I could spend weeks dismantling this movie aesthetically. I understand it was shot on an extremely low-budget, but even skin flicks usually contain sets that are dressed up to appear like certain locations. The movie opens on a talk show set, and it literally just shows close-ups of the host and interviewee against an anonymous background. They don't even face each other and they're individually framed, not even hiding from the audience the fact that they shot each woman separately. I'm guessing they shot the whole movie with one video camera, because there are moments where you see a woman's body and her face in isolated shots, even though there were no body doubles involved. If there's anything good I can say about the movie aesthetically, it's that the acting is not bad. The actresses are actually fairly convincing. I once saw Richard Roeper review an erotic foreign film, and he said that, "If I rave about a comedy because it makes me laugh, then I guess this movie makes me feel proud that I'm a man with 20/20 vision." The moral of that statement is that men are often afraid to admit something is erotic and a turn-on to them, with the risk of being called perverts. I'm not afraid to admit that this movie is very erotic, and it succeeds on that level. The first 30-minutes-or-so contains softcore oral sex scenes, which are obviously simulated and something laughable, but the rest of the movie really takes off. And just my good luck, 95 percent of the sex scenes involve girl-on-girl activity. That's right, no men involved. And I can honestly say that I found every actress in the movie attractive, especially the lead actress who looks even more sexy in glasses and a business suit. Unlike many girl-on-girl scenes, the actresses looked like they were really into what they were doing, and not like they're just anticipating reactions from the horny guys in the audience. My score: 7 (out of 10)

View More
Similar Movies to Dr. Jekyll & Mistress Hyde