Jekyll

James Nesbitt takes the lead in this dark, twisting, slightly predictable Moffat romp with visions of Sherlock, which eventually loses momentum and ends up taking itself a bit too seriously.

My housemate recently got a Netflix account wired up to the TV, so I've had some joyful evenings of rediscovering lost gems and things I'd always meant to watch. The first one I jumped on is this masterful re-imagining of a Victorian classic by none other than Steven Moffat, Sue Vertue and Hartswood Films - the group that would go on to make the pre-eminent Victorian modernisation of our day, Sherlock. Jekyll, despite some shining moments and some stellar casting, seems like a bit of a warmup act.

"So here's the deal. Here's the 'job'. As long as the lights
and cameras are on, you're safe. Lights out - you're dinner."

When I originally discovered the series I'd only seen the first two episodes out of six. My conclusion after the rest is that I'd already seen the best of it. Nesbitt's performance is wholly spellbinding - a complete and convincing Jekyll (genetic scientist Tom Jackman - though his career isn't relevant in the way you might think), and a freshly nuanced Hyde, as tone-perfect as Cumberbatch's famed Holmes, or indeed Martin Freeman's Watson. The other cast members do okay - I liked Michelle Ryan, forgiving some ropey performances elsewhere (Lady Christina De Souza, anyone?), Denis Lawson's character development is well-paced and played, and Meera Syal is thoroughly enjoyable. But, having been subtly introduced to it in more forgiving environments, Gina Bellman's character revealed a consistent problem with Moffat's dramatic writing.

As lovely a man as he may be, Steven Moffat rarely writes convincing and realistic women. My good friend Kieron Moore regularly expands upon this over at This is Good, Isn't It?, so I won't go into detailed analysis. I don't want to accuse him of outward sexism, to do so would be inaccurate - but there's just something unsettling and un-present about how female characters are used in his stories. Bellman's earnest portrayal of Jackman's confused but strong wife does well for the first few episodes, but the later series of reveals about her origins, their life together and her acceptance of Hyde's existence swiftly transform her into an over-sexed, sultry witticism spout. In some otherwise thrilling or tense scenes, her clichéd and almost Nigella-like interjections along the lines of "You can't have him, he's mine!" get wearing, until she remembers the existence of her children for a few minutes. The final two episodes attempt high drama, and do a good job of upending the audience's safe expectations about the world - but just get messy in the process.

"Ever killed anyone? You're missing out.
It's like sex, only there's a winner."

The first two episodes are both far more comfortable and more honed, largely due to their focus - dealing almost entirely with the protagonist's own perspective, filling in recent back story, heightening the tension and really showing off the brilliance of James Nesbitt. I've quietly appreciated his acting in a few things before (it was one of the few things that made The Deep watchable, and I was fuzzily pleased to see him in The Hobbit) but here he just gets to run riot with characterisation and pure fun. The childlike motivation behind Hyde's personality and mannerisms is a work of character art. You really have to watch at least the first episode to get a handle on it, but his performance had me transfixed again, years after my first taste.

The style of shooting enhances this - inventive and beautiful little motifs suggest an impending change, which is skilfully achieved through subtle styling and prosthetics, giving a physical transformation (though the ears were occasionally a bit obvious). Artful camera work never seems to get in the way of the story, holding tension beautifully whilst hiding and revealing scenic elements at just the right time. Music too is a great influence - the main theme is repeated often, but it is hauntingly beautiful and spot on in tone, taking a while to grate. Overall the effect is profoundly unsettling, and accentuates Nesbitt's character work while leaving some other elements a bit behind.

Summary: it's on Netflix, watch it - but if you feel the need to spend your time elsewhere after the first two episodes, don't worry, you've seen the best.