steven moffats jekyll

glimmeringinred  asked:

I'm new to the Jekyll and Hyde fandom, I've only read the original book, read a version of the musical's script, and listened to the 1994 recording with Anthony Warlow... What else would you reccomend for me?

Oh there are many things I would recommend!

First and foremost, start reading The Glass Scientists by Sabrina Cotugno!

Read midorilied‘s comic as well, The Search For Henry Jekyll !

Try watching the 1920 and 1930 versions of the book! They are old school,  but they’re a lot of fun. There is also the League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, which is a movie based off the comic book of the same name. Jekyll is a member of a team composed of Victorian fictional characters. c:

There is also the movie Mary Reilly, which is silly but has a really fun Hyde.

There are many spin off comics and books, such as: The Strange Case of Mr. Hyde, a Sherlock Holmes J&H spin off, the Monster High series, with Jekyll being a main character, a recent book based off the original story through Hyde’s POV by David Levine, and a whole other array of fun comics such as these: [x] [x] [x

There is a BBC series, (a short one, 6 episodes, by Steven Moffat) called Jekyll, starring James Nesbitt, which is also very good! You can watch them all on YouTube here.

Musical wise, check out the German production, as well as the productions with Robert Cuccioli from 1995 and Rob Evan. Constantine Maroulis’ Revival from 2012-13 is also a guilty pleasure of mine, and I’d be more than glad to send you it through an email, as I always misplace the Tumblr post with the links to the show. D:

I’d also recommend tracking the Jekyll and Hyde tag, as we have lots of very talented and wonderful artists and writers. c: And as a bonus, I have a Jekyll and Hyde playlist of a few of my favorite (and not so favorite) J&H related content here.

I hope this helps!


Steven Moffat and Romance. My rambles about how Jekyll reinforces my belief of TJLC.

          ~Spoilers for Jekyll and Sherlock and Doctor Who (11th) bellow~

I watched BBC’s Jekyll expecting to add to my understanding of Moffat’s writing style. I got more interesting comparisons than I was expecting. I would love to start a discussion about comparing Sherlock and Jekyll, because I have only begun to delve into the complexities.

One episode into Jekyll, I was unsurprised to see a lesbian couple casually mentioned. Coupling reveals that Moffat has a bit of a thing for lesbians, and he likes to casually slip lesbians or mentions of lesbians into his other shows. That was a bit of an aside, but I often hear people saying that Johnlock won’t happen because of Steven Moffat, and that just seems way off the mark to me.

Moffat’s writing of Hyde had some distinct similarities to his writing of mind palace Moriarty in His Last Vow. This post shows the direct comparison: (x) Bonus recycling dialogue Doctor Who and Jekyll edition with Claire and River Song: (x)

And then there was episode 6…WHAM BAM plot twists. I have not read “Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde,” but from the summaries I have read, the original text seems like a straightforward split personality case. In the original story, Hyde kills someone and Jekyll writes a letter acknowledging that he will become Hyde permanently. So what happens in Moffat’s version of Jekyll? Everything is revealed to be about love through complicated plot twists.

Watch this scene: (x) I am going to add the text bellow too.

Tom’s mother: People think Hyde is rage or hate or greed or lust. But Hyde is far worse.

Claire: What is he?

Tom’s mother: What was the first day you knew you could kill anyone? Anyone at all if you had to?

Claire: The day I first held my children.

Tom’s mother: It’s our oldest deadliest impulse, the need to protect our own at the expense of any other living thing. And we give that impulse such a nice name, don’t we? Hyde is love. And love is a psychopath.

Cue my brain connecting to Sherlock: “Bitterness is a paralytic. Love is a much more vicious motivator.”
Moffat paints love in such a dark light in both Jekyll and Sherlock.

Essentially, Moffat took a piece of classic literature and turned it into this odd grand romance. A character played by Mark Gatiss revealed one of these romantic plot twists (and with that I need to pause for a moment and laugh). The note handed to Jekyll said that there was no medicine that caused Jekyll to turn into Hyde that it was the girl (Claire) all along.

Cue my brain connecting to Sherlock: “It’s always you. John Watson, you keep me right.”

I don’t really understand the logistics of the change happening because of Claire. It honestly seems like a huge gapping plot hole. Am I supposed to believe that the original Doctor Jekyll loved Claire so much that he developed a split personality to store the vicious side of love? The transition from a purely cruel and child-like Hyde to a Hyde who is willing to sacrifice himself for his cloned wife and their children is sudden and frankly ridiculous. The show was cut short, so Moffat had to figure out a way to end it with less episodes than he was expecting, but he chose the romantic direction.

Moffat does love twists like that ending with Dr. Jekyll’s mother. One thing that I am certain of is that we have not seen anywhere near the end of plot twists in Sherlock. The successful nature of Sherlock allows for more time to slowly build in foreshadowing for twists and cliff hangers.

Let’s go back to the scene where Moriarty lines mirror Hyde’s dialogue. Was this unintentional or was Moffat trying to tell us something? This comparison makes me think of LSIT’s M-theory, in which Moriarty is viewed as obsessed with Sherlock in a romantic/sexual way. The character types don’t translate exactly between the shows, but I see Moriarty as similar to Hyde, Sherlock as similar to Jekyll, and John as similar to Claire. Moriarty’s behavior can fit into the obsessive side of love, but unlike Hyde I don’t see Moriarty making any grand romantic gestures. I also think that Hyde only made the gesture that he did because at that point he was connected to Jekyll, and so the good side of love was blending in with the bad side. Moriarty and Hyde both enjoy toying with people and their emotional reactions. Even though Jekyll’s mother says that love is a psychopath, I see Hyde as more of a child than a psychopath, and I don’t see Moriarty as a psychopath either. Sherlock/Moriarty have many similarities though they are not quite as similar as Jekyll/Hyde, but Sherlock/Moriarty display the opposite sides of the same coin (consulting detective/consulting criminal). Jekyll and Claire’s relationship ends up being the most important part of the show, and Sherlock and John’s friendship is already the most important part of Sherlock.

The above River Song and Claire dialogue seems more likely to be an unintentional repetition, but there are also some similarities between River and Claire. Both women have complicated backstories involving evil organizations creating or controlling them in order to manipulate the main character of the respective shows. Both women cause the main character of their show to be viewed in a more romantic way than the character was classically viewed. I saw the Doctor as more asexual until Moffat started writing him. The Doctor had feelings for Rose Tyler, but I didn’t see those as sexual. Whereas River Song makes comments that are undeniably sexual. In Jekyll, even if Jekyll was married in the original story, Moffat took that relationship and expanded its importance. Jekyll only loved one woman all those years across generations. Bringing Sherlock back into the discussion, I read the Sherlock Holmes stories as separate from anything romantic or sexual until BBC Sherlock’s writers set the seeds for that direction. All of this makes me think that Steven Moffat really is a big romantic.

Jekyll begins like a typical Jekyll and Hyde adaptation, but then a romantic plot twist changes the entire meaning of the split personalities. This modern adaptation could have followed a more typical Jekyll and Hyde plotline, but that is just not what Moffat does. Sherlock and Jekyll initially seem like shows about a detective and a scientist with a split personality respectively, but they are both ultimately about the relationships between the characters. I believe Sherlock will follow a similar twist reveal pattern as Jekyll, but will not fall into the plot hole territory that comes along with the romance in Jekyll.


Moffat Appreciation Week Day 7 

Steven Moffat’s Insight of Our Inner Mind

In the original story of ‘Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde’, Jekyll wanted to find an exit for his dark side thus created/brought out the personality, Hyde. Then he was pulled between Hyde/himself and his guilt/the society/himself. The latter was so strong and powerful and eventually caused his suicide. Moffat put this killing-your-bad-side-in-the-name-of-the-greater-good motif in a different light in 2007′s ‘Jekyll’. In Dr. Jackman’s point of view, Hyde was a threat to his family, while Hyde was presented as a 'child’ in the narrative. This image not only implied his unsocialized and self-centered characters but also showed how we treated our dark side in this modern civilization society. We fear it and try to get rid of it in a patronizing way, just like how 'Daddy’ Jackman did. In the end, however, Hyde wasn’t the one destroying Jackman’s family. Jackman (Jekyll) and Hyde contained and empowered each other and saved their family together.

A similar motif appeared in the Day of the Doctor as a brighter and further developed version. The Doctor was given a chance to reconsider one moment of his past when War Doctor committed genocide. He caused enormous pain and guilt to his own ninth, tenth, and eleventh incarnations and none of them wanted to admit him as the Doctor. But how could the Doctor make up for his crime? Not until they made a self-reconciliation. They had to see the fact that, while always seeing War Doctor as the one brought pain, they failed to see him as the one who was also suffering. And more importantly, he needed company and forgiveness just as they did. What if Tenth and Eleventh didn’t come back to him? Then he couldn’t save himself by saving the day.

Sherlock Holmes used to believe that “Alone protect people.” He assumed emotion was a weakness, and his well-functioned brain was the only reason people need him to be around. He was wrong. In the first two series, Sherlock used his mind palace to solve crimes. In the third series, we saw not only information in his mind palace but also his friends and fears. The case he needed to figure out in it wasn’t crimes anymore but himself and his emotions. From ‘His Last Vow’ to ‘The Abominable Bride’, he’d learned something of himself. He would rise from the deepest of his inner 'hell’ to save his friend. Also, he could rise from that 'hell’ if he let his friend save him.

Sherlock’s inner ‘hell’ was a basement with his madness/death wish chained to the wall. In Heaven Sent, Twelve’s personal 'hell’ was being trapped in an unbreakable self-repeated torturing, in which he experienced sadness, anger, guilt, resentment and powerless of losing his significant other. The hell might be his own, but it’s “a story of everybody.” He was stuck there, couldn’t run away like he usually did; couldn’t time travel to another time and place and skip this process. Like what would happen to all of us when trapped in an enormous sorrow. Time past; his time stopped; life repeated itself. He kept 'regenerating’, burning the old him, to make a new one, trying to break free, trying to fulfill his promise to Clara and himself. There’re few things he could do under that situation, but punching that wall, again and again, enduring physical and mental pain, like his birth, like his death, until one day, the first second of eternity finally past.

No matter how deep Moffat dug and how extreme he went, he always left a thread for characters and for us to hold. Santa wasn’t only a childhood fantasy; he was a story stayed inside our head, and he could save us even when we claimed we’ve already lived out of fairy tales. Clara Oswald was there inside Twelve’s storm room. She guided, comforted, and pushed him even if she wasn’t there. Impossible stopped nothing. Our mind protected us by using the face of our heroes/heroines, our friends, and loved ones. And at the end of the day, we became stronger and kinder, to others and ourselves.

Joseph Campbell stated that all the great myths were, all the same, the hero’s journey. In Moffat’s universe, however, he let his characters grow in a different way. It’s not a 'traditional’, masculine and linear journey. They didn’t have to go elsewhere, to conquer something, to bring treasures back to his/her life. Their journey was heading inside themselves. Their missions were to know, to appreciate, to make peace with every part of themselves. Their inner world became bigger and vaster during the process; every self of them had the opportunity to be explored, to interact, and to be settled. They didn’t have to become heroes/heroines; they were just becoming himself/herself, and that’s an endless story.


Some more of the women of Steven Moffat’s television series’ (a continuation of this post)