{"id":59082,"title":"Dr Jekyll and Sister Hyde (1971)","description":"The first British film to overtly mention homosexuality premiered in 1961. Victim, written by Janet Green and produced by Rank Film Studios on a budget of \u00a3153,000 pounds, was too well financed to be a B movie, but not nearly glossy enough to be considered mainstream. All the same, it faced intense public scrutiny and was given an X rating by the BBFC, a rating normally reserved for erotica and horror","content":"

\"mwfktcx760qyombtowkfrkem2uqpz4lq7akjiqqkyxfcjgk6.jpg.jpg?w=1140&v=2\"The first British film to overtly mention homosexuality premiered in 1961. Victim, written by Janet Green and produced by Rank Film Studios<\/u><\/a> on a budget of \u00a3153,000 pounds, was too well financed to be a B movie, but not nearly glossy enough to be considered mainstream. All the same, it faced intense public scrutiny and was given an X rating by the BBFC, a rating normally reserved for erotica and horror. This was partly due to the fact that sexual activity between men was still illegal in the UK at this time, and in the words of a BBFC official \u201cOutside of (the public\u2019s) direct experience.\u201d The controversial neo-noir was not to set off an immediate trend, instead being seen as part of a broader cycle of exploitation films.<\/p>

Ten years on, and several dramatic social and cultural shifts had brought LGBTQ issues marginally more into the cinematic frame. In America, the aftermath of the Stonewall riots, and the abolition of the Hayes code in the late sixties had worked to bring LGBTQ rights into conversation, and in Britain the passing of the Sexual Offences Act in 1967 had decriminalised homosexual activity for men over the age of 21. Homosexual activity between women had never been illegal by statute in the UK. It was in this environment that a burgeoning new queer cinema was to emerge through an initially sporadic canon of films spanning a wide range of genres.<\/p>

These first forays were not self-considered, having no cultural backdrop to draw on, and so represented the first forays into a unified cinematic canon. Queer film was not yet considerable as a genre, but a collection of films such as The Boys in the Band, Janie, and Vampyres Lesbos were gradually accumulating as the decade moved forward. These ranged from serious, compassionate explorations of how gay people lived, to the campy, exploitative British B movie. This lack of self-conscious allusion meant that these films were still ideologically disparate, with complex undertones that even the creators would not unpick.<\/p>

Dr Jekyll and Sister Hyde (1971) strikes a discordant tone to the modern viewer, coming from a more open time where the landscape of queer film is dominated by figures such as Clive Barker and Jane Schoenbrun. In contrast, Roy Ward Baker, known for directing Quatermass and the Pit<\/u><\/a>, as well as two of Hammer\u2019s nine Dracula films<\/u><\/a>, had also directed the more overtly exploitative The Vampire Lovers (1970), a far cry from the post-modern reclamations of the monster label that fill our screens today. Nevertheless, what links these filmmakers is a confident approach to controversy that has, as a necessity, accompanied queer cinema from its inception.<\/p>

This was to be Hammer\u2019s third adaptation of the original novella, written by Robert Louis Stevenson, which is not without homosexual subtext on its own. It is telling that it took until 1971, in the wake of such civil upheaval, for this to be extracted from the source material and conveyed with Hammer\u2019s characteristic subtlety. Dr Jekyll is portrayed as an awkward obsessive, who ignores the affections of his neighbour Susan in favour of finding the elixir of eternal life. This is juxtaposed against the insatiable philandering of every other male character. One character, making an observation on behalf of the audience, describes him as \u201cimpervious to women.\u201d The central plot of a man turning into a woman to enact a latent desire, otherwise unfulfilled has clear implications for queer cinema, while also conforming to homophobic stereotypes.<\/p>

\"5c2hkhmf3atdpxnmqnlrud1rzut57tm4r98uepsuqkgcjrud.jpg.jpg?w=1140&v=2\"Trailer still highlighting the two warring personalities<\/p>

As well as this reading, there is a tangible transgender allegory to be read into the film, which reflects contemporary sensibilities towards gender fluidity, and provides a contrast to the modern day through its sensationalised view of non-conformity. If the coverage of homosexuality at this time was scant, the transgender cinematic landscape was even more barren. With the exception of Paul Morrissey\u2019s Women in Revolt (1971), there were very few films that dealt with the experience of transgender people, and the ones that did were generally short, documentary style works that did not hit a global or even national audience. Dr Jekyll and Sister Hyde therefore continued in its contradictory vein by at once bringing the issue into the light, while also entrenching gender divisions by juxtaposing the two personalities.<\/p>

Interestingly, the sexual assertions of the male characters also provide a sense of horror for the focal character, as he suddenly becomes a figure of objectification. There is a stunning level of doublethink occurring here, which at once reflects on the horror of Sister Hyde becoming one with other objects of the male gaze, while the direction openly invites it. One early moment of horror is not a murder, but when the morgue attendant requests that the Doctor spare a particular body from use in his experiments because he has \u201cgrown fond of her.\u201d Yuck.<\/p>

John Berger famously stated that, in film, men act, while women appear. As a genderfluid character, Sister Hyde manages to do both. While Dr Jekyll is socially challenged, bordering on neutered, Sister Hyde is homicidal and domineering, with the plot seeing her become the more powerful of the two personalities. This reflects the higher level of agency afforded to female villains compared to their heroine counterparts, also present in the Vampire Lovers, which would go on to be co-opted into more overtly feminist narratives in the micro-genre of \u201cgood for her\u201d horror, including Companion (2025) and Revenge (2017). As with Victim (1961) Horror as a genre was relegated to the X rated category for its disturbing and shocking content, so it isn\u2019t surprising from a distributional standpoint that LGBT cinema and horror cinema are so closely linked. A studio will obviously be less reticent about a production causing controversy if it was going to be restricted anyway.<\/p>

Dr Jekyll and Sister Hyde is a time capsule of a period of radical change regarding the civil and social rights of LGBTQ+ people, and as a result comes across to the modern audience as ideologically baffling. Nevertheless, films such as this laid the groundwork for a rich tradition of queer horror. The seventies would see a myriad of projects, coalescing into one movement, signified by 1975\u2019s landmark release of the Rocky Horror Picture Show. These days, such campy, sensationalist performances are far less common, but whether they are progressive or sensational, each one works to push new boundaries with that same unflinching surety.<\/p>

Related Episodes:<\/p>