Doctor Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, from then to now.

and it was as an ordinary secret sinner that I at last fell before the assaults of temptation



My relationship with the story of doctor Jekyll and Mr. Hyde is not bound in unconditional love, it's bound in unconditional fascination that have captured me in its net and have evolved to down right obsession which demands me to see everything that have to do with the franchise, and boy do I have my work cut out for me, I have seen so much doctor Jekyll and Mr. Hyde and there keeps being more. both stuff that is long time lost and really difficult to dig up, or just pops up out of nowhere and there keeps being made more all over. how sweet is that!?
or not sweet, because if there is something most Jekyll and Hyde interpretations does, it's sucking. There are enormous amounts of suck in the history of Doctor Jekyll and Mr. Hyde interpretations, in fact only one tenth seems to be any good, luckily when it does work it is extraordinary good, sexy, dirty and so extremely fascinating. The movies I am going to pick out are the ones I personally find to be any good, which is probably also the most well known films anyhow. but let's have a look shall we.
Jekyll and Hyde is about the good man and honorable doctor, Doctor Jekyll who finds away to separate his bad side from the good by taking a drug, and then turns into a whole other person "Mr. Hyde" who ad the beginning is nothing but Jekyll's lustful side and just acts as a stupid bully, until it all eventually gets out of hand as Hyde gets out of controls and literately kills people, while Jekyll can do nothing about as he is now turning into Hyde without the drugs, and it all goes up in a point.



This book sucks, never in my life have I been more disappointed as when I read the original Jekyll and Hyde book or "the Strange case of Doctor Jekyll and Mr. Hyde" as the actual title is, as a fifteen year old. okay, the book is okay I guess, but it is just not what you would expect from this tale. Exactly like the original books of "the Scarlet Pimpernel," and "The Phantom of the opera" the novel is written as bloody mystery novel where we see everything from the point of view of the lawyer mr Utterson who tries to find the connection between doctor Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, not before the very last page is it revealed that they are actually the same person, and so the book never ever deals why the Psychological aspect, nor the characters made journey from point a to be, boring boring disappointing book, and it saddens me. Robert Lewis Stevenson who wrote the book also wrote stuff as "treasure island" which is in fact a very good book. thank god for the adaptations, lest have a look at those.




Okay this might come as a surprise to you, as I guess no one is aware of its existence, it haven't even been released on DVD, but my experience regarding this movie is so unique and kind of awesome that it needs telling. "Den Skæbnesvangre opfindelse" or just English titled "Doctor Jekyll and Mr. Hyde" is a 22 minute long silent movie from 1910. it's probably the first movie adaptation ever made of Doctor Jekyll and Mr Hyde, and it's Danish... hey I am Danish!? the fuck O.O
I so marveled when I found out about this, as I said earlier the movie haven't even been released on DVD anywhere, but the raw print still exists in the archives of the Danish movie institutes as a national piece of treasure, and I actually called the instituted and asked if there is somehow I way I could watch it? They were surprisingly happy that I seemed this interested and invited me over for a private screening, which I attended to, and I went to their private cinema in Copenhagen and watched the movie. So I am probably one out of around a hundred people to have even seen this movie. haha awesome story, beat that James Rolf.. the film is okay, it's what you would expect from such an early silent movie and the print was in a really bad shape, it's interesting how they at that early stage managed to shoot a scene where Jekyll and Hyde was in the same room, though actually being played by the same actor, in 1910 guys! I have bloody no idea, but extremely inventive for its time.
the experience was absolutely awesome, and the hunt was on to be the most knowledgeable Doctor Jekyll and Mr. Hyde fan in the world.. though my travels may be far from over.



The American silent hour long "Doctor Jekyll and Mr. Hyde" movie from 1920 is probably the silent version most people are familiar with. And it's also put legally up for free on several internet sites including youtube, plus have been released on DVD in numerous times.
Like all the classic silent movies I need to give my usual rant that you need to go and buy a prober version of this with a prober soundtrack if you are ever going to see it, don't see the free youtube version or any free internet versions. just find one with a good well balanced soundtrack, the experience will be completely different.
And with the right soundtrack, it's an awesome movie. So creepy and so dream like, like a nightmare.
There is no other Hyde who looks like this one, he is sort of indescribable, but he looks great, really creepy and scary and I can even trace and evolution throughout the movie that Hyde looks worse and worse every time he appears, he kind of goes bold actually.
One pretty cool transformation scene Jekyll is just laying in his bed sleeping, and a ginourmus spider crawls up in the bed and immerges with him as he transforms into Hyde, and that is probably the best way to describe this Hyde, he looks like a human spider. no really, he does. and very inhuman, which is great. absolutely a movie worth checking out.



The 1931 is differently my favorite version that tries and stay as true as possible to the book. this movie is really incredible awesome.
It's dark, edgy, sexy and does not compromise but carries out it's dark themes perfectly, plus it's entertaining.
Frederich March delivers a superb performance as both Doctor Jekyll and Mr Hyde. Jekyll as the young ideal doctor, but not mr goodie perfect as he is rather brash and is put down by his own class who tells he what he can't do, which is really the issue he wants to deal with. And Hyde unleashed which is a bundle of energy, he looks and moves like a freaking monkey, not ever trying to maintain any kind of dignity as he is just raging through the world doing whatever the hell he likes. that is bloody awesome.
As Hyde becomes a growing menace and eventually rapist and downright murderer Jekyll sinks deeper and deeper into hysteric and panic. this movie have no shame but at the same time maintains a sense of class. it is freaking great.
In 1941 the movie was remade with Spencer Tracy in the title role, and I mean that literately as dialogue, sets pieces and plot is exactly the same. only not nearly as daring, sexy. in other words, really boring and not worth checking out when you got the other much cooler version, which even predates it by ten years, sloppy work people, real sloppy.




The British horror company horror productions actually managed to make three different Jekyll and Hyde adaptations, all really unique and stands on their own. one is, "The two Faces of Doctor Jekyll " "Doctor Jekyll and sister Hyde" (no really, it is "sister" he turns into a blood thirsty woman, and no, it's not a comedy either but goes straight for dark horror feast) and "I'Monster"
My personal favorite of does are "I'monster" which I find to be a real good credible Jekyll and Hyde adaptation, in any case Christopher lee in the main character, you can't go all wrong. plus it follows the idea I have of doctor Jekyll and Mr. Hyde most closely, and have lots of unashamed horror.
"The two faces of Doctor Jekyll " is just such a weird movie, if not for anything else it is absolutely creative written and doesn't quite end as all other adaptations, plus handling the Jekyll and Hyde persona quite different then I have seen other places.
"Doctor Jekyll and Sister Hyde" is equally weird to watch, mostly because I keep expecting some kind of lame pun regarding Jekyll turning into a woman, but it never ever comes. Hyde just goes on a murderous rampage as in any other Jekyll and Hyde movie as Jekyll realizes how dangerous she is and decides to kill her.
one thing that is plainly obvious in this movie though, that kind of really bothers me regarding female villains is that they are never any fun. Hyde as a character is often really grotesquely funny as he is a rampage and a savage beast all in himself, but women are never allowed to act that way, for some reason women monsters must have beautiful grace and dignity, which was pretty cool the first couple of terms where it was in sharp contrast to their murderous actions, but now it's just boring, I see a woman villain and I now precisely what she is going to give, zero surprises there. and Mrs. Hyde is no different.



"Mary Reilly" from 1996 (get the anagram, Mary Reilley, Mary Shelley, author of Frankenstein, anyway). I did not think I would like this movie, after all, it does not take the approach you would usually take for a Jekyll and Hyde movie, but we see everything from the perspective of his servant girl. that's right, Mary Reilley. it is a classic tale of Jekyll and Hyde, only we see all from her point of view as the plot develops. it's a surprisingly good and moody film, it actually manages to deal with the psychological of Jekyll and Hyde as a character, even though we don't spend to much time with them. the growing unsuddenty in the household leaves a mark at the viewer and a sense of claustrophobic helplessness is ever growing as the household is seeing their master slowly growing more and more insane as the manically Hyde appears more and more to terrorize them. The movie does not hide that they are the same person, and it seems like the staff all kind of suspects it, especially Mary, only they don't want to believe it, and so the truth is tearing them slowly down inside of their own mind. a really unique and special movie, but well worth checking out.



the 1997 musical.. I know I know, musicals. I'm sorry, but I just need to.
I have seen this musical three times in three different productions, plus the recorded version with David Hasselhoff.. and they were all tremendlessly different! It's four completely different musicals, even using very different music despite them all kind of being the same score and says its "Frank Wildhorn's" the man have just written so many alternative versions of it, so how the hell am I supposed to talk about this? I don't know, but I tell you something, and that is that I love this musical, again its one of the things I want to really make into a good movie. I own three different soundtracks and I listen to them and I see precisely how I want to make it. The score is great and the song is changing between being brutal and cruel to beautiful that again contrasts the savage murderous things that is going on. Frank Wildhorn the creator of the musical also wrote the Scarlet Pimpernel musical, which I just plainly love. so he is in my mind a very capable and good author and composer. songs like "This is the moment" and "Someone like you" are actually considered huge classics as standalone songs between classical singers, and even if the musical doesn't life on, does songs absolutely will.



in 2007 a six part British television series simply called Jekyll come out, written by Steven Moffat the current head writer of doctor who it's a modern interpretation of the classic stories. actually it only uses the idea of a man turning into a savage beast and uses the tale of Jekyll and Mr. Hyde more as a back grounds story than anything else, actually even the back ground story reminds me more of "Mary Reilley" than anything else related to doctor Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, the real story takes place in present day and is more of a psychological thriller with some hardcore action in it to.
Now, they are a lot of divided opinions about this, some people seems to hate it as they find it to complicated. I personally plainly love this!
It was such a treat for me as all modern interpretations of Doctor Jekyll and Mr. Hyde I have seen so far other than this sucks. and this is just such an exciting hardcore disturbing thriller which is not afraid of really digging down and going deep in the psychological exploration of Doctor Jekyll and Mr. Hyde and his two personalities, on the same time as being a adrenalin pumped ride Die heart still. Hyde as a character is a total show stealer and is as disturbing yet fascinating as any Hyde character I have ever seen, despite he doesn't have disturbing make, he simply doesn't need to as he is disturbing enough as it is, you just don't know where you have him, and keeps expecting him to do something truly horrible. he truly is a psychopath or largest degree.




Well, this must be this for new. as I said, new adaptation keeps popping up everywhere, right now I have two whole major adaptations to look forward to, one is set to be released in 2011 with Keanue reeves in the title character. I don't care much for him, I think he have the emotional equeliant of cardboard, but maybe we actually will see him being released in a mad rampage as Hyde! I would love to see that! I don't think I have ever seen Keanue reeves being unleashed in any emotional way, at all. neither in the Matrix movies.
The other one is that freaking Guillermo del Toro is going to make his version of the story.
I love Del Toro as a director, I love his art directing and his heavy emotional style, Pans Labyrinth is easely one of the most disturbing fantasy films I have ever seen. and Guillermo Del Toro and Doctor Jekyll and Mr Hyde seems like a match made in heaven for me, my heart is singing clear and loudly and I am crying tears of joy.

So, that is probably how it will keep on going with Jekyll and Hyde, lots and lots of crappy adaptation with great shinning lights in between. I would not want it in any other way.

The Phantom of the Opera, from then to now.

Hi's there the phantom of the opera!

Beware the Phantom of the opera!

We'll. kind off seems I wont have access to a computer tomorrow, so two articles today.

I love Phantom of the opera, but boy, what a girly thing to review. but at least it isn't quite as stupid as stuff like "Twilight" and other teen flicks. and it both have a sense of drench full horror and class above it. awesome!

Phantom of the opera was originally a book written in 1909 by Author Gaston Leroux.
The book is really not the best book in the world, I read it and completely expected a devastating tragic love story with a flinch of creepy stalker ghost story. as that Is what I get from the many adaptations.
What I did get was another detective mystery book where we see everything from the perspective of the character "Raul" the most hated character in the phantom adoptions, and he is equally hated in every single adoption despite being the good guy, I will explain exactly why in a moment when we get to the summary.
Button line is, the book just isn't very good, it's now downright bad, but it's a very bland and long read and not nearly as interesting as it's own legacy.

What the story is about is the opera house in the middle of Paris. Christine Daae is a singer in that opera house and have for a long time taken lessons by the mysterious phantom who is madly in love with her, he is fine with just giving her singing lessons until Christines old childhood sweet heart Raul appears and starts dating her, where after the phantom gets insanely jealous and all hell breaks loose.
you see as it turns out the phantom is a horrible disfigured man living in the dungeons of the opera and hiding behind mask, is a genius in almost everything but is also completely mad and a murder. he sports the cape and mysteriously disappearing acts, he plays the organ and the hypnotic voice, the insanity and is bloody dangerous, he is the stereotype of the kick ass bad guy, awesome!
But he is just so interesting and human that every girl phantom fan have a crush on him, dude he even got a cape, a romantic giving side and can play the organ, he is just sexy and we kind of fell sorry for him that his so lonely. Raul is always mr perfect, young, beautiful, charming and giving and really really boring. which is why every phantom fan girl in the world hate him for taking Christine away. Anyway, adaptations!




funny how the early adaptations always seems to be the definite version in the fan base's collected concious. that does in any case very much apply here where the silent 1925 Phantom of the Opera with Lon Chaney in the title role is regarded the definite thing.
Who can blame the people who thinks that? this movie is awesome and differently worth for anyone to check out. Though I must say right now, I own three different copies of this film and they are all different. when you go and watch it, if you watch it, make sure to watch a copy with a good soundtrack, the soundtrack on the free version in the internet is pure crap, and the good sound track make all the difference in the world.
Though it do kind of bother me, that one copy I do have with good soundtrack doesn't have the coloured versions of the two scenes that are some of the first techni colour film scenes ever made.
One of the big masquerade scene that is all colourful and looks awesome as the guests are dancing around in all these imaginative animal costumes, and of cause the phantom in his red death costume. It just looks awesome in colour.
Anyway, movie! this is one beautiful and moody film. it's a ghost story and a romance. it is creepy and it's tragic. the atmosphere in the room is that of a fairy tale, not to mention Lon Chaney's make up is really good, and makes him look really scary, his face looks sort of like a skull or something.
amazing film, if your a fan of the silent era and like stuff like "Nosferatu" or the silent "Jekyll and Hyde" you simply mustn't cheat yourself of this.





in 1943 another Phantom of the opera film was made, this time with Claude Rains, mostly known from the invisible man (1934) and Casablanca, in the title character.
For some reason this movie actually won an Oscar for best movie, I have a hard time seeing where that Oscar came from. this is not that good a movie and it's differently not that good a phantom movie. Claude Rains is a really odd casting choice for the Phantom, especially his small height makes it seem weird, all though his voice is awesome and fits the phantom well. The film is not really that creepy, it's not really that suspenseful and the romance almost non presence. all though the movie have it's really tragic elements. in this the phantom is more a victim than anything else as we actually in the beginning of the movie witness his fall from grace, and this is also where the origin of him being burned by acid instead of just being born disfigured started.





in 1962 it was the Hammer companies turn to bite into Phantom of the opera.
Now, Hammer is a late British horror film company, who adapted all the classic horror tales. Dracula, Frankenstein, Doctor Jekyll and mr Hyde. They did them all, and they did them in a very delightfully horrifying and gore filled way. really putting the horror back into the genre.
Why on earth does their version of the Phantom of the opera then seem like such a tame affair.
There are few traces of the good nasty Hammer gore feast and creepiness. and again the romance is non present. in fact it's written completely out of the story, there isn't as much as a hint towards it.
Not to say the movie haven't got it's cool factors, like the inserted villain, though despite of evil and slick he is. The phantom is the villain, so you shouldn't have to put another one in. well, in this movie the phantom is even more a victim than the Claude Rain version, and this Phantom couldn't even hurt a fly, what a bore.





in 1986 Andrews Lloyd webbers musical stage version of the phantom of the opera opened for the first time, this is probably the version most people is familiar with as it still lives and have become truly a classic. and it is awesome!
everything that is good about the phantom is in this musical and is used. The danger, the ghost story, the romance, the tragedy, the mystery and element of magic. not the mention the extremely grand music score. I saw this show twice in west end and once in a Danish production, and it's still just as awesome. cause it's just such a ride to watch, you just fell with this thing.
And people who says Andrew Lloyd Webber's music is bland clearly haven't seen this musical... all though with Stuff as "Cats" and "Star Light Express" behind him... I don't blame them.







The 1989 Phantom of the opera movie.
Freaking Robert Englund Freddy Kruger as the Phantom! need I say more.
well yeah, I do. two lines of description is hardly enough, I gotta make it at least ten.
This movie is really cool, it's kind of weird. sometimes in a good way sometimes in a bad, but really cool. It does not have the romance in it, but the dark edge and horror element is totally present plus it's such a good looking movie. whit great mystery elements in it, it's differently worth checking out for any horror fans.
plus, Freaking Freddy Kruger as the Phantom!




"Il Fantasma dell'opera", or just plain English Phantom of the opera 1998.
It's stuff like this that makes me sympathise with the nostalgia critic. THIS MOVIE SUCKS!
it's made by Dario Argento which is known for his gritty horror films, and so this should be a good edgy film. though, the horror is dump and disgusting more than anything else, the romance likewise so, the phantom isn't even disfigured, though as disgusting as ever. dude, there's a scene where he shows sexual pleasure by stuffing a rat into his pants, Christine who is by the way played by Argento's daughter is totally sexualiesed in the most disgusting non senses way, her feelings towards the phantom as he is suddenly totally in love with him makes absolutely no sense, he treats her horrible and then claims hi loves her, and she wants to stay with him.
I mentioned twilight before in this article, well this movie is way worse than twilight for kind of the same reasons. it just sucks, don't bother with it.



most recently in 2004 Joel Schumacher made the film version of Andrew Lloyd Webbers stage play. this movie is... really not living up to it's potential. it's so boring and plane, it looks way to clean and not edgy at all, the Phantom is really miss cast. (girls I know Gerard Butler is hot, but doesn't changes the fact that he was miss cast) You should think it would be easy as Joel Schumacher already had the script and incredible score in his hands, and just needed putting pictures on it. but all the cool stuff in the franchise and stage play, which is kind of edgy, he toned down and made way to clean. Like the Phantoms red dead costume at the masked ball, it's the most boring and clean cut Phantom/red dead costume I have ever seen.
The movie have its moments, and especially for girls the plain romantic music can get to you. but for an adaptation of one of the greatest stage musicals ever produced, it's just not good enough.





and then this yeas Andrew Lloyd Webber had all the fans of his original phantom of the opera musical enraged as the sequel "love never dies" had its opening at west end.
Have anyone ever done a stage sequel to a stage show? I have never seen it done before, and Ive had my eyes on stage shows for a long time.
Anyhow, I haven't seen it, just thought I would mention it. I listened to the soundtrack, it both have really good numbers in it and numbers that fall short.
Plus the most hardcore awesome musical number Andrew Lloyd Webber have ever composed, it's just so extraordinary awesome, and I would so kill to see it being used in a phantom movie. The song is called "Beauty underneath" it's on youtube. I implore everyone to just check it out, you will never think of Andrew Lloyd Webber the same way again.


And so on this ending note, this is another thing that I don't think will ever die. it's just a matter of time before another adaptation will see the light of day. I actually haven't covered all the versions I know of the Phantom of the opera in this article, there are books, other stage plays, television movie and cinematic spoof kind of movies I haven't even mentioned, the material is awesomely big, and fortunately is keeping on growing.
The next time I have access to the computer we will talk about "Darkman" which is a movie that in many ways reminds me both of Phantom of the opera, and the classic secret identity disguising hero, which is why I wanted to cover does two aspects this quickly. see yah around, hopefully.

The Scarlet Pimpernel, from then to now.

They seek him here
They Seek him there
Does Frenches seeks him everywhere
Is he in heaven? or is he in hell?
That damned, illusive, Pimpernel.

I ask of you, how many swashbucklers have a poem about them self which is actually from their first original appearance over a hundred years ago and have the purpose of mocking once uttered.

So with such an ancient old character, do he have like a secret underground fan base... not what I know about. in fact, as far as I know nobody knows who the Scarlet pimpernel is, ecxept for really dusty littérateur professors, and very cultivated people who also likes stuff like "Cyrano de Bergerac" "Romeo and Juliet" and "Les Miserables."
All of which are good stories in their own right, especially Cyrano which one of my favourite stories of all time, but it isn't exactly what a mainstream audience want to go watch.

And when talking the Scarlet Pimpernel, that is such a shame, as he truly is the first hero ever to sport the secret identity of a incompetent fobish prince cheesecake, also in front of the love of his life which is in this case his actual wife, to fool the enemy and go one heroic dangerous crusades under the alias of "The scarlet Pimpernel."

The Scarlet Pimpernel is really starting to become and old character, he was created in 1902 in a book by Baroness Emmuska Orczy, and it was quickly turned into a stage play.
She wrote several books with the figure, but only the first one have been adapted and is the one which is considered the classic.




The book is kind of written like a mystery novel, where Marguerite, the hero's wife is the actual main character and we see everything from her point of view as she unravel the mystery about her husband and eventually take matters into own hands.

so, summary.
The Scarlet Pimpernel concerns the French evolution where the French noble was taken prisoner and decapitated by the guillotine for their single crime of being French noble, and it was everyone. Men, women, children, people who was under suspicion of hiding or just being in contact with nobility, having a noble grand aunt. and this is real history folks.

Sir Percy Blakenly is a English nobleman, and therefore have quite a lot of French friends of nobility, so he decides to something about it as he collects a gang of friends around him and create the alias of the scarlet pimpernel, so he through disguised and planning can smuggle the French nobility out of the country and to England where they are safe.
The Scarlet Pimpernel have been marked French's enemy number one, so carefully planning even more cunning disguised are in other, at the same time as Percy must at all cost keep his identity secret.
It's the stuff of great adventure, and it is. great fun story, and I only got 3 bloody different adaptations to talk about. man that sucks, but oh well. lets get started.




The most famous adaptation if the scarlet pimpernel, and what is considered the definite version would be the Leslie Howard "the scarlet Pimpernel" from 1934.
It's a great fun movie, all though it's not as much an action movie, as it is an adventure movie of wits. actually its not an action movie at all, there are no stunts and no sword fighting. Percy is purely fighting with his wits using elaborate cunning plans, incredible disguises and impersonations plus fooling the entire French police was to think he is the most incompetent fobbish person in all of England and French.
It is differently my favourite scenes in the entire movie when ever Percy stands as himself, in his noble clothing just beside the French police, and talk with them with his fobbish voice.
The really interesting thing about these scenes is how much he is mocking the French police force, they don't know that they are being mocked as they just find him incredible annoying, but believe me, they are.
His disguises when being in French, like when he plays an old hag, or a stupid farmer is just delightful. to see what he planned on how it's set into work is just great fun. not to mention the movie climax which is purely a battle of wits between Percy and sir Chauvelin that goes on for around 5 minutes. and it is nothing but the two of them standing in a room constantly trying to outwit each other, it really proves you don't need great action and explosion to have tension, that scene have it fully.

as sequel "Return of the Scarlet Pimpernel" was made and released in 1937, it kind of sucked. what more can I say?
It's about Chauvelin trying to get revenge by kidnapping Percy's wife and Percy must pursue him. There are no fobbish persona, no great disguised, no elaborate plans. just boring suck about a man trying to get his wife back, we seen that a thousand times before, just tell it fun and well in a Pimpernel fashion and it would have been cool, but no.





Then there is the British television movie "The Scarlet Pimpernel" from 1982.
And what can I say about that? it's an extremely faithful remake of the 34 movie, which is both good and bad. It's good because this movie is just as good as the old one, it follows the same formula, Percy do pretty much the same things, and the actor playing Percy carries it out beautifully and fun, but it's not better than the Leslie Howard movie either, cause it's the same thing. Well, this movie have Gandalf as the villain, and Ian McKellen is always good in whatever he is in, in fact every actor in this is good. but what can I say I did not say about the 34 movie?
anyhow, if you like adventure and disguises, it's worth checking out.




A short British mini series of the scarlet Pimpernel was released in 1999. I have heard it should be really good. but I have no idea for myself as I was never able to get a hold on it.
What I have seen from it it seems okay, Percy don't seem to be as much fun as I am used to, but who am I to judge when I havn't seen the connection of his actions.





I'm sorry. but I am a musical person. I love a good musical.
you see, musical are like movies, there are really good musicals and there are many really bad musicals. and people tend to think all musicals are bad because that one thing they saw was a bad high school production.
As far as I am concerned, the Scarlet Pimpernel musical from 1997 is a really good musical.
It's bloody funny and adventurous. the music is big and great, the plot is as adventure as ever. they even have a good sword fight or two in there. mocking and disguises. it's just great. Percy is really written as one of the best comedian parts in the century and everything about it is just fun. just to show you how funny and awesome this musical is, check out this scene from the original production. Both what happens before and after the song.
Before Maugurite, Percy's wife who doesn't know that Percy is the Pimpernel rushes the the Pimpernels rescue to warn him that Chauvelin is on the way, and Percy takes the uppertunity to start questioning her.
After the song, the villain Chauvelin actually catches Percy red handed, so Percy must use his wits to get out of it.. which he does... quite brilliantly.




So, 1999 was the last time the pimpernel made an appearance, and that was only in a small mini series. that's over 10 years ago.
Is he dead and gone from the mainstream medium? I really don't know, but I sure don't hope so.
I am one of the few who are really for remakes and adaptations of this really old stuff, and especially the Scarlet Pimpernel I would so want to see have a shine in Hollywood.
If I myself could pick exactly what movie should have the green light in Hollywood, that would be it. and I am all for turning it into a swashbuckling adventure ala Pirates of The Caribbean, as long as you remain it fun.
Hell, with 45 minutes of extra screen time (The average movie in the 30's was only like 60 minutes) you can easily put in some sword fighting and elaborate chases scenes. I am all for it.