Everyone has had the experience of reading the book and then scrutinizing the movie to notice the director’s faults in following the plotline. Sadly, this is the case with most paper-big screen pairs – neither completely parallels with its cohort. Just as with more modern pairs, The Fault in Our Stars, Harry Potter, and even Twilight, the movie Dr.Jekyll and Mr.Hyde doesn’t follow the plot of Stevenson’s original novel.

Book:
Movie:
Very obvious changes from Dr.Jekyll to Mr.Hyde (physical differences, eg. height, facial appearance, etc.)
Jekyll promises Utterson that Hyde will not return
Jekyll’s instruction state that the chemicals are in a drawer and that Lanyon is to get the already-packaged chemicals, which are in the drawer, from his cabinet

Movie:
Transformations were a bit melodramatic, wasn’t much of a change from Dr.Jekyll to Mr.Hyde (again, physical differences)
Jekyll promises Ivy that Hyde will not return
Lanyon receives instructions from Jekyll in the form of a letter to put the chemicals in a package

In the first scene difference, the book does describe Jekyll’s transformations into Hyde as painful, however the movie, I feel, blows this description out of proportion. The movie’s portrayal of the transformations make it appear as though Jekyll is almost dying of pain during these forced metamorphoses into his adversary. Therefore, I feel that, with the movie’s distracting, melodramatic portrayal of the transformations, the book’s likeness was superior and, therefore, added to Stevenson’s intent of the play.
In the second scene difference, the book includes a scene in which Jekyll promises Utterson that Hyde will not return, while the movie portrays a sly Dr.Jekyll reassuring Mr.Hyde’s mistress/slave that Hyde will not return. Although this major difference would seem to throw the rest of the plot off-track, with a second glance, I believe, this change actually makes the story somewhat more interesting by building tension between Mr.Hyde and his fearful and submissive mistress Ivy. However, quite a bit of the plotline is consequently affected by this change, therefore I feel that this difference takes away from the playwright’s intent.
In the third scene, the book expresses that Dr.Jekyll had written Dr.Lanyon a note/letter stating that in a drawer in his cabinet were specific chemicals and that he, Dr.Lanyon, was to go to Dr.Jekyll’s house and collect the entire drawer that Jekyll specified. Instead of following this plot, the movie portrays Lanyon receiving the note, then travelling to Dr.Jekyll’s cabinet and collecting the specifically-mentioned chemicals and placing them in a package – not taking the drawer. Despite the fact that, in the end, Hyde receives the chemicals, which enable him to display his transformation to Dr.Lanyon, the plot is still not followed. Therefore, this difference, I believe, doesn’t necessarily add to or take away from the playwright’s intent in the play.
Overall, I would rate the success of the movie version of Dr.Jekyll and Mr.Hyde an 8. I rate the movie this simply because of the unnecessary strays from the plot (Dr.Jekyll’s fiance, Mr.Hyde’s relationship with Ivy, the drawer and the chemicals, etc.). Personally, I would rather the movie match the book line-by-line than have unexpected variables added into the equation that is the gothic fiction of Dr.Jekyll and Mr.Hyde. I would, however, rate Stevenson’s effectiveness in psychological exploration a 10- or 9+ because of the novel’s ability to make me think about my own good and evil.