A film crew goes to a tropical island for an exotic location shoot and discovers a colossal ape who takes a shine to their female blonde star. He is then captured and brought back to New York City for public exhibition.
Working in Dr. Cranley's laboratory, scientist Jack Griffin was always given the latitude to conduct some of his own experiments. His sudden departure, however, has Cranley's daughter Flora worried about him. Griffin has taken a room at the nearby Lion's Head Inn, hoping to reverse an experiment he conducted on himself that made him invisible. Unfortunately, the drug he used has also warped his mind, making him aggressive and dangerous. He's prepared to do whatever it takes to restore his appearance, and several will die in the process.Written by
garykmcd / edited by statmanjeff
When screenwriter R.C. Sherriff came to Hollywood to write this film, he asked the staff at Universal for a copy of the H.G. Wells novel he was supposed to be adapting. They didn't have one; all they had were 14 "treatments" done by previous writers on the project, including one set in Czarist Russia and another set on Mars. Sherriff eventually found a copy of the novel in a secondhand bookstore, read it, thought it would make an excellent picture as it stood, and wrote a script that, unlike Universal's Dracula (1931) and Frankenstein (1931), was a closer adaptation of the book. This was fortunate, in that Wells had negotiated script approval when he sold the rights. See more »
Wires are frequently visible moving objects that are meant to be moved by the Invisible Man. This is most noticeable when he rides the stolen bike. See more »
Man in Pub:
Did you hear about Mrs. Mason's little Willy? Sent him to school and found him buried ten-foot deep in a snow drift.
Man in Pub # 2:
How did they get him out?
Man in Pub:
Brought the fire engine 'round, put the hose pipe in, pumped it backwards and sucked him out.
See more »
Claude Rains is the only actor in the film whose character is identified in the credits. We are not told which roles the other actors play, even though the cast is listed twice: at the beginning and at the end. Rains is billed as "The Invisible One" in the opening credits and as "The Invisible Man" in the closing credits. See more »
When the film was released to home video, Universal Studios replaced a snippet of music heard on the radio when Dr. Kemp is reading a newspaper in his house, and the Invisible Man enters through a set of French doors. Universal was unable to secur the rights for the original music and replaced it, covering the original sound effects (the sound of the newspaper and the door latch) in the process. See more »
This film version of the H.G. Wells science fiction classic works very well. It has a number of strengths, but it benefits most of all from James Whale's direction, creativity, and technical excellence. Both the flashier aspects of the movie (such as the "invisibility" effects) and also most of the basic elements are done with skill.
The story is for the most part based on the one main idea of "The Invisible Man" who combines his scientific genius with a generous supply of madness. The story is interesting enough in itself, and of course it provides all kinds of opportunities for visual tricks. Whale hits just the right balance in making good use of these opportunities without over-indulging himself.
The visual effects themselves are of excellent quality, and they are far better than all but the very best of the present-day computer imagery. While it is usually rather easy to spot which parts of a movie are computer-generated, Whale's effects are all but seamless, with the exception of a handful of brief moments. They are often quite impressive, without resorting to tired devices, such as explosions and the like, in order to impress those with shorter attention spans.
Claude Rains does quite well for having such limitations on what he could do. The rest of the cast is solid, if mostly unspectacular, letting the story do the work. Una O'Connor somewhat overdoes it with the screaming this time, but otherwise the characters are believable. The acting may seem slightly quaint to those who are accustomed to the pretentious styles of the present generation of performers, but it's certainly better than the grating, self-important performances in some of the recent movies of the same genre.
While the story does not have the thematic depth or the suggestive imagery of horror classics like "Frankenstein" or "Dracula", this adaptation gets everything it can out of the material, telling the story in an entertaining fashion and with technical skill.
23 of 25 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?
| Report this