Author Topic: The Invisible Man  (Read 3328 times)

Head Gardener

  • weed specialist
    • Gardening mixes
The Invisible Man
« on: March 05, 2020, 05:22:58 PM »


I didn't see a thread (arf) but by crikey this was great, saw it this afternoon and really enjoyed it
I can see The Invisible Woman coming next - a steady 8/10

Re: The Invisible Man
« Reply #1 on: March 05, 2020, 06:10:05 PM »
Is it as good as the original or the short story or Hollow Man?

If he is half as repugnant as The Invisible Man in Alan Moore's League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, I will def think about watching it.

Does this link with all the Universal extended universe?

Glebe

  • This is a low-flying panic attack.
Re: The Invisible Man
« Reply #2 on: March 05, 2020, 06:34:25 PM »
Saw it last night (in IMAX), it was decent, some tense moments and that.

I've not been posting about films I've seen of late cos me laptop's fucked.

Re: The Invisible Man
« Reply #3 on: March 05, 2020, 06:40:07 PM »
Is it as good as the original or the short story or Hollow Man?

If he is half as repugnant as The Invisible Man in Alan Moore's League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, I will def think about watching it.

Does this link with all the Universal extended universe?

I think that's dead isn't it? Or maybe that was the joke and I missed it.
Anyway this is a standalone story, and done really well.

Re: The Invisible Man
« Reply #4 on: March 12, 2020, 04:09:47 AM »
This was fucking poor.

Re: The Invisible Man
« Reply #5 on: March 12, 2020, 08:29:27 AM »
This was fucking poor.

Was the plot transparent? Could you make yourself clear?

Re: The Invisible Man
« Reply #6 on: March 12, 2020, 09:20:21 AM »


That's an image of a static handprint materialising, it's not how anyone would place their hand on a pane of glass. 0/10

Re: The Invisible Man
« Reply #7 on: March 12, 2020, 09:33:56 AM »
Isn't it just showing the steam making the hand print appear, and the hand had been placed there before the steam started to make it visible? 8/10. Would buy again

Head Gardener

  • weed specialist
    • Gardening mixes
Re: The Invisible Man
« Reply #8 on: March 12, 2020, 12:04:21 PM »
That's an image of a static handprint materialising, it's not how anyone would place their hand on a pane of glass. 0/10

as far as I remember that bit isn't actually in the movie - it's in the trailer and I waited for it to happen in the shower scene but never saw it - DVD extra praps?

Re: The Invisible Man
« Reply #9 on: March 12, 2020, 12:12:09 PM »
It starts off quite well and it's an interesting take on the material. Elizabeth Moss is also great as usual. However, about half way through it becomes very fucking silly.

Re: The Invisible Man
« Reply #10 on: March 12, 2020, 01:25:19 PM »
It starts off quite well and it's an interesting take on the material. Elizabeth Moss is also great as usual. However, about half way through it becomes very fucking silly.

I thought the other bathroom scene where she drops her towel and is alerted to his presence by his appendage accidentally becoming a stealth towel-rack was very tasteless. And let's not mention the homo-erotic Ray Stantz cameo..

Re: The Invisible Man
« Reply #11 on: March 12, 2020, 01:46:22 PM »
I thought this was pretty entertaining, but I am struggling to take it seriously as either a scary movie or an ultra-relevant exploration of relationship abuse, because it is fundamentally fucking stupid. Moss sells some very silly stuff with real heart, and the use of negative space in the opening hour or so is admittedly tense. Everything after the big reveal midway through is too daft for my taste, but I did think the direction was generally excellent. Didn't realise it was the same fella who did 'Upgrade', which I also thought was a more-than-solid genre picture.

Re: The Invisible Man
« Reply #12 on: March 12, 2020, 04:47:06 PM »
Moss sells some very silly stuff with real heart, and the use of negative space in the opening hour or so is admittedly tense.

Fuckin' A. There's some great creepy scenes of the camera panning round to nothing. Plus the reaction of Moss in one particular bit chilled my blood when she turns around suddenly looking absolutely terrified.

Such a shame it became so ridiculous about 2/3 in. The suit was so fucking stupid and it became X-Men. I was thinking they could have just maybe kept going with the ambiguous nature of it and constantly thinking is it just all in her head?

Re: The Invisible Man
« Reply #13 on: March 12, 2020, 07:22:32 PM »
The condensation wouldn't even be on the outside of the screen, would it? Fuck's sake. Absolute disaster.

Shameless Custard

  • PAUSE FOR THE JET
    • My RUBBISH
Re: The Invisible Man
« Reply #14 on: March 14, 2020, 08:24:09 AM »
Really enjoyed this. Bit daft obviously but it's the bleedin' Invisible Man

Elisabeth Moss was excellent as usual, and I found most of it really tense, especially the bits in the loft and kitchen

Four bags and maybe a tiny gimp suit

Mister Six

  • Ridiculously teacakes
Re: The Invisible Man
« Reply #15 on: March 14, 2020, 02:51:15 PM »
Saw this a couple of weeks ago and meant to make a thread but didn't get around to it. Anyway, yeah, a brilliant film[1] Best I've seen at the cinema in ages.

Is it as good as the original or the short story or Hollow Man?

If he is half as repugnant as The Invisible Man in Alan Moore's League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, I will def think about watching it.

The Invisible Man is indeed an absolute cunt, although he barely gets any speaking lines. He's mostly a seemingly omnipresent figure haunting the wife he used to abuse. The film is basically about her trying to maintain her sanity while he fucks up her life.

Quote
Does this link with all the Universal extended universe?

That's dead, I think. Certainly no hint of it here, and this is a much more "realistic" (though still very entertaining and OTT) film than The Mummy.
 1. EDIT: to stave off moaning given the response of some people in this thread, a brilliant film for its genre; I'm not saying it's the Seventh Seal or anything.

Re: The Invisible Man
« Reply #16 on: March 15, 2020, 06:50:07 PM »
Elizabeth Moss has great teeth. She really does good 'teeth acting'.

This this film started out they were going to make another huge blockbuster like the Tom Cruise 'Mummy' film but they decided to scale it down and make a more interesting 'little' film.

Mister Six

  • Ridiculously teacakes
Re: The Invisible Man
« Reply #17 on: March 15, 2020, 08:32:21 PM »
It cost about $7 million and has made about $123 million so far, so that was a good call. Ideally this would lead to a mass realisation that you can make interesting, distinctive films for not very much and rake in the profits, and low- and mid-budget movies would make a resurgence. But Hollywood is largely run by people who couldn't find their arse with both hands and a map, so that probably won't happen.

Re: The Invisible Man
« Reply #18 on: March 16, 2020, 08:21:35 AM »
It cost about $7 million and has made about $123 million so far, so that was a good call. Ideally this would lead to a mass realisation that you can make interesting, distinctive films for not very much and rake in the profits, and low- and mid-budget movies would make a resurgence. But Hollywood is largely run by people who couldn't find their arse with both hands and a map, so that probably won't happen.

The problem with Blumhouse is that it operates by not paying the cast or crew very well, or even fairly (outside of the occasional star, who usually does it for the producer credit or backend deal). They don’t use union crews whenever avoidable, often use non-SAG actors (paid in “exposure”) and make people work incredibly long hours for far less than they’d get even doing bad TV. You can spit in any direction in LA and hit someone who’s either acted in or worked on one of those movies, and they never have anything good to say about the experience.

So while it looks like “low budget, huge return, why isn’t everyone doing this?”, the answer might actually be that other production companies or studios are held to a higher standard of fairness - which costs more, movies aren’t cheap. With Blumhouse, Jason Blum and his friends are the only ones really benefiting from it.

Mister Six

  • Ridiculously teacakes
Re: The Invisible Man
« Reply #19 on: March 16, 2020, 12:26:32 PM »
Ah, okay. Well, they could have made this for $30-40 mil and still walked away with a nice profit. And if it wasn't for the coronavirus, it could be doing even better.

Ant Farm Keyboard

  • 60 percent of the time, it works every time
Re: The Invisible Man
« Reply #20 on: March 16, 2020, 12:54:25 PM »
Five or six years ago, Universal was all thinking about the MCU. They don't own many franchises, and definitely not enough characters inside them to compete with Marvel or DC Comics. They decided instead to revive most of their famous monster franchises (Dracula, Frankenstein, The Mummy, The Invisible Man, plus Dr Jekyll) and tie them together inside something called the "Dark Universe".

When The Mummy, which was supposed to be the big launching event, flopped in 2017, they started backtracking on those plans, and ultimately cancelled everything. They still saw that there was some interest for a new Invisible Man movie, and Blumhouse realized they could do something about it for a pittance.

So, the Leigh Wannell film is something totally independent from the project that Johnny Depp was supposed to star in four or five years ago.

Mister Six

  • Ridiculously teacakes
Re: The Invisible Man
« Reply #21 on: March 16, 2020, 08:16:22 PM »
This is moving to VOD soon along with other new Universal releases, apparently.

Re: The Invisible Man
« Reply #22 on: March 16, 2020, 09:05:30 PM »

Shameless Custard

  • PAUSE FOR THE JET
    • My RUBBISH
Re: The Invisible Man
« Reply #23 on: March 21, 2020, 09:29:17 AM »
Amazon want 15.99 to rent it. Arf.

It's in the Available section of the other stores

Re: The Invisible Man
« Reply #24 on: March 22, 2020, 10:16:38 AM »
I found the first half of this genuinely scary, unsettling and inventive. But the second half felt like almost a totally different film. Overall pretty decent though, Moss is always good.

Puce Moment

  • Member
  • **
Re: The Invisible Man
« Reply #25 on: March 22, 2020, 01:54:07 PM »
Amazon want 15.99 to rent it. Arf.

It's in the Available section of the other stores

Fuck 'em. Move with the times and get this shit released at a decent price and I would gladly not go through the process of downloading and then transferring onto an external hard drive for my TV.

weekender

  • Member
  • **
Re: The Invisible Man
« Reply #26 on: March 22, 2020, 03:22:43 PM »
Fuck 'em. Move with the times and get this shit released at a decent price and I would gladly not go through the process of downloading and then transferring onto an external hard drive for my TV.

How is it going to get into your TV and how are you going to pay for it?

Puce Moment

  • Member
  • **
Re: The Invisible Man
« Reply #27 on: March 22, 2020, 07:39:54 PM »
How is it going to get into your TV and how are you going to pay for it?

By streaming it like Ben Wheatley had the sense to do when A Field In England was released.

Paid for using my credit card.

Re: The Invisible Man
« Reply #28 on: March 22, 2020, 07:55:19 PM »
Amazon want 15.99 to rent it. Arf.

It's in the Available section of the other stores

I only paid £6 to see it at the cinema.

Mister Six

  • Ridiculously teacakes
Re: The Invisible Man
« Reply #29 on: March 23, 2020, 04:34:07 AM »
Yeah in the US it's $20 to stream. Even getting a ticket in midtown Manhattan is "only" going to cost you $17 or so.

I'm assuming someone will have ripped and torrented it by now. And I can't blame anyone who downloads it, honestly...

Tags: