DVD Review THE INVISIBLE MAN 1933

Published on November 12, 2011

Universal Legacy Collection – Chapter 5: The Invisible Man

(1933)

By Jason Marsiglia

Out of 4

The Invisible Man is a well-revered classic in the horror genre, and I can certainly understand why. Here’s a film that boasts ingenious, yet practical special effects to achieve the impression of an invisible madman running rampant around England. It was inducted into the National Film Registry for preservation back in 2008 by the Library of Congress for its cinematic (and historic) significance. And its always been a cornerstone film in Universal’s vaults both as a horror and science fiction film.

So why does this movie irritate me so damn much?

The film, based (rather loosely, most of the time) on the novel by H.G. Wells, centers on a scientist named Jack Griffin who has found the secret to invisibility, managing to make himself completely disappear, unless he’s wearing clothes or bandages. Cloistering himself up in a room above a local tavern, Dr. Griffin toils day and night to find a cure for his invisible predicament, but it isn’t long before curious bar patrons and the local police figure him out – sending the doctor into a mad and violent frenzy (in no small part to the invisibility drug’s side effect of heightened aggression and madness).

The rest of the movie is basically the invisible doctor terrorizing the countryside with murder and various mayhem, while the townspeople and police scatter around, trying to figure out a way to capture something they can’t see.

Obviously, the real highlight of The Invisible Man is the special effects by John Fulton, John Mescall and Frank Williams. For its era, there are tricks done in this movie that I’m still not 100% sure of how they were achieved. Obviously, early “green screen” technology was employed here (or in this case, black felt and trick photography), but to see the type of effect it has on a film of this age, and to know that we’re still employing the same tricks almost 80 years later is remarkable. Then of course is the unmistakable voice of Claude Rains as the invisible doctor. Having to emote through layers of clothing, bandages or – more often than not – “thin air” can’t be an easy task. Yet Rains keeps the invisible villain a cold, menacing, cackling ghost of a nightmare. He’s one mean son of a bitch, lemme tell ya. His antics go from silly hijinks like snatching hats from people’s heads and kicking them in the ass, to derailing whole trains and murdering passengers in the fiery carnage.

Director James Whale, who helmed the wonderfully macabre Frankenstein from ’31 has nothing short of a winner on his hands – and it was one. The Invisible Man opened to great reviews, amazed audiences and made a bundle of cash for Universal.

So why do I have to be such a stick in the mud, huh? What makes me so pretentious to find something to dislike in a film that’s been an “etched-in-stone” classic for generations? It’s actually really simple.

It’s no secret to horror buffs of the Golden Age and hardcore James Whale fans alike that Whale had a soft spot for theater actors. Not a problem, really – a good many wonderful actors of the stage translated to the screen effortlessly. However, in the case of The Invisible Man, the stage actors here were so dramatic, so animated and so over-the-top, that they felt less like characters in a film, and more like overdrawn caricatures in a comedy. It’s distracting, at best.

And God help me, when one of Whales’ favorite “oddballs” Una O’Connor enters the fray with her obnoxious shrieking and hysterics, my teeth started grinding away. A quick mosey around the internet proves O’Connor was something of a cult icon in her day, and loved by most audiences for her bug-eyed expressions and creaky old crone voice. Here, on my TV, in my house, the woman couldn’t shut up soon enough, and Whale lovingly gives the annoying old bat more than enough screen time to tempt you into throwing a bowling ball through your television. Whale’s tendency to shine spotlight on goofball characters like this would be more commonplace in his future films (O’Connor unfortunately also appears in Bride of Frankenstein, doing the same shrill shtick she does here), but it was something largely lacking in Frankenstein two years prior, and thank God for it. Frankenstein was a grim film, set in its tone. Unfortunately for The Invisible Man, there’s horrible acts of violence and venom a-plenty coming from our vile, invisible madman…and it’s all overshadowed by Whale’s attempts at humor.

For instance, why is every other character in The Invisible Man so stupid? I don’t just mean annoyingly stupid like O’Connor. No, I mean truly, hopelessly, ineptly stupid! Is it that the invisible Dr. Griffin is such a genius, or rather that the entire population of the town he’s terrorizing are a bunch of blithering idiots? Every police officer is a bumbling moron, practically falling over each other in piles in their goof-ball attempts to capture Griffin (an embarrassing scene involving paint guns and an alley cat almost had me banging my head against the wall), and every townsperson is either a bug-eyed dope (O’Connor again, for example) or a drunken wino whose pants got kicked by our jovial lunatic – witnesses quickly written off as the drunks they clearly appear to be by the “you’re not so swift yourselves” police force.

Was all of this supposed to be funny? Did Whale deem the H.G. Wells story too dark or straightforward that he felt the need to inject the film with this crowd of loonies? For the life of me, I’ll never know, and so much time is spent on these jackass locals that The Invisible Man became less and less suspenseful by the minute, and far more annoying and off-beat in equal time. Add to that some glaring mistakes in logic and timing (how does a countryside get a newspaper reporting a policeman’s murder before the body is even removed from the crime scene?) and you get a film that continually irritated and annoyed me.

It really is a pity that The Invisible Man is so off-putting to me. I wanted to like this movie, I really did. And the special effects are so damn amazing for their time that I was simply astounded. But damn it, I just couldn’t get past the side-characters who dominate such a large portion of the film. It’s a complete misfire to me, and while I know I’m in the minority, I just couldn’t bring myself to ignore the film’s faults and focus on its many technical achievements.

C: Claude Rains, William Harrigan, Gloria Stuart, Henry Travers, Una O’Connor. D: James Whale. Sub genre: Mad Scientist. Time: 71 minutes. Ratio: (1.33:1) Fullscreen. Not Rated: Some violence.

The Best Digital Bang For Your Hard-Earned Buck:

The best bonus feature for this movie is a documentary called “Now You See Him! The Invisible Man Revealed!” which chronicles the production of the film, including its impressive special effects and some comparisons to the novel. They also go into brief detail about every sequel to follow the film, and how the special effects progressed from film to film. They even stop to chat a little about The Invisible Man’s run-ins with Abbott and Constello, so it’s a pretty complete history of Universal’s involvement with the character.

We also get an Audio Commentary by Rudy Behlmer who is always fun to listen to.

And it’s rounded out with some Production Notes, Biographies and a Photo Gallery of Production and Publicity skills.

Sequels: We wouldn’t see (so to speak) another Invisible Man until 1940, in The Invisible Man Returns.

Remakes: H.G. Wells’ novel would be adapted many times over, to various extents – sometimes directly, sometimes simply borrowing the idea of an Invisible Man – but a true remake of this film is slated to be released in 2013 by Universal Pictures.