- The Invisible Man review by KB
Within the first few minutes i could tell i wasn't going to like this film & that it was going to be rubbish which was the case .Very typical of many modern/new films in that there is no substance , the script /dialogue is dire almost laughable , it's predictable , the acting just isn't convincing and the viewers are treated as if they are dim . Also , i am not sure if it was meant to be scary but it wasn't anyhow & i generally found the whole thing tedious .
This is why you can't beat the old films .
2 out of 7 members found this review helpful.
Intriguing idea not fully realised?
- The Invisible Man review by PD
Leigh Whannell’s new, loose adaptation of H. G. Wells’s 1897 novel begins with a backstory of abuse. Elisabeth Moss plays Cecilia Kass, an architect who, in the first scene, stealthily and fearfully escapes from a gated and electronically guarded oceanfront compound, in Northern California, where she lives with her boyfriend, Adrian, a fabulously wealthy inventor who specialises in optics. Adrian’s abusive violence is quickly in evidence when he punches his fist through the window of the escape vehicle—driven by Cecilia’s sister Emily. Cecilia takes refuge in the home of her friend James, a police officer, and his teenage daughter, and stays there in a state of panic, unwilling even to set foot outside for fear that Adrian is spying on her and planning to harm her. Adrian’s house is decked out with a panoply of security cameras and other devices, and she left him because of the devastating methods of surveillance and control—of psychological manipulation—to which he subjected her. Adrian “controlled how I looked,” she tells James and Emily, and also what she wore and ate, and when she went out; then, she adds, he controlled what she said and was trying to control what she thought. What’s more, she says that he wanted her to have his child—and, knowing that, with a child, she’d be essentially tied to him for life, she secretly took birth-control pills.
Cecilia’s fears are, she thinks, finally put to rest, soon thereafter, when Adrian turns up dead at his home; but of course things get progressively creepy from this point, with the effect that makes Cecilia begin to doubt her sanity (and making those around her doubt it, too). Whannell concocts these schemes with clever attentiveness to the role of current technology; mobile phones, laptops, passwords, and various security devices all play crucial and natural roles in the action. At the same time, there are other tricks that are powerfully imaginative if yet left undeveloped visually and thematically.
The plot-centred nature of the film is undoubtedly its strength but also its basic trouble. Whannall comes up with some neat, clever twists that give rise to both great suspense and some keenly defined moral themes, notably when Cecilia plans to turn the tables and exact revenge, whilst several sequences make clever use of the edges of the frame in relation to surveillance devices. For all this, however, the characters are given little identity, little personality. Though the film rests heavily on its backstory, its protagonist has virtually no substance: though it almost entirely takes Cecilia’s point of view, what she knows, remembers, what her insights are, are unknown to us. So all in all, watchable enough with many good moments (although a big suspension of disbelief is often required!), but for me an intriguing idea that hasn't been fully realised.
1 out of 1 members found this review helpful.