This was Supposed to be Scary?
-
Archived from the IMDb Discussion Forums — The Invisible Man
Nerdgasm — 19 years ago(December 07, 2006 02:13 PM)
I remember seeing this and liking itbut it was anything but scaryme and my friend were talking about it and saying "yeah, invisible man, what's he gonna do get naked and move around your furniture, ooooh!"(sure I know he can do more and in real life, perhaps that's scary) but reallyfor a film an invisible human wasn't that scaryjust neat.
That's not my problem, I sleep now. -
UlrikSander — 19 years ago(December 20, 2006 05:03 AM)
As with most of the 1930's Universal Studios horror movies (Dracula, Frankenstein, The Old Dark House, The Mummy, The Invisible Man etc.) they aren't really that scary anymore. But believe me when I say that people where indeed horrified when they saw them in the cinemas back then!
It's well-known that horror movies push the boundaries of what's defined scary more and more for each decade. Therefore many pre-1970 horror movies seem dated in terms of the scare/gore quality. But that, as you say, doesn't mean that they aren't good. In fact I think the horror movies that Universal Studios produced in the 30s are some of the best ever, because they don't just rely on being scary. Many of them have interesting themes (there's stuff to analyze for a million books), characteristic actors/characters and beautiful and imaginative set-designs.
My YMDb Top-20 Movies List:
http://www.ymdb.com/ulrikone/l37847_ukuk.html -
Nerdgasm — 19 years ago(December 22, 2006 05:51 AM)
Oh, I do understand how old horror movies aren't as scary anymorebut I kind of get why like dracula and frankenstein scared peoplejust the invisible man is one I don't get.
That's not my problem, I sleep now. -
directorgene — 15 years ago(February 22, 2011 06:49 PM)
It simply mean you can not suspend you disbelief that this is really happening. An invisble man is far scarier than a monster you can see with you own eyes. Some people can't let their imagination and feeling go, to feel beyond with they can see.
Same way with sex. Some men only like the physical feel of the graphic act, but don't like forplay or sexual fantasy, or talk to stimulate the imagination.
Sincerley Director gene -
Doghouse-6 — 15 years ago(March 04, 2011 10:55 PM)
I think you've gotten closest to the heart of it. It wasn't so much his invisibility that was "scary," but the seeming invincibility it gave him. The idea is pretty much embodied in Insp. Lane's warning to either one of the reporters or one of the constables (can't recall which) that, "He may be standing next to you right now."
And this is reinforced by the truly heinous and even sadistic acts we're shown he's not only capable of, but even cackles with laughter while he commits them.
If it's "horror," it's for the mind, not the eye (Hmmthat's pretty much what you said, isn't it?).
Poe! You areavenged! -
directorgene — 14 years ago(April 15, 2011 07:48 AM)
Yes it is! Sorry for being late. I can imagine a film like this horrifying the audiences of 1933. Like one of ranking inspector said. "He made be standing right next to you". Then when he over powered the station master and had the train go over the cliff, .was a real shocker.
So people just don't open their minds. They only get scared at images of Jason of "Friday The 13th" (1980?) comming at them with a knife and lots of blood and gore they can see with there eyes
Sincerley Directorgene -
GreenGoblinsOckVenom86 — 18 years ago(August 05, 2007 11:14 AM)
I actually saw the movie when I was 10 and I wasn't scared. Though to be honest maybe in the 1930s people thought it was scary but now a days it really isn't. I liked it. I'm thinking of buying the Legacy Collection some time.
"Never rub another man's Rhubarb!" Joker/Jack Nicholson from Batman -
MacKrazy — 18 years ago(October 09, 2007 05:54 PM)
Funny for me out of all the Original Universal Horror's the Invisible Man is the most disturbing, Yes I'm not scared by these Horrors, to tell the truth I am not scared by Halloween or Evil Dead either, I am entertained.
But getting back to the Invisible Man, Funny thing is I always used to think, why is the Invisible Man a horror icon? He's not a monster like Dracula or the Mummy. But he is far more violent in This Film than any of them. Frankenstein's Monster and The Wolf man I felt sympathy for but the Invisible Man was just a Psycho Killer, Perhaps the first? Add to that he has become a super natural and I think he does rank among the monsters. -
Jason_Radley — 17 years ago(January 02, 2009 06:38 PM)
Griffin's a raving, megalomaniacal psychopath, responsible for the deaths of well over a hundred people, and the film's only got a PG-rating? The horror of that train set tumbling down the paper-mache embankment will live with me forever.
-
LarrupinLou — 17 years ago(January 03, 2009 11:31 AM)
"The Invisible Man" is a great film and is part of my DVD collection, but I never felt that it was scary. The Frankenstein Monster, Dracula, the Mummy, the Gill Man and my favorite the Wolf Man gave me nightmares as a kid during the '70s, but not the IM. It may be the best of the Universal classics, however.
No blah, blah, blah! -
GreenGoblinsOckVenom86 — 10 years ago(March 31, 2016 09:00 PM)
I think it's the fact that 90% of the cast acts in a silly and over the tap manner. Especially the Landlady Jenny. The way she screams at the top of her lungs just makes me laugh and makes me forget how dangerous an invisible man today. Then there's that one cop who isn't even scared of him that says, "He's invisible, aye?" as if he faces invisible men everyday. Heck speaking of Jenny there's a scene where she is in the bar after the invisible man escapes where she is standing right next to her husband and the actor playing him looks like he's really annoyed with her screaming into his ear.
Green Goblin is great! -
Tin_ear — 10 years ago(February 05, 2016 03:13 AM)
I get what you are saying. The fact we only
see his face when he dies
humanizes him a lot, which is more existential than terrifying. But I think an invisible serial killer is scary enough to work, not to mention he is running around with his schlong out while breaking into peoples' houses. That's legitimately creepy. And he almost kills a baby in the street. (In comparison, it's a hell of a lot grittier and weirder than Dracula or the Wolfman.) -
Cult_of_Kibner — 9 years ago(November 14, 2016 07:26 PM)
yeah, invisible man, what's he gonna do get naked and move around your furniture, ooooh!"(sure I know he can do more and in real life, perhaps that's scary)
Well he can alsoyou knowmurder a bunch of people. Kind of like what he does all throughout the movie. -
twofacetoo — 9 years ago(January 25, 2017 05:18 AM)
As with older movies, the fear factor came from the idea rather than the presentation. Nowadays Dracula is a fairly standard concept, vampire with a funny accent, but imagine it in the mind of someone from that era.
A strange foreigner with hypnotic eyes and a sinister attitude, capable of shapeshifting and retains his youth by drinking the blood of the living. That's a fairly horrifying concept.
The same applies to this movie. A man who is invisible sounds like a power-fantasy for many (it is for me certainly, I love invisibility as a story-telling device), but imagine it in a horror scenario. Say you're in your home, and suddenly there's a noise. Could be burglars, could be some animal that got in, you have no idea. And no matter how hard you look, you can't find the source of the noise. It always seems to be right behind you, but there's absolutely nothing anywhere in the house but you. Then you see something on the floor footprints, appearing and disappearing as if they're making their way across the carpet. And then you realise it's an invisible person. How do you stop them? how do you fight them? You can't see anything they're going to do, nor where they even are! As long as he keeps quiet, he could remain hidden forever!