NEW INVISIBLE MAN REFRESHES SF CLASSIC

Of the five original Universal Films horror classics—DRACULA (1931), FRANKENSTEIN (1931), THE MUMMY(1932), THE INVISIBLE MAN (1933) and THE WOLF MAN (1941),  two are based on classics of science fiction literature. Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein, first published in 1818, and H.G. Wells’ The Invisible Man, first published in 1897, helped create the familiar “mad scientist” trope of science fiction. In both cases, a scientist, seeking the secrets of the universe, over-reaches and intrudes into the domain of God, leading to madness and death.

Shelley’s Frankenstein was written just at the beginning of the Industrial Revolution and reflected the fears of her time over a loss of the “innocence” of a more rural and agrarian life. By the time Wells wrote The Invisible Man, though, the Industrial Revolution was a done deal. Its consequences were already being felt—in the displacement of populations; in pollution and industrial accidents; in urban poverty and labor exploitation, among other things. 

In the film version of Wells’ story, directed by James Whale and starring Claude Rains (of CASABLANCA fame), the scientist’s creation of an invisibility elixir drives him mad. Before his rampage ends, he kills over 120 people (surely the most of any Universal monster!), some directly, but most by the modern means of engineering a train derailment. It is a story uniquely suited to its time, even though the Universal film version is set in 1933, rather than 1897 like the book.

The latest film version of Wells’s story has been updated for our own modern times, with writer/director Leigh Wannell’s fresh take on THE INVISIBLE MAN. Wannell is best known for writing the screenplays for the first film in the torture-porn series SAW and the more standard creeper INSIDIOUS, but he approaches THE INVISIBLE MAN with something other than gore or ghosts in mind. Like Wells and Whale before him, Wannell is concerned with the horror of the human mind, and how science and technology abet the worst of our motivations.

 

Don't look now!

Elisabeth Moss, of The Handmaid’s Tale and Mad Men, plays Cecelia Kass, who, after months of elaborate planning, escapes her rich, abusive, tech-inventor husband Adrian (played by Oliver Jackson-Cohen). Two weeks later she learns Adrian has killed himself and left her $5 million dollars, to be delivered in large monthly installments over the course of her life.

At first, she doesn’t believe it. Adrian is not the kind of man to kill himself—and why would he give her that money when she left him? But she finds it hard to turn down the money when it can do so much good for the friends who have taken her in after her escape. She accepts, even if the money does come with two conditions: if she runs afoul of the law or is declared mentally incompetent, the payments will cease.

Almost immediately, of course, weird things—impossible things—start happening. And here the movie borrows from another classic of the psychological thriller genre, GASLIGHT, starring Ingrid Bergman. In that film, steered by "women's director" George Cukor, an opera singer in Victorian London is subjected to her new husband’s subtle campaign to drive her insane. 

Like Bergman’s character, no one believes Cecelia when she claims a number of spooky-bordering-on-dangerous events are not mere coincidence. All the incidents are calculated to cast doubt on her sanity, and soon enough, the money is withdrawn.

Cecelia’s worst fears are confirmed when she’s attacked in the house where she’s been staying—by an invisible opponent. She is forced to fight him off before fleeing the scene in a (conveniently) passing car/Uber/Lyft. But not before she dumps a can of paint on her attacker and reveals that he is, in fact, a man in some kind of special suit.

Later, at her husband’s estate, she finds the evidence of what she has suspected all along. Adrian is alive; he has used his knowledge of optical science to invent an invisibility suit; and he is tormenting her in revenge for her rejection of him.

The last third of the film contains so many plot twists it would be a shame to reveal them here. You expect an abused heroine to pick herself up and start fighting back. You expect a movie villain to get his comeuppance. But the road to these predictable destinations in THE INVISIBLE MAN has as many switchbacks as a mountain trail in West Virginia. And almost as many terrifying hundred-foot drops.

You can enjoy this film and its jump-scares without thinking too much about the context of a woman fighting her way out of an abusive relationship, a subject which, as GASLIGHT proves, is not exclusive to our times, but is certainly relevant to them. But modern times call for a more modern interpretation. In the context of this INVISIBLE MAN, it’s easy for Adrian to make Cecelia appear to be the crazy one. He has help in creating the illusion he’s dead, of course, but even once that illusion is destroyed, he is given the benefit of the doubt, whereas Cecelia never is. She is never believed, just as so many women in the #MeToo movement were never believed. She has to take matters into her own hands. Which she does eventually, and quite finally.

As an author and creator of kickass heroines, however, I do wish Cecelia had found her courage a little sooner. The first part of the film suffers a bit from “helpless heroine” syndrome. Part of that is a legitimate result of her abusive relationship with Adrian, but part of it comes from outdated beliefs that a horror story requires helplessness of the heroine—at least for a while. We need to get past that.

Then there are the laws of physics. Rain is the invisible man’s biggest enemy. He’s visible when it rains, because his body takes up space and the raindrops are displaced around him. That makes him easy to see. Not so much in the pouring rain scene in this movie, where we can see a bit of a ripple, but not the big blank spot where the “invisible man shape” should be visible.

There were a few other plot holes, but they aren’t enough to keep you from seeing and enjoying this movie. I suggest you refresh your knowledge of all things INVISIBLE with a viewing of the Claude Rains’ 1933 version, then head over to the multiplex to check out Leigh Wannell’s THE INVISIBLE MAN ASAP.

Listen to my expanded review of THE INVISIBLE MAN on my podcast MY MOVIEHOUSE MY RULES.

Cheers, Donna