Skip to content
Dan Owen reviews
UCI, Trafford Centre
- Cert:
- Running time: 112 minutes
- Year: 2000
- Released: 29th September 2000
- Widescreen Ratio : 1.85:1
- Rating: 6.5/10
Ahh, invisible man movies:floating hats, levitating guns, disembodiedtrenchcoats, bandages, sunglasses… but not any more. Modern technologypushes the “invisibility” premise to new heights in Paul Verhoeven‘s“Hollow Man”, starring Kevin Bacon as Dr Sebastian Cane, an egotistical scientistwho harnesses the power of invisibility and becomes the first human testsubject – with predictably bad results.
Paul Verhoeven can usually be counted on to supply certain things in hismovies; nudity, violence, special-effects, and social satire. “Hollow Man”is a somewhat tamer Verhoeven flick by his standards. It has all hisingredients (except the sadly missing satire), but the remaining cocktail isfairly routine, with only the special-effects proving a talking point.
To say the plot is simplistic is putting it mildly. This is all a veryroutine variation on the “scientists tampering with what they don’tunderstand” plot, which then becomes a slasher flick in its final third.There’s nothing necessarily wrong with that – I mean, everyone going to seethis film just wants some SFX to feast their eyes on, right?
If the answer to that question is “yes”, then “Hollow Man” is a film youshould see. The CGI work done to create the illusion of invisibility isamazing, with some very interesting takes on the premise – such astransparent eyelids making it difficult for him to get to sleep. Of course,these egghead scientists never think of simply giving him a blindfold…
The CGI work can only be applauded, and it’s likely the disappearance (layerby sickening layer) of Kevin Bacon, should earn the effects guys an Oscarnext year. Even if the absence of fluids – deemed too much of a headache bythe SFX wizzes – makes the results somehow “cartoony”. It’s still impressivestuff, but it’ll be bettered when the next invisible man movie comesalong…
Acting-wise, it’s all very so-so. Elisabeth Shue is very watchable and Bacon(when seen) makes the most of a fairly 2D character. Kudos mainly goes toBacon for putting up with the extensive nightmare of green-makeup andcontact lenses for the majority of the film’s running time. The results wereworth it.
So – good movie or bad movie? Good movie. It has nothing to offer exceptvisuals, but it does what it sets out to do with aplomb. A shame it didn’thave high aspirations, as the plot restricts events to the Laboratory mostof the time, and never explores the outside world enough. This, of course,limits the possibilities Verhoeven may have explored regarding socialsatire… but instead we just get a peeping-tom scenario with escalates intoa rape (a scene severely cut following bad test audience reaction).
A workmanlike film then, but still entertaining and with enough visuals tokeep you happy. Just a shame the writer’s inventiveness stopped after he’dconceived some original invisible man sequences.
Review copyright © Dan Owen, 2000.E-mail Dan Owen
Reviewer of movies, videogames and music since 1994. Aortic valve operation survivor from the same year. Running DVDfever.co.uk since 2000. Nobel Peace Prize winner 2021.