Hollow Man

I have been unusually lucky with my SyFy-channel movie watching lately. I had no idea what this movie was really but there was nothing else on last night and I also noticed that it was directed by Paul Verhoeven which have directed quite a few movies that I really liked so I decided to give it a try. As it turned out, this is another movie that is somewhat above the usual standard for movies given on SyFy.

It has a rating on 27% on Rotten Tomatoes which is just bullshit. But then, the so called professional critics used by the Rotten Tomatoes are dimwits who trash every movie that is not intellectual enough for their self-imagined refined tastes. I do not know why they continue to use these clowns for their official rating system instead...

It's amazing what you can do... when you don't have to look at yourself in the mirror any more.

It was the film that convinced director Paul Verhoeven to leave Hollywood and take a break from film making. His reasoning being that any Hollywood director could have made Hollow Man, a big effects led movie that made a lot of cash at the box office. It's this that is the main problem with the picture, it lacks some of the director's bite and satirical savagery, even the souped up sex (natural or deviant) that often comes with his productions. Yet devoid of expectations of a Verhoeven masterpiece, and the crushing realisation that it basically wastes its potential and plays out as a haunted house stalk movie - it's a good enough energetic pop...

Some pretty impressive effects for the era, and a pretty cool (if not original) core concept, but what's most intriguing about Hollow Man is the hero's journey, or more accurately, the absence of it. The inverse of it. I don't feel like it's fair to even say that it's a villain's journey. Assuredly, by the end of the movie, it is very clear who our villain is, but given that he starts out such a dick anyway, the intriguing thing is not so much that he necessarily changes, but the idea that his character is maybe just "revealed". To become the type of prick he always could have been, if only had the power to be so. The thing is, he starts this movie a pretty archetypal protagonist. His role is seen almost identically across any number of m...

Great watch, will watch again, and can definitely recommend.

This has a fantastic premise of what happens when humans discover a process to "invisible-lize" and "visible-lize" organic life forms. For a 2000 movie, this has a high production value and probably state of the art computer effects in 2000, and for most of the movie they hold up, though they do struggle at points. I honestly do think that it's an "invisibility" effect, is what helps it hold up.

This is a rather tricky premise, it's presented as a scientist turning himself invisible, but it's much closer to a "Twilight Zone" episode with a philosophical waxing of a Dr.'s god complex. What would a human do when it has a distinct advantage / power over others. And while th...

Loved this movie. I never seen a concept for a movie like this. I wouldn't hate being invisible at all. I can also see how it would be frustrating to not be able to become normal again too.

Kevin Bacon ("Sebastian Caine") leads a team of scientists looking for ways to make living things invisible. When he decides to be the ultimate guinea pig, it all starts to go a bit wonky - they can make him disappear ok, but they cannot quite reverse the transaction. Needless to say, despite the best efforts of Elisabeth Shue ("Linda") and Josh Brolin ("Matt") he starts to go off the rails a bit, and with his new found abilities to go about undetected, he soon becomes quite a nasty piece of work determined to wreak retribution on his boss and his erstwhile colleagues. It's a rather daft slasher with plenty of clever skeletal effects and pace, but the dialogue and scenarios are pretty preposterous with little, if any, chemistry between any of the stars.