Hollow Man boasts some pretty impressive visual effects and does have an intriguing story. Kevin Bacon plays Sebastion Caine, an arrogant scientist who develops a serum for invisibility. Withholding information from his superiors, Caine tests his serum on himself and undergoes a transformation that is quite visually arresting. It's like an anatomy book come to life. But while Caine's transformation and subsequent experiments with his new found power prove interesting, the movie fails to capture what it feels like to truly be invisible. Caine says to his colleagues, "You have know idea how much fun this is." In truth, we don't. We see Caine slowly going mad and trapping his fellow scientists in the lab when they threaten to go public. But, we don't get any sense of power from Caine. True he does venture out into public and enters the apartment of his very fetching neighbor, but that's about all the real world we see with Caine. It would've been interesting to see Caine in the real world, and what would've been done to capture him. Instead, we have Bacon, Elisabeth Shue and Josh Brolin and a few others mixing it up in a hidden lab somewhere in D.C. While the actors try to make the best with what they have, Paul Verhoeven tries to goose us a little. He succeeds in a few instances, and he does manage to hold your attention for a while, but the ending is the weakest link in the movie. Had there been a stronger ending, the movie would've been a little better. As it is now, it's a good exercise in visual effects territory, but there are so many other possibilities that lay with the story of an invisible human being.
584 Reviews
Hollow plot and characters but visually fantastic
bob the moo14 November 2003
Sebastian Caine and his team have worked tirelessly to develop a formula that can not only turn animals invisible but also bring them back to normal at will. With Governmental pressure on them to show results, Sebastian decides he will be the first human to try the formula. He becomes invisible for a short time, however efforts to bring him back fail and he finds himself stuck. As work continues on the formula, the others in the lab begin to notice him becoming increasingly unhinged.
From director Verhoven the norm is to expect great special effects and violence. He has also been known to integrate themes and good stories into these mainly effects driven films. On this occasion however he fails to really do that and is left with a fast paced and enjoyable film that makes up in effects what it lacks in substance. The plot is pretty basic and never goes deeper Sebastian's descent into madness is not really a descent so much as a short trip that is not really built to so much as just delivered. In it's placed though, the effects are really impressive and make the film worth seeing simply because, not only are they great, but they are also used very well in the action rather than just being the film in themselves.
The cast is OK but don't really have much to work with in terms of material. Bacon is much more interesting when not on screen than when he is. His character is too thin and he fails to portray any sort of `descent' in his character's behaviour. Shue is pretty good and seems to enjoy running round with a flamethrower. The rest of the cast are OK but basically just act as fodder in the way that a normal slasher movie will have actors to be disposed of as the film rolls.
Overall I really enjoyed this film as it is a very expensive special effects movie which relies on spectacle to keep things moving. The effects are great and take the mind away from the lack of real substance and the action at the end is very enjoyable. A really good special effects movie as long as you don't expect anything more.
From director Verhoven the norm is to expect great special effects and violence. He has also been known to integrate themes and good stories into these mainly effects driven films. On this occasion however he fails to really do that and is left with a fast paced and enjoyable film that makes up in effects what it lacks in substance. The plot is pretty basic and never goes deeper Sebastian's descent into madness is not really a descent so much as a short trip that is not really built to so much as just delivered. In it's placed though, the effects are really impressive and make the film worth seeing simply because, not only are they great, but they are also used very well in the action rather than just being the film in themselves.
The cast is OK but don't really have much to work with in terms of material. Bacon is much more interesting when not on screen than when he is. His character is too thin and he fails to portray any sort of `descent' in his character's behaviour. Shue is pretty good and seems to enjoy running round with a flamethrower. The rest of the cast are OK but basically just act as fodder in the way that a normal slasher movie will have actors to be disposed of as the film rolls.
Overall I really enjoyed this film as it is a very expensive special effects movie which relies on spectacle to keep things moving. The effects are great and take the mind away from the lack of real substance and the action at the end is very enjoyable. A really good special effects movie as long as you don't expect anything more.
Goes from being a decent look at an interesting theme to a predictable B-grade slasher
TBJCSKCNRRQTreviews14 March 2004
This could, and should, have been an interesting look on the idea of invisibility. Unfortunately, somewhere along the line, they ran out of ideas and decided to just kill everyone off and have it end in huge explosions, demonstrating a total lack of creativity. Too bad. It could have been great, were it not for the total lack of good acting, the one-dimensional characters, the corny lines and the general lack of anything worthwhile in the movie at all, other than good special effects. I feel bad for Paul Verhoeven; he used to make great movies; RoboCop, Basic Instinct & Starship Troopers were all way better than this mainstream garbage. The only good thing about this movie is the special effects, and, believe me, they are good. They are just not good enough to distract the viewer from all the negative points about the movie. It's really too bad that they couldn't make a better movie about invisibility; we've never had a truly good movie dealing with the rush of power it would be to be invisible. This movie tries, but it just falls short. All those great special effects, and no good movie to back them up. I'd only recommend this to special effect nerds, people who'll watch a movie regardless of quality just to see good special effects. I can't imagine anyone else actually enjoying this movie. I gave it a 6/10, but only because of the special effects.
Hollow Man takes an abundance of fantastic special effects and narrative possibilities and reduces it all to an expensive but cheesy horror movie.
Anonymous_Maxine7 April 2002
Ever since the original Halloween was released in 1978, there have been countless imitation films that desperately, although primarily unsuccessfully, attempt to feed off of the success of that film by copying its premise of a faceless and unstoppable killer. In the late 90s, there have been a resurgence of these films, such as the Scream movies, which started off good and then went sharply downhill with each additional sequel, Urban Legend, and I Know What You Did Last Summer (as well as, God willing, it's only sequel, I Still Know What You Did Two Summers Ago). Hollow Man is a film that takes a fantastic premise and reduces it to yet another of these cheap imitation slasher films.
Sure, the whole invisible man thing has been done before. Done to death, if you include literary examples. But let's face it, the possibility of human invisibility is one of the most fascinating premises that you can possibly tell a story about. The unfortunate thing about Hollow Man was that no one involved with the making of the movie seemed to realize that. What you have here is the development of an invisibility serum (as well as a reversing visibility serum) by a brilliant scientist, who successfully uses it on a gorilla in some of the best special effects scenes to date, and then uses it on himself. Well, of course he uses it on himself, what scientist could possibly resist? And why would any scientist WANT to resist? Well, the reason may be that, evidently, invisibility serum turns even the most intelligent scientists into raving madmen.
The absolutely infinite amount of possibilities for an invisible character are completely ignored here in favor of turning him into yet another bland faceless killer. This time, we may know who it is that's trying to kill people, but what we don't know is why he completely ignores the outside world. This is the greatest scientific discovery of mankind, and this bonehead decides to use it to become a peeping tom and to spy on his girlfriend. This vast and hugely unfortunate simplification of the potential for the story of an invisible man is both bitterly disappointing and more than a little insulting. As Roger Ebert mentions in his review of Hollow Man, it seems that director Paul Verhoeven, who directed such great films as RoboCop and Total Recall, seems to think that his audience is so intellectually dim that they prefer a mindless killer to the incredibly imaginative villain (or protagonist) that Dr. Sebastian Caine could have become.
Hollow Man is an absolutely fascinating display of brilliant special effects, which seem to map out internal anatomy just as good as any medical textbook, and is also a great deal of fun as the visible characters desperately try to make Dr. Caine visible again, but it is a dismal failure on the story level. The film starts out with a gigantic amount of intelligence, both that required for the development of an invisibility serum and that involved in the brilliant premise of the story, but winds up in the end as nothing more than yet another mindless thriller, completely lacking in thought and intrigue.
Sure, the whole invisible man thing has been done before. Done to death, if you include literary examples. But let's face it, the possibility of human invisibility is one of the most fascinating premises that you can possibly tell a story about. The unfortunate thing about Hollow Man was that no one involved with the making of the movie seemed to realize that. What you have here is the development of an invisibility serum (as well as a reversing visibility serum) by a brilliant scientist, who successfully uses it on a gorilla in some of the best special effects scenes to date, and then uses it on himself. Well, of course he uses it on himself, what scientist could possibly resist? And why would any scientist WANT to resist? Well, the reason may be that, evidently, invisibility serum turns even the most intelligent scientists into raving madmen.
The absolutely infinite amount of possibilities for an invisible character are completely ignored here in favor of turning him into yet another bland faceless killer. This time, we may know who it is that's trying to kill people, but what we don't know is why he completely ignores the outside world. This is the greatest scientific discovery of mankind, and this bonehead decides to use it to become a peeping tom and to spy on his girlfriend. This vast and hugely unfortunate simplification of the potential for the story of an invisible man is both bitterly disappointing and more than a little insulting. As Roger Ebert mentions in his review of Hollow Man, it seems that director Paul Verhoeven, who directed such great films as RoboCop and Total Recall, seems to think that his audience is so intellectually dim that they prefer a mindless killer to the incredibly imaginative villain (or protagonist) that Dr. Sebastian Caine could have become.
Hollow Man is an absolutely fascinating display of brilliant special effects, which seem to map out internal anatomy just as good as any medical textbook, and is also a great deal of fun as the visible characters desperately try to make Dr. Caine visible again, but it is a dismal failure on the story level. The film starts out with a gigantic amount of intelligence, both that required for the development of an invisibility serum and that involved in the brilliant premise of the story, but winds up in the end as nothing more than yet another mindless thriller, completely lacking in thought and intrigue.
A very good B movie
hung_fao_tweeze2 October 2009
True - this seems like a modernization of 'Invisible Man'. I enjoyed the 'Invisible Man'. I enjoyed this movie, too. (This is along the lines of the old 'The Thing From Outer Space' compared to Carpenter's 'The Thing'. Both movies work.) Don't try to look for any hard-core explanations of the technical-kind here. Ultimately it is a really good B movie along the order of something fun or entertaining to watch on a boring Sunday like we used to when we were kids. Yes, you know what's going to happen (Just like B movies) - the villain dies...duh! But getting there was fun. Very good special effects - probably worth the viewing alone. Top notch gorilla suit!! Kevin Bacon is good though the character is a shallow vehicle to carry the story. Every one else is slight as well but the story carries just fine. I'll watch it again for sure.
For fans of the sci fi and slasher genres, and fans of Kevin Bacon
lemon_magic6 November 2005
"Hollow Man" has enough strong performances, nice moments, and interesting plot turns to make for an mildly enjoyable film, as long as you don't think too hard about the plot. Visually, it is quite appealing and effective, and the soundtrack (especially the opening themes played over some effective and atmospheric opening credits) does a great job of adding some "oomph" to the action of screen. Keven Bacon is his usual on-screen self, and carries the film effectively, which is no small feat when consider that half the time he is either invisible or covered up in latex, which deprives him of most of an actor's most effective tools (his eyes and his mouth).In the scenes where he is covered in bandages, he has to get the character's emotions and presence out with body language and vocal cues, and even this is filtered through SFX. So I give him kudos for a professional, effective job in a difficult environment.
So why only a score of 5 out of 10? Having admitted that the film is enjoyable if you don't think too critically about it, I am now going to think critically about it for a minute.
Problem number one is Elizabeth Shue. Don't get me wrong, I think she is a very attractive woman, and she can hold her own as an actress in most movies. But she is horribly miscast here as a "top level research scientist" (just as she was in "The Saint"). She may come across as more than a typical "dumb blonde", but she's a clothes-horse, pure and simple, and I can't believe for a moment that she could get a PhD in the physical sciences. She's far more believable fending off Bacon's advances than she is playing "Pentagon Barbie". (The other two supporting actresses, who are by no means ugly or haggard, but still have considerably less "Vogue" cover potential, are quite believable in their roles).
Problem number two is a certain weakness in the script regarding how and why Bacon's character goes around the bend. The movie implies and foreshadows all kinds of reasons: Bacon is already a creep with a God-complex; the serum which turns him invisible is affecting his brain's neurochemistry; being invisible confers addictive power and opportunity he doesn't want to give up; invisibility creates an alienation and isolation from society...etc. But the script doesn't really drive any of these points home, and just flits from idea to idea without doing real justice to any of them. A line of dialog or two is meant to imply a whole series of attitudes and moral values changing, ("It's easier to sin when you don't have to look at yourself in the mirror", etc.), and even a pro like Bacon can't manage it in the space he is given.
Problem number three is (are) the escalating misogyny and graphic completeness of the voyeurism, molestation, and finally rape scenes included in the movie to convince the viewer that the Hollow Man is becoming a human monster. The first two scenes were bad enough (especially the CGI of a sleeping woman's bare breast being fondled), but perhaps necessary, but the final full blown rape scene was way too mean and misogynistic for my sensibilities. That scene didn't need to be there, and its inclusion makes it hard for me to recommend it to my more conservative friends...they would be angry at me if they watched this on my say-so and came upon these scenes unprepared, and they wouldn't buy or rent this movie if they knew these scenes were in it.
Problem number four is that the movie producers overreached themselves a bit with the invisible SFX...some of them, especially the transformation scenes, don't quite work. The figure struggling on the table is very plastic and inorganic-looking and doesn't convince. (Ironically, the first transformation scene, with the gorilla, works much better, possibly because our human eyes aren't as familiar with the textures and shapes of the simian physique). And here and there the articulation of the shoulders isn't quite right, or the swing of the hips. These deficiencies seem to be a common problem for 3D computer graphics of the human form, and they dog the animators here. Sometimes the animators get it, but sometimes they don't. I know it wasn't easy, but if they couldn't pull it off, they shouldn't have used it.
The last major problem was that the movie should have ended when Shue does her wonderful "base-stealing" slide into the elevator and hoses Bacon's character down with her home made flame thrower. That was a great moment, and should have been the climactic payoff for the film. Instead the movie staggered on for another 10-15 minutes in "Friday the 13th" territory with the Hollow Man popping back up from what should be mortal injuries again and again - who knew that naked invisible men could be so resilient?
So that's why only 5 out of 10. Too many problems and weakness to score this as a classic. But I do own this movie (bought it used) on VHS, and will buy it (used) on DVD if I find it cheap enough. Enjoy the eye candy and strong supporting performances and the many nice little touches here and there...if you are into that sort of thing.
So why only a score of 5 out of 10? Having admitted that the film is enjoyable if you don't think too critically about it, I am now going to think critically about it for a minute.
Problem number one is Elizabeth Shue. Don't get me wrong, I think she is a very attractive woman, and she can hold her own as an actress in most movies. But she is horribly miscast here as a "top level research scientist" (just as she was in "The Saint"). She may come across as more than a typical "dumb blonde", but she's a clothes-horse, pure and simple, and I can't believe for a moment that she could get a PhD in the physical sciences. She's far more believable fending off Bacon's advances than she is playing "Pentagon Barbie". (The other two supporting actresses, who are by no means ugly or haggard, but still have considerably less "Vogue" cover potential, are quite believable in their roles).
Problem number two is a certain weakness in the script regarding how and why Bacon's character goes around the bend. The movie implies and foreshadows all kinds of reasons: Bacon is already a creep with a God-complex; the serum which turns him invisible is affecting his brain's neurochemistry; being invisible confers addictive power and opportunity he doesn't want to give up; invisibility creates an alienation and isolation from society...etc. But the script doesn't really drive any of these points home, and just flits from idea to idea without doing real justice to any of them. A line of dialog or two is meant to imply a whole series of attitudes and moral values changing, ("It's easier to sin when you don't have to look at yourself in the mirror", etc.), and even a pro like Bacon can't manage it in the space he is given.
Problem number three is (are) the escalating misogyny and graphic completeness of the voyeurism, molestation, and finally rape scenes included in the movie to convince the viewer that the Hollow Man is becoming a human monster. The first two scenes were bad enough (especially the CGI of a sleeping woman's bare breast being fondled), but perhaps necessary, but the final full blown rape scene was way too mean and misogynistic for my sensibilities. That scene didn't need to be there, and its inclusion makes it hard for me to recommend it to my more conservative friends...they would be angry at me if they watched this on my say-so and came upon these scenes unprepared, and they wouldn't buy or rent this movie if they knew these scenes were in it.
Problem number four is that the movie producers overreached themselves a bit with the invisible SFX...some of them, especially the transformation scenes, don't quite work. The figure struggling on the table is very plastic and inorganic-looking and doesn't convince. (Ironically, the first transformation scene, with the gorilla, works much better, possibly because our human eyes aren't as familiar with the textures and shapes of the simian physique). And here and there the articulation of the shoulders isn't quite right, or the swing of the hips. These deficiencies seem to be a common problem for 3D computer graphics of the human form, and they dog the animators here. Sometimes the animators get it, but sometimes they don't. I know it wasn't easy, but if they couldn't pull it off, they shouldn't have used it.
The last major problem was that the movie should have ended when Shue does her wonderful "base-stealing" slide into the elevator and hoses Bacon's character down with her home made flame thrower. That was a great moment, and should have been the climactic payoff for the film. Instead the movie staggered on for another 10-15 minutes in "Friday the 13th" territory with the Hollow Man popping back up from what should be mortal injuries again and again - who knew that naked invisible men could be so resilient?
So that's why only 5 out of 10. Too many problems and weakness to score this as a classic. But I do own this movie (bought it used) on VHS, and will buy it (used) on DVD if I find it cheap enough. Enjoy the eye candy and strong supporting performances and the many nice little touches here and there...if you are into that sort of thing.
thrilling
kurtman-34 August 2000
The Hollow Man was a great film. It was scary and an on the edge of your seat thriller. Kevin did a great job as the scientist with a god complex and Elizabeth Shue also did a good job as the big breasted bimbo who had brains. Yes a bimbo! Most of the clothes she wears are tight and meant to show breasts. The beginning is good, with more character development in it then usual for this kind of film. While the end turns into a fantabulous horror film with blood galore. Mix in some female (some women) and male (Kevin Bacon) nudity we got ourselves a great film. The only bad thing was that the highly touted special F/X where Kevin turns invisible were only good not great and for the hype they should have been better. The movement of the character was good but it just didn't look real enough for me but don't worry about it because the rest of the special effects are very good and the action is excellent. I give this film 3* out of 4*.
Poster movie for the hollowness of most Hollywood offerings!
tessjon14 August 2000
"Hollow Man" can boast state of the art special effects, but as is the case with so many recent Hollywood films, its characters and plot have been grossly ignored. The film speaks to nothing endearing and noble in the human spirit. I left the theatre saying, "So what?" What a waste of talent, time, and money. Even a hollow man needs a heart.
Not Hollow At All
cstotlar-15 January 2014
I was pleasantly surprised by this film. The acting was quite adequate, the film score very imaginative and the special effects amazing (and gruesome). It copies "The Invisible Man", made half a century before, in having its protagonist lose his mind but unlike the other film, there is no humor to be found - nor any reason for it. It is a bit too apocalyptic near the end and I felt that the special effects turned it perhaps too much into a technical spectacle, but it made sense in general and brought me more pleasure than I had expected. Kevin Bacon was certainly up the his part and William Devane was frightening in his brief scene,
Curtis Stotlar
Curtis Stotlar
I can't tell you how bad this movie is! Well, maybe I can...
Prophet1-28 August 2000
This is, without a doubt, the WORST movie I have seen in a very long time. From the flat out bad plot, to the "horror movie stupidity" of the characters, this movie reeked, even worse, it had such promise...
I had high hopes for this movie originally - it could have been a great movie exploring what a real person would do if suddenly granted invisibility, and how it might slowly erode your morals since "Who's going to know?" The temptation would be great, and in the hands of Kevin Bacon, one of the most versitile actors in Hollywood, it would be a superb movie.
But "Hollow Man" disappoints. We never CARE about Sebastian, and he strikes us as the type of person who might off somebody who seriously got in the way of his progress ANYWAY. He is crass, cruel and egomaniacal, so his descent and fall is not a surprise; it's inevitable.
The plot is like a 22 minute "Twilight Zone" or "Tales From The Crypt" episode someone thought might be a good idea for a movie. No surprises, no twists, and so MANY slasher movie cliches it is sickening. You KNOW what will happen before it does. I hate it when a movie spends so much time (and money; the special effects are excellent, too bad they are wasted here) getting you to believe in the thin scientific premise surrounding the plot (which I have no problem with; they did a good job here, albiet briefly, and I'm prepared to suspend a little disbelief), and then ignore BASIC PHYSICS and totally and blatently destroy the disbelief they worked so hard to create...
Example - End of the movie. The insane invisible killer gets fried by Elisabeth Shue with an impromptu flamethrower. OK. Fine. THREE SECONDS LATER he is running after her full tilt. Apparently, invisibility grants super-healing. He is then hit FULL ON THE HEAD with a CROWBAR, and immediatly jumps up to attack our heroes while their backs are turned. Then, while all three main characters are each standing in THREE INCHES OF WATER he swings a crowbar into a high-voltage box, frying himself and turning himself semi-visible, while the others escape. Apparently, invisibility also hinders conductivity, otherwise all three would be dancing the electric boogaloo. Fast-forward - Sebastian is apparently unconcious. Heroes climbing to escape explosion (which should have fried them all, but thats just an action movie cliche as well: Flames licking at the heros feet while he climbs/runs/drives/jumps to safety.) Huge explosion. FROM THE WRECKAGE comes the semi-visible Sebastian?!?!?! Either he got caught in the explosion, and he should be dead, or he was on the elevator with them, and they would have seen him since he was SEMI-VISIBLE!!! ARGH!!!! I am prepared to suspend disbelief, but this is TOO MUCH!!! And he has the strength the tangle with the heroine after the MAJOR COOKING, CROWBAR TO THE HEAD AND THOUSANDS OF VOLTS OF ELECTRICITY!!!! Just ONE of these would be enough the make me say "now hold on,..." but ALL THREE!!! PLUS him crawling IMPOSSIBLY FROM THE TWISTED WRECKAGE OF THE ELEVATOR!!!
To make matters worse, Kevin Bacon and Elisabeth Shue are fine actors both. But to have this movie devolve into slasher movie stupidity is unconscionable. The cast acts well with what they are given, but this movie has NO redeeming qualities WHATSOEVER!
One of the top ten worst movies EVER. (except for the special effects, the SF guys should get an Oscar for this.)
I had high hopes for this movie originally - it could have been a great movie exploring what a real person would do if suddenly granted invisibility, and how it might slowly erode your morals since "Who's going to know?" The temptation would be great, and in the hands of Kevin Bacon, one of the most versitile actors in Hollywood, it would be a superb movie.
But "Hollow Man" disappoints. We never CARE about Sebastian, and he strikes us as the type of person who might off somebody who seriously got in the way of his progress ANYWAY. He is crass, cruel and egomaniacal, so his descent and fall is not a surprise; it's inevitable.
The plot is like a 22 minute "Twilight Zone" or "Tales From The Crypt" episode someone thought might be a good idea for a movie. No surprises, no twists, and so MANY slasher movie cliches it is sickening. You KNOW what will happen before it does. I hate it when a movie spends so much time (and money; the special effects are excellent, too bad they are wasted here) getting you to believe in the thin scientific premise surrounding the plot (which I have no problem with; they did a good job here, albiet briefly, and I'm prepared to suspend a little disbelief), and then ignore BASIC PHYSICS and totally and blatently destroy the disbelief they worked so hard to create...
Example - End of the movie. The insane invisible killer gets fried by Elisabeth Shue with an impromptu flamethrower. OK. Fine. THREE SECONDS LATER he is running after her full tilt. Apparently, invisibility grants super-healing. He is then hit FULL ON THE HEAD with a CROWBAR, and immediatly jumps up to attack our heroes while their backs are turned. Then, while all three main characters are each standing in THREE INCHES OF WATER he swings a crowbar into a high-voltage box, frying himself and turning himself semi-visible, while the others escape. Apparently, invisibility also hinders conductivity, otherwise all three would be dancing the electric boogaloo. Fast-forward - Sebastian is apparently unconcious. Heroes climbing to escape explosion (which should have fried them all, but thats just an action movie cliche as well: Flames licking at the heros feet while he climbs/runs/drives/jumps to safety.) Huge explosion. FROM THE WRECKAGE comes the semi-visible Sebastian?!?!?! Either he got caught in the explosion, and he should be dead, or he was on the elevator with them, and they would have seen him since he was SEMI-VISIBLE!!! ARGH!!!! I am prepared to suspend disbelief, but this is TOO MUCH!!! And he has the strength the tangle with the heroine after the MAJOR COOKING, CROWBAR TO THE HEAD AND THOUSANDS OF VOLTS OF ELECTRICITY!!!! Just ONE of these would be enough the make me say "now hold on,..." but ALL THREE!!! PLUS him crawling IMPOSSIBLY FROM THE TWISTED WRECKAGE OF THE ELEVATOR!!!
To make matters worse, Kevin Bacon and Elisabeth Shue are fine actors both. But to have this movie devolve into slasher movie stupidity is unconscionable. The cast acts well with what they are given, but this movie has NO redeeming qualities WHATSOEVER!
One of the top ten worst movies EVER. (except for the special effects, the SF guys should get an Oscar for this.)
Fast-paced and occasionally exciting, but ultimately disappointing.
Li-112 April 2003
** out of ****
I've seen Hollow Man twice now, the first time in theaters, where I had the distinct impression that I'd seen a fast-paced thriller that was nonetheless entirely disposable and unfulfilling. Seeing the film again, I had the exact same feeling. Hollow Man is a film of great potential, packed with terrific special effects and a surprisingly engaging cast (the exceptions being Josh Brolin and Elisabeth Shue). So when the movie goes to cliche hell in its final 1/3, you'll be very disappointed even though the action is still entertaining.
Kevin Bacon stars as Sebastian Caine, a scientist working with a diverse crew in an underground laboratory on a military project. The goal: to achieve the power of invisibility, as well as the ability to return to a visible state. Caine, being the egotistical hothead that he is, performs the procedure on himself, but finds he is unable to return to his human state. With Caine growing further and further mad, the rest of the crew try to find a way to revert him back to his normal state, not knowing Caine is beginning to prefer his invisibility and will do anything to keep it.
The first half-hour of Hollow Man is the best, when we're introduced to these wow-inducing, eye-popping visual effects. This is also the point where the story holds the most potential, before devolving into B-grade land. Now, most people seem to agree that the film would have worked a lot better if it had focused on Bacon brandishing his invisibility on the outside world, and there is a ten-minute segment where he does do this, but it's also arguably the film's worst part.
The reason? That's easy, it's because he rapes Rhona Mitra. Apparently, director Paul Verhoeven seemed very satisfied with just presenting this rape, as if though to make a statement about man's human nature and what we'd do if we didn't have to face up to the consequences. That's fine and all, I'm for a little depth here and there, but it disturbs me that he doesn't address Mitra's character further. Here's a woman who's been raped by an invisible man, and we're simply supposed to accept this scene and not wonder about the effect this will have on her psychological state (think about it this way, unless the military goes public with all the invisibility stuff, there's no way she wouldn't know if she'd be attacked again). This is where the movie truly goes awry.
The last half-hour is essentially Caine going around, knocking off all the lab workers, and while it's uninspired material, it's still rather exciting to watch, if only because Verhoeven is a skilled action director who really knows how to make us squirm and cringe at the sight of blood and guts. But by the time it's all over, though I found myself mildly entertained, there was still a bad taste in my mouth from the filmmakers' poor decision-making and routine route they chose for the film.
I've seen Hollow Man twice now, the first time in theaters, where I had the distinct impression that I'd seen a fast-paced thriller that was nonetheless entirely disposable and unfulfilling. Seeing the film again, I had the exact same feeling. Hollow Man is a film of great potential, packed with terrific special effects and a surprisingly engaging cast (the exceptions being Josh Brolin and Elisabeth Shue). So when the movie goes to cliche hell in its final 1/3, you'll be very disappointed even though the action is still entertaining.
Kevin Bacon stars as Sebastian Caine, a scientist working with a diverse crew in an underground laboratory on a military project. The goal: to achieve the power of invisibility, as well as the ability to return to a visible state. Caine, being the egotistical hothead that he is, performs the procedure on himself, but finds he is unable to return to his human state. With Caine growing further and further mad, the rest of the crew try to find a way to revert him back to his normal state, not knowing Caine is beginning to prefer his invisibility and will do anything to keep it.
The first half-hour of Hollow Man is the best, when we're introduced to these wow-inducing, eye-popping visual effects. This is also the point where the story holds the most potential, before devolving into B-grade land. Now, most people seem to agree that the film would have worked a lot better if it had focused on Bacon brandishing his invisibility on the outside world, and there is a ten-minute segment where he does do this, but it's also arguably the film's worst part.
The reason? That's easy, it's because he rapes Rhona Mitra. Apparently, director Paul Verhoeven seemed very satisfied with just presenting this rape, as if though to make a statement about man's human nature and what we'd do if we didn't have to face up to the consequences. That's fine and all, I'm for a little depth here and there, but it disturbs me that he doesn't address Mitra's character further. Here's a woman who's been raped by an invisible man, and we're simply supposed to accept this scene and not wonder about the effect this will have on her psychological state (think about it this way, unless the military goes public with all the invisibility stuff, there's no way she wouldn't know if she'd be attacked again). This is where the movie truly goes awry.
The last half-hour is essentially Caine going around, knocking off all the lab workers, and while it's uninspired material, it's still rather exciting to watch, if only because Verhoeven is a skilled action director who really knows how to make us squirm and cringe at the sight of blood and guts. But by the time it's all over, though I found myself mildly entertained, there was still a bad taste in my mouth from the filmmakers' poor decision-making and routine route they chose for the film.
Invisible Man Verhoeven Bloodbath?
chiumt13 June 2020
Fine for a light, lazy day, albeit unremarkable and flawed
I_Ailurophile10 March 2023
His films range from phenomenal, to so-so, to - more rarely - poor, but one can almost always trust Paul Verhoeven to do something interesting, even if it doesn't quite turn out. I've been slightly reluctant to watch 'Hollow man' ever since it was released just because the word of mouth of which I'd caught wind wasn't especially strong. Having more recently watched Universal's iconic 1933 adaptation of 'The invisible man,' and dearly loved it, did nothing to curry any additional favor for this 2000 title. It's been high time for me to watch it for myself, however, and here we are. Before even ten minutes have passed I find myself forming a divided opinion: on the one hand, reading about the hard work put into producing all the effects is decidedly encouraging, and shows that this wasn't just a proverbial "dog and pony show"; on the other hand, we're introduced to snappy songs on the soundtrack, extra "cool" and "slick" visuals and presentation, and marginally accelerated pacing that's more than a little overbearing. One can't help but worry from the outset that 'Hollow man' is going to be more style than substance. Ultimately I do like this, and think it's worthwhile, but I understand why it was met with mixed reception, and it's definitely less than perfect.
I don't know if it's specifically the collaboration with cinematographer Jost Vacano or some other facet, but it's noteworthy that this really does look like it's cut from the same cloth as the filmmaker's previous outing, 'Starship troopers.' It doesn't feel like it, though, in various ways, not least of all in that the latter was superficially plainspoken and over the top, but was saturated through and through with underhanded wit and nuance that was cloaked by the surface appearance. This title, on the other hand, doesn't particularly give us more than meets the eye. It is mostly a straightforward sci-fi thriller, with tinges of horror on the edges. There are crumbs of a psychological element to the proceedings, as there were in the 1933 picture and H. G. Wells' original novel, but they are emphatically less pronounced here - or in the very least, emphatically less successful. A major component of the narrative is supposedly the deterioration of the invisible subject's psyche, yet I feel like we don't really get that in this case; Sebastian is already written as such an egotistical, selfish, crude, and rather cruel person that there's no significant contrast, no significant progression. The tale could have been an exploration of the psychological effects of the experiment, and it does play with that notion to some extent, but not with what feels like nearly the full potential.
Hand in hand with how Sebastian is written, other ideas that this plays with are mostly accentuation, and amplification, of the awful behavior the protagonist already demonstrates. Thus, content warnings are necessary for animal cruelty, sexual assault, and - part and parcel as well with the more overcooked sensibilities of the early 2000s - rather gratuitous nudity. Speaking of overcooked, as the last act rolls around the writing becomes so forthright (in dialogue, characterizations, and scene writing alike) as to become a little tawdrily blunt; moreover, setting aside a handful of critical details or intermittent dashes of cleverness, the brunt of this genre flick is very familiar and nothing especially remarkable. All this is the bad news, making the picture less interesting, more difficult to engage with, less worth our engagement, and in some ways kind of tiresome.
On the other hand, in every other capacity it's safe to say 'Hollow man' is very well made. The cast give swell performances all around, maybe even a bit impressive since in some select instances they're not necessarily acting in earnest reaction to anything. Likewise, between Verhoeven's orchestration of shots and scenes and Vacano's photography, it's clear that great pains were taken to fashion the film around the conceit that an invisible character was present on the set, and toying with various props, instead of just relying on digital fabrication of effects out of thin air. The endeavor certainly paid off in that regard. To that point, congratulations are surely in order for the visual artists who operated behind the scenes here, because even at their most over the top (primarily transformation sequences, and the climax), every such contribution is superb. From more ordinary tidbits like blood, explosions, and wrecked set pieces, all the way through to depictions of unseen Sebastian and his ill doings, the teams that concocted the visual wonderland of this feature are undeniably the real stars. I may not agree with every single choice, but frankly, they knocked it out of the park.
Dabbling with what is broadly a straightforward thriller, Verhoeven's direction is sharp and careful, helping the climax to attain genuine thrillers that the movie may have lacked elsewhere. The sets are splendid, and in all other regards it's as solid as one would hope contemporary films to be. Truthfully, more so than not I think this Y2K production is fairly good, reasonably enjoyable, modestly worthwhile. Would that the screenplay did something more unique and actively absorbing than "genre thriller," but I suppose there's no rule that every picture has to be positively brimming with bedazzlement. My opinion wavered throughout, and at length I wonder if I'm not being too kind as it is, but I think what it comes down to is that so long as you're not looking for a revelation, this will suitably fit the bill for entertainment. It's not everything it could have been, and you don't need to go out of your way for it, but for something light (if violent) that you don't particularly need (or sometimes want) to engage with, this is decent for a lazy day. Kept aloft primarily by excellent effects work and a more exciting climax, 'Hollow man' would have benefited from a more compelling screenplay above all else, but there are definitely worse ways to spend your time.
I don't know if it's specifically the collaboration with cinematographer Jost Vacano or some other facet, but it's noteworthy that this really does look like it's cut from the same cloth as the filmmaker's previous outing, 'Starship troopers.' It doesn't feel like it, though, in various ways, not least of all in that the latter was superficially plainspoken and over the top, but was saturated through and through with underhanded wit and nuance that was cloaked by the surface appearance. This title, on the other hand, doesn't particularly give us more than meets the eye. It is mostly a straightforward sci-fi thriller, with tinges of horror on the edges. There are crumbs of a psychological element to the proceedings, as there were in the 1933 picture and H. G. Wells' original novel, but they are emphatically less pronounced here - or in the very least, emphatically less successful. A major component of the narrative is supposedly the deterioration of the invisible subject's psyche, yet I feel like we don't really get that in this case; Sebastian is already written as such an egotistical, selfish, crude, and rather cruel person that there's no significant contrast, no significant progression. The tale could have been an exploration of the psychological effects of the experiment, and it does play with that notion to some extent, but not with what feels like nearly the full potential.
Hand in hand with how Sebastian is written, other ideas that this plays with are mostly accentuation, and amplification, of the awful behavior the protagonist already demonstrates. Thus, content warnings are necessary for animal cruelty, sexual assault, and - part and parcel as well with the more overcooked sensibilities of the early 2000s - rather gratuitous nudity. Speaking of overcooked, as the last act rolls around the writing becomes so forthright (in dialogue, characterizations, and scene writing alike) as to become a little tawdrily blunt; moreover, setting aside a handful of critical details or intermittent dashes of cleverness, the brunt of this genre flick is very familiar and nothing especially remarkable. All this is the bad news, making the picture less interesting, more difficult to engage with, less worth our engagement, and in some ways kind of tiresome.
On the other hand, in every other capacity it's safe to say 'Hollow man' is very well made. The cast give swell performances all around, maybe even a bit impressive since in some select instances they're not necessarily acting in earnest reaction to anything. Likewise, between Verhoeven's orchestration of shots and scenes and Vacano's photography, it's clear that great pains were taken to fashion the film around the conceit that an invisible character was present on the set, and toying with various props, instead of just relying on digital fabrication of effects out of thin air. The endeavor certainly paid off in that regard. To that point, congratulations are surely in order for the visual artists who operated behind the scenes here, because even at their most over the top (primarily transformation sequences, and the climax), every such contribution is superb. From more ordinary tidbits like blood, explosions, and wrecked set pieces, all the way through to depictions of unseen Sebastian and his ill doings, the teams that concocted the visual wonderland of this feature are undeniably the real stars. I may not agree with every single choice, but frankly, they knocked it out of the park.
Dabbling with what is broadly a straightforward thriller, Verhoeven's direction is sharp and careful, helping the climax to attain genuine thrillers that the movie may have lacked elsewhere. The sets are splendid, and in all other regards it's as solid as one would hope contemporary films to be. Truthfully, more so than not I think this Y2K production is fairly good, reasonably enjoyable, modestly worthwhile. Would that the screenplay did something more unique and actively absorbing than "genre thriller," but I suppose there's no rule that every picture has to be positively brimming with bedazzlement. My opinion wavered throughout, and at length I wonder if I'm not being too kind as it is, but I think what it comes down to is that so long as you're not looking for a revelation, this will suitably fit the bill for entertainment. It's not everything it could have been, and you don't need to go out of your way for it, but for something light (if violent) that you don't particularly need (or sometimes want) to engage with, this is decent for a lazy day. Kept aloft primarily by excellent effects work and a more exciting climax, 'Hollow man' would have benefited from a more compelling screenplay above all else, but there are definitely worse ways to spend your time.
Absolutely awful
jenniferlisabrowne11 April 2020
I will say, the CGI for its tome is absolutely fantastic. However, it is just full of sexual abuse, rape and misogyny. Absolutely awful the treatment of women in this film, and it really begs the question as to the directors & screen writers feelings towards women. Absolutely disgraceful.
Hollow Man
CinemaSerf28 August 2023
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.
Pointlessly sick and demented.
dave-64517 August 2000
The first thirty minutes keeps your interest as dazzling special effects highlight an intriguing new twist to a common premise. But, as soon as Kevin Bacon disappears, so does the interest. The movie quickly falls apart, transforming into a stinking heap of senseless and disturbing violence and all-too-predictable cat-and-mouse chases. My girlfriend and I left the theater in shock; amazed at how easily our twelve dollars disappeared.
Kevin Bacon flopped in this one...
cskoenig-217 February 2001
This picture was the worst that I've seen this year. The graphics were good yes, and that's the only reason on why I gave it a "1" rating. If it weren't for the graphics, I would have tried to give it a zero. This movie reflects what I call "pigism." Yes, if we were invisible we would play tricks on people, maybe sneak-a-peak here and there but I'm sure the normal person would not commit murder or rape. The "Kevin Bacon Game" stops short of this one folks; the plot sucks and the security that the pentagon adheres to in this movie is horses**t. Thumbs down, please don't waste your time.
Clay S. Koenig
Clay S. Koenig
A movie that was ahead of its time when it came out nearly 20 years ago
justin-fencsak25 June 2020
When I saw the trailers for this movie back in early 2000, i was curious to see how it would be vs The Invisible Man starring Claude Rains as well as its remakes including the most recent one starring Elisabeth Moss as the girlfriend of the invisble man played by Oliver Jackson Cohen that came out weeks before the pandemic. When I indeed saw the movie at what is now AMC Clifton Commons on opening weekend, I was happy to enjoy this movie, the last good one that Paul Verhoeven made before he went back to smaller movies. It was nominated for best visual effects before losing out to Gladiator, which was also a good movie. The cast is excellent and the effects are good and the music is great. The director's cut bluray has most of the deleted scenes seen on the special edition dvd from 2000 remastered in 1080p. A sequel was made without the director's approval and was blasted by fans.
A decent little film
TheLittleSongbird21 August 2011
I watched Hollow Man not expecting much but while it was flawed the film was decent. The story is predictable despite a very interesting theme complete with a rather abrupt ending, the characters are hollow particularly Elisabeth Shue's character and the script is on the weak and cheesy side. However, visually it is fantastic with the photography crisp and the effects spot on and the music from master Jerry Goldsmith is very atmospheric. A lot of scenes are genuinely suspenseful and taut and the action is well choreographed. The acting is mostly good, though I thought Shue tries a little too hard with her shallow character, with Kevin Bacon particularly impressive. All in all, decent. 7/10 Bethany Cox
Hollow Man, Hollow Plot.
phil.minto19 October 2000
No, I did not really like this, but I better be a bit more descriptive.
Special effects were brilliant, I must say. You can hardly (I say 'hardly') see the joins. It took some art to set up the actual props to float in mid air when there really isn't anyone there. Even more art (combined with a tad of computer power, of course) to put in the background/inside of the mask when they "blue-screened" someone or something out of the shot.
I wish they'd have a better plot, however. There are problems of rational science, naturally. Invisibility by injection is a no-no. Invisible syringe, anyone? If it's keyed to biological processes, how do teeth bones and hair get affected in such a short time-frame. I've no problem with suspending my disbelief a bit as far as that goes, however, and again with all the baggage that comes with it. (Seeing is hard with eyes that don't interact with light.)
Really, though, the movie aims too low. It would be great Manga-type animation (blood'n'guts department) if it weren't for the fact you'd lose all the spectacular visuals you get from this 'live' action. I think a more thought-provoking film could have been made with the same effects. How about a film where the invisible guy is the victim? Been done before, I know, but not with these effects available...
Not that it matters, but this movie also gave me sore feet, 'cos I missed the last train and had to walk home in the dark. Luckily, in the dark, invisibility isn't such a great advantage. :)
Special effects were brilliant, I must say. You can hardly (I say 'hardly') see the joins. It took some art to set up the actual props to float in mid air when there really isn't anyone there. Even more art (combined with a tad of computer power, of course) to put in the background/inside of the mask when they "blue-screened" someone or something out of the shot.
I wish they'd have a better plot, however. There are problems of rational science, naturally. Invisibility by injection is a no-no. Invisible syringe, anyone? If it's keyed to biological processes, how do teeth bones and hair get affected in such a short time-frame. I've no problem with suspending my disbelief a bit as far as that goes, however, and again with all the baggage that comes with it. (Seeing is hard with eyes that don't interact with light.)
Really, though, the movie aims too low. It would be great Manga-type animation (blood'n'guts department) if it weren't for the fact you'd lose all the spectacular visuals you get from this 'live' action. I think a more thought-provoking film could have been made with the same effects. How about a film where the invisible guy is the victim? Been done before, I know, but not with these effects available...
Not that it matters, but this movie also gave me sore feet, 'cos I missed the last train and had to walk home in the dark. Luckily, in the dark, invisibility isn't such a great advantage. :)
Poor Wells
tedg19 December 2000
Making a film is about abstracting and consolidating all the elements at your disposal around a single vision, then ruthlessly exploiting that vision to achieve what you want. In film that vision has to be cinematic above all -in general successful filmmakers develop a single strategy to deliver a well crafted film, and some intelligent directors try to master several strategies.
All too often, the strategy is to rely on the simplest of cinematic principles, the visual. So we get explosions with lots of plasma, plus whatever the latest technology can deliver. In `The Perfect Storm' it was CG water; here it is the advance toward CG humans (in two scenes at the beginning and the climax at the end). It is possible to use these as tools to create a tone that resonates, but all to often that resonance never appears.
`Star Wars' creates a unique tone, and is a success despite bad acting and a hokey story. `Hollow Man' doesn't, so is instead hobbled by its actors and writer. Verhoven has had too many tries at this and too many failures. Only `Basic Instinct' instinct keeps him alive in Hollywood - the tone there was built around simple misogynism, and thankfully there's only so far one can go with that.
`Hollow Man' is a particularly troubling as the H G Wells story itself successfully constructs a tone that is pretty disturbing and memorable. Effects and a competent vision could have built on that to produce one of the best films of all time. Bacon isn't great as actors go, but he is one of the best when it comes to understanding this notion of collaborative tone and contributing to its ruthless progress.
No more Verhoven for me.
All too often, the strategy is to rely on the simplest of cinematic principles, the visual. So we get explosions with lots of plasma, plus whatever the latest technology can deliver. In `The Perfect Storm' it was CG water; here it is the advance toward CG humans (in two scenes at the beginning and the climax at the end). It is possible to use these as tools to create a tone that resonates, but all to often that resonance never appears.
`Star Wars' creates a unique tone, and is a success despite bad acting and a hokey story. `Hollow Man' doesn't, so is instead hobbled by its actors and writer. Verhoven has had too many tries at this and too many failures. Only `Basic Instinct' instinct keeps him alive in Hollywood - the tone there was built around simple misogynism, and thankfully there's only so far one can go with that.
`Hollow Man' is a particularly troubling as the H G Wells story itself successfully constructs a tone that is pretty disturbing and memorable. Effects and a competent vision could have built on that to produce one of the best films of all time. Bacon isn't great as actors go, but he is one of the best when it comes to understanding this notion of collaborative tone and contributing to its ruthless progress.
No more Verhoven for me.
An invisible man loses control
stefanozucchelli17 July 2022
Film not excellent and with some special effects not perfectly aged but that works overall.
This movie has received a lot of negative reviews but I liked it even though I recognize the flaws it has. The first is that it looks more like an action movie than a horror movie, the second is that the behaviors of some characters in some situations don't make much sense.
This movie has received a lot of negative reviews but I liked it even though I recognize the flaws it has. The first is that it looks more like an action movie than a horror movie, the second is that the behaviors of some characters in some situations don't make much sense.
Good entertainment.
Hey_Sweden7 June 2012
The story of The Invisible Man is updated for the 21st century in this tale of research scientists who've managed to turn animals invisible and then bring them back, and the arrogant egomaniac in charge, Sebastian Caine (Kevin Bacon). He's ready to start testing the process on people, and offers himself up as the guinea pig. Trouble arises when they can't make him visible again, and he becomes utterly frustrated, then gleeful when he realizes the power he holds. So it's then a very short trip into psycho territory for this genius, who begins to terrorize various unlucky individuals, including his own team. The movie is certainly not without its flaws, as eventually it does turn pretty routine, a high tech, sci-fi slasher with an overblown, Hollywood style climax, characters who start acting rather dumb, and, to top it all off, a villain whose virtual indestructibility makes him akin to a typical horror movie antagonist. Still, it's extremely well made technically, with director Paul Verhoeven in fine form, and does have a substantially nasty edge that may amuse some fans of the genre. Even at an hour and 53 minutes, it is paced fairly well, and gets a lot of mileage from Bacon's fun villainous portrayal. Elisabeth Shue and Josh Brolin also do fairly well as the co-leads trying to keep their romance secret, knowing well how ugly Caine's reaction would be to the truth. The main reason to see this movie are the eye popping special effects, especially as we see characters like Caine and the gorilla go through stages of visibility. Even with its flaws, the movie is undeniably exciting and far from boring. Followed by a direct to DVD sequel six years later. Seven out of 10.
A total waste of time.
Twisted Veracity28 October 2001
Shortly after seeing this film I questioned the mental competence of every actor and actress that accepted a role. Elizabeth Shue is a commendable actress, why would she embrace such an overrated opportunity? I must give credit where credit is due, though. Some moments in the movie were unpredictable and rather transfixing, but they hardly made up for the scathing perverse tendencies of Kevin Bacon's character, Sebastian Caine. I wouldn't recommend this movie to anyone, man or woman, that has any form of self-respect to account for.
TOP-TIER VISUAL EFFECTS
jeromesgabilo20 March 2023
Kevin Bacon's sinister character and its development arc was predictable but very effective in portraying a self-absorbed and bad-ass antagonist. The interesting thing about that is that it also felt loke he was the protagonist as well. The director really captured the mood and intensity in an otherwise mediocre cast. The writing and pacing was good albeit nothing special about it. Elisabeth Shue's performance was of the perfect female movie protagonist. But the best thing about this sci-fi thriller was its top-tier visual effects which I think was a bit ahead of its time. It was flawless and made with such accuracy and quality which I enjoyed very much.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
