Avis des utilisateurs

Lost interest fairly early on. Only got to the end as the wife decided we should stick it out. It is like watching a 6th form school play in acting and dialogue. Dig out the 1933 film which is far, far better.

If you are a fan of "Invisible man" movies, if you are expecting some fun special effects, and new twists,, dont bother here.

It is akin to a stage play. 3 actors. 2 sets. 2 dimensional characters.

If you want to watch a movie for the sake of seeing someones art, ok go ahead.

Nothing new, nothing flashy. adequate directing and production.

Sorry but I feel like I wasted my time. I think the average person would find it boring.

MAYBE, just MAYBE if you have NEVER even heard of the invisible man book or related movies, you MIGHT find it worth your time.

Sorry to be a Debbie Downer.

Watched this by mistake thinking it was the 2020 Invisible Man and thought I'd see it through to the end. Writing this review so others done waste a tad over an hour of their lives. I won't discuss the negatives because I wouldn't know where to start.

I thought this was the movie Invisible Man with Elizabeth Moss...this is the worst movie ive ever seen..kept watching for Elizabeth Moss to appear

Some of the worst acting I have ever seen. Sarah Navratil takes first place here, followed closely by her boyfriend. The part of Griffin was tolerable. I accidentally watched this one instead of the 2020 version. What an awful mistake to make!

Like most people, I accidentally watched this one instead of the 2020 one that supposedly has Johnny Depp in it. I unfortunately watched it all the way through. The end was the most confusing, I just kept laughing. What was the budget for this film? I just wasted a little over an hour of my life. It doesn't even look like it was made 3 years ago! Please, don't watch this.

In a day when we are used to seeing movie plots move right along, this one gets stuck and crawls along. Would not advise watching.

Saw it by mistake , was looking for the 2020 film but found the story line gripping and the acting was great ! don't know the reason for the bad reviews here

Contrary to other reviews I found this movie to be very good. Special effects are at a minimum and is more concerned with the story line. I think reviews were from ones expecting big special effects and did not bother to follow the story. Sarah Navratil did a great job playing Heather.

This is an interesting loose adaptation of H.G. Wells's "The Invisible Man" with the feel of a theatrical play - actually the script could be adapted for a play with little work. Apparently filmed mostly on location at or around Stanford University, with a minimalist cast of 4 actors. Also very obviously done on a minimal budget; nevertheless the look is "modest" rather than "cheap" in my view. The cinematography is very good.

Besides the overall theme of a scientist named Griffin researching invisibility and testing it on himself, the script has little in common with the original book. Rather - and again like a play - it focuses on the interactions between the main characters, in particular Griffin himself and his assistant, Faith, This is a film focused on actors and dialogue rather than action or special effects, which I see as a positive but obviously many will disagree.

The two main actors - Jonathan Le Billon and Sarah Navratil - are not exactly household names but they are experienced actors, and I thought they were pretty good. In particular, Le Billion plays Griffin as a sort of stereotypical awkward and tormented scientist in a way that is convincing. Sometimes I think he stepped slightly into a caricature of the stereotype but I think that was what the script was asking for. Sarah Navratil, a very attractive actress, did manage to persuade me that her character, Faith, was actually attracted to Griffin (which seemed unlikely at first) and there was real chemistry between the actors. Far less convincing was the notion that she was having a serious relationship with the university professor Steven, played by T J Sloan. His role is "the girl's current douche boyfriend", a guy who you are supposed to dislike, but it never became convincing to me that Faith would seriously date him in the first place. However, although he is an unpleasant and annoying character, he is not a true "villain" and so is a more complex character than one could have expected.

The plot and its two or three subplots are not really that interesting in my opinion. But Billion's and Navratil's acting kept me interested from start to finish,

If you're a Science Geek, a fan of HG Wells, A fan of the book, or a fan of the 1933 version with Claude Raines, this movie will hit the mark. Not much special effects. The science that is used is supported by real Physics and convincing that theoretical invisibility could indeed be possible someday. My guess is that the negative reviews here are people expecting to be wowed by SFX or a complex storyline with mystery. You'll find none of that here. But the acting is decent and the production, while low budget, isn't obviously so. It's available on Amazon Prime if anyone needs to find it.

Well done. The passion and heart of this project are evident. These people clearly gathered together to CREATE ART and what a gift to enjoy the fruits of their labors. Highly Recommend.

This movie as great. I found all the actors convincing in their roles, and I felt the script created a fun, new and fresh take on the invisible man from H.G. Wells. The practical effects were spot on, showing that it doesn't take a big budget to create the illusion of invisibility.