GameSpot | GameFAQs | SportsGamer | Metacritic | MP3.com | TV.com
 |
|
|||||
|
 |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Upcoming Release Calendar
63
11th Hour, The Stars indicate the most critically-acclaimed movies. |
Hollow Man
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
|
||||||||||||
MPAA RATING: R for violence, nudity, vulgarity, animal abuse
Starring Steve Altes, Kevin Bacon, Josh Brolin, William Devane, and Elizabeth Shue
A government scientist (Bacon) discovers how to make people invisible. After a freak accident that makes him slowly disappear, he begins to go insane and seeks revenge on the other scientists on the project.
| GENRE(S): | Suspense/Thriller |
| WRITTEN BY: |
Gary Scott Thompson (story)
Andrew W. Marlowe (also story) |
| DIRECTED BY: | Paul Verhoeven |
| RELEASE DATE: |
DVD: January 2, 2001 Video: January 2, 2001 Theatrical: August 4, 2000 |
| RUNNING TIME: | 112 minutes, Color |
| ORIGIN: | USA |
All critic scores are converted to a 100-point scale. If a critic does not indicate a score, we assign a score based on the general impression given by the text of the review. Learn more...
The average user rating for this movie is 5.1 (out of 10) based on 27 User Votes
Note: User votes are NOT included in the Metascore calculation.
Dizzle Fizzle gave it a10:
The funniest comedy of the year, if not the decade. Everything including the story, acting, and sheer genius by the director just makes me want to pee my pants. Obviously this movie was not meant to be serious, and most of the critics did not realize this. There is no way that anyone could be stupid enough to make a movie like this and have it actually be a suspenseful thriller. That's just crazy. Keep up the good work Paul Verhoeven, I look forward to other comedies coming out directed by you.
James T. gave it a2:
This movie has all the bad elements of a B rated horror flick. However it's not snakes on a plane bad, more like snakes in a pit of boringness. It doesn't even have the guilty sense of bad movie watching pleasure. Neophytes who like bad movies would really have to dig deep to enjoy this one.
Big K. gave it a4:
I've seen better and worse films with Mr Bacon. This film is simply another cliched foray into the sci/fi/horror type flick. Truly ordinary in the way it ends with the lacklustre defeat of the (by that stage) poorly computer generated Bacon. (in fact he looks like he might actually have been made out of bacon).
[Anonymous] gave it a5:
Invisibility effects were cool, but after Sebastian's transformation, there's nothing but dawdling around until he finally goes insane.
[Anonymous] gave it a10:
This movie is da bomb.
raVen gave it a 1:
Most people seem to agree that this movie's most fatal flaw was its assumption about human nature - but I disagree. Actually, its most towering failure is that it sabotaged the one element that SHOULD have been its saving grace: science. Science was reponsible for the special effects, and for the story itself, really. The hang-up is that the movie makers didn't have to earn this idea - it was already out there, and so they apparently felt no need to think about it much. And so, once Kevin Bacon is made invisible, any sense of reality is abandoned. Enter: THE PLOT ELEMENT THAT DESTROYED THIS MOVIE.... Sunglasses. There is much made about the fact that Bacon's eyelids are invisible and thus transparent. The big black sunglasses are brought out to prevent our Kevin from being blinded. What??? Using this (invisible = transparent) formula, would he not be blinded anyway - his corneas, retinas, and such being similarly transparent? They couldn't function if light passes right through them. Period. Not to mention what might be happening to the rest of Bacon's bacon, internal organs exposed to light and whatever other rays that wish to pass through transparent human flesh. A better idea would have been to say that invisibility could be achieved through an ultra-chameleon-like biology, not through pane-of-glass transparency. Because in a funny way, Harry Potter's invisibility cape makes a lot more sense. Better Scifi flicks like Jurassic Park have succeeded as great cinema despite being MOSTLY fiction, because once they ask the big "what if," they leave it alone and don't screw it up with sunglasses. It's like showing the monster's zipper on purpose. Doy.
Alex G. gave it a 3:
Pretty poor movie, but with good special effects. I think Paul Verhoeven is a dirty old man with a sick mind who got a little too horny when making this movie. To "Jimmy H" who said, "Great action", (fair enough) and "too many talking scens", (I think he means 'scenes') what exactly do you mean by "too many talking scenes"? You see Jimbo actors talk in movies to show us charicterisation, to further the plot, and make us think etc, etc. Basically their are "too many 'intellectually challenged' people like yourself out there" for my liking. Oh and you should tone down your use of apostrophe's. Good man.
 |
Return to top of page |  |
