the audience applauded

Fanciful, disturbing, and wildly original, it announces the arrival of a fresh, bold voice in American cinema.

an ambitious but ultimately ineffective debut endeavor.

The film may be flawed, but its message is not.

Had this film been released a year later, the Production Code would have considerably tamed the ferocity of this film's anti-hero and probably have obscured references to the fact that he spends most of the film naked (which would have cramped his ability to ride a bicycle, while his ability to run rings round people would have been considerably trickier barefoot).Stylishly photographed and designed, the film moves at a fine old lick while the special effects emphasise the novelty and comic possibilities of the story, but the brutal way Griffin kills seemingly just for the hell of it sits rather uneasily with the whimsical tone of much of the rest of the film, and more accurately reflects the bleakness and cruelty of H.G.Wells' original novel.

Juxtaposed with spectacular special-effects and a well driven plot, Claude Reins' performance as the Invisible Man (Dr Jack Griffin), will make this film go down in history as a horror classic! It's clear-cut plot is perfect, with great performances from Claude Reins and Gloria Stuart (Flora Cranley). The visual effects are absolutely stunning, casting the audience speechless. Such detail is paid to these effects as they even accentuate the footprints in the snow! It is definitely a must-see on the visual effects alone! No scene is unimportant; a beautiful scene being held in the first moments of the film, with a man, wrapped in bandages, walking through the snow. Why is this important? Because immediately the audience is thinking: Did he get injured? Or: Was this an accident? Or (which will be the first thought) : Is he this so-called Invisible Man? It is a dark movie, with terrorism and greed, but, there are lighter moments showing us new perspectives to the characters; love relationships, and even sympathy. The script is filled with fantastic quotes - "We'll begin with a reign of terror, a few murders here and there, murders of great men, murders of little men - well, just to show we make no distinction. I might even wreck a train or two... just these fingers around a signalman's throat, that's all." - which even relate to the world of today. This quote resonated to me as an unforgettable line. The fact that he does not distinguish between "murders of great men" and "murders of little men" express more about this character, showing us Dr Griffin's mentality that their deaths are equal. We wish we were born equal, but that now seems as an almost naive mentality. As mentioned earlier, though, the script only seems to improve every moment we see Claude Reins speak (well... don't see, technically) unleashing sympathy and horror, all in the space of a single scene.

I'm a big fan of H. G. Wells' books, and when I saw that they made a film based on The Invisible Man I got excited. The Invisible Man is an amazing book, and I wanted to see if the movie was as good as the book. It wasn't, but it still is a great film.First of all: the special effects (and especially the invisibility) is mind-blowing. Griffin actually ís invisible, and no matter how good you look, you don't see some lines of an actual body. Nowadays it ain't special anymore, but this is 1933! When I finished the movie, I checked how they did it and it turned out that they used the technique that's now with a green screen. But in 1933 that method wasn't common. Points for that at least!The acting is different per character. The acting of Claude Rains (Griffin/Invisible Man) is quite good. In modern terms it is average, so that is quite good in 1933. However, the acting of Una O'Connor (Jenny Hall) is typical 1930-style: bad over-overacting. In this movie that's quite funny actually. Gloria Stuart (Flora Cranley) acts just bad, but whatever. The rest of the cast acts not quite bad, but also not great.At last the story. James Whale changed some things for the movie, which can be understood. Wells' books are quite hard to film, because a lot of his books contain talking about the science behind the subject, in this case invisibility. Also Whale made Griffin a little bit more human; in the book Griffin has barely any emotions. In this movie Griffin is a lot more dangerous, but his romance makes him more human to the audience. I like that feature. Furthermore, the story is not too slow and not too fast, Whale found a great balance between drama and action. I think this movie is a lot more fun if you've read the book. But even if you haven't read the book, just admire the amazing looking special effects and enjoy the terrifying deeds of The Invisible Man. If you think all the movies from before 1940 are too slow for you, this movie proves you wrong. I give this movie 8,5/10. A must-see.

I just seen this movie for the first time and I thought it as really good The movie was very funny couldn't stop laughingThe old lady that kept in screaming was funny at first but as the movie goes that dose get a bit annoyingI also felt that There were some scenes that felt forced at time, when felt liked I was watching stage show I did find it very odd and funny but I don't understand How the news made a paper before body was moved from the bar I really liked fest of the movie As it flowed really wellMost of acting was really good at time I going to give this movie 7 out of 10