Stometer Save your money for something good and enjoyable

HeadlinesExotic Boring

TaryBiggBall It was OK. I don't see why everyone loves it so much. It wasn't very smart or deep or well-directed.

Paynbob It’s fine. It's literally the definition of a fine movie. You’ve seen it before, you know every beat and outcome before the characters even do. Only question is how much escapism you’re looking for.

MartinHafer I wonder why this film has a 6.0 rating on IMDb. Is it possible people saw this bad film and actually thought it was good?! The world is a strange place, indeed.Now I started watching this film strongly predisposed to liking it. After all, I adore the Universal horror films of the 30s and 40s and the Invisible Man series is among the best. Plus, the idea of the Allies using the invisibility formula to infiltrate Nazi territory to do some spying is an inspired plot idea. Yet, almost miraculously, the Universal folks produced a very bad film.Most of the problem is that unlike most other horror films of the time, this one was very often played for laughs. Considering that the guy is supposed to get important information and get out, his sticking around to play tricks on the incredibly stupid Nazis was really dumb--and not in a good way! Plus, after a while, it was obvious that there was an invisible guy running about--talk about a great way to maintain your cover! Additionally, instead of the usual conniving and evil Nazis like you'd see in an American wartime propaganda film, here they are complete morons--almost like what you'd see in a Three Stooges film. If it were a Stooges film that would be great...but not in a horror film. Making it a straight drama would have improved the film tremendously.Additionally, it's obvious Universal simply didn't care when they made this film. Even for a B-movie, it is cheap and has a slapped together look. The models used for airplanes for the film were pathetically unrealistic and it was obvious they were bad models. Also, having Peter Lorre (whose heritage in reality was German) playing a Japanese man was ridiculous. In fact, it wasn't until later in the film that you even realized he was supposed to be Japanese! Now I understand that Lorre played the lead in the Mr. Moto films (where he was supposed to be Japanese), but here he didn't even try to look or sound Asian. Mantan Moreland would have been just as fitting an actor to play this role. Finally, throw in an unimportant and ridiculous love story that comes out of no where and you have the ingredients for a truly awful film.Exceptionally poor writing, indifferent direction and actors who couldn't have possibly made this material work and you have INVISIBLE AGENT in a nut shell. Don't say I didn't warn you! Fortunately, the next film in the series (THE INVISIBLE MAN'S REVENGE) is quite a bit better.

JohnHowardReid Another really big-budget sequel to the original Invisible Man, this one has a screenplay that's witty yet adventurous and packed with hair's-breadth escapes. It also provides great opportunities for some of our favorite character players including a delightful trio of treacherous heavies: Peter Lorre, J. Edward Bromberg and Sir Cedric Hardwicke. It's also good to see the lovely Ilona Massey, who made only eleven Hollywood movies between 1937 and 1960 (this is the fifth), though it's disappointing that she doesn't get to sing. Never mind, she does wear some really lovely gowns. Jon Hall is personable enough as the reluctant hero, though he fails to handle the switch in his feelings towards the heroine with complete conviction.Marin's direction is admirably fast-paced (we suspect producer Frank Lloyd took a hand in the action sequences) and other credits, including Lester White's attractive photography, are equally outstanding. Special effects fans will not go away unhappy either.

j-cf This is not the James Whale's Invisible man, far from that, but it's still quite interesting on an historical point of view: America can involve ANY of "her" heroes in wars, even the psychotic one created by Wells. And besides that… it's funny! The hero is dumb (what a pitiful spy!), but this can be related to the original movie (the first Invisible man became insane because of the drug, this one becomes stupid and suspicious - kind of a "war symptom" for America… or France!). Some scenes reminded me of the Whale's movie (which had also a lot of humorous parts), like the barn scene. The directing is correct, not great (Marin is not Whale), and the editing is poor. Characters are sympathetic (the villains, anyway: Lorre and co can manage that). What gives the movie his "power" (on a low level: it's not Lubitsch's To be or not to be) is the distance taken with the story told, which is plain silly (how come a dumb like Griffin Jr Jr can make the drug by himself? And if he can't, this drug has an impressive power of conservation, having been made half a century ago!). But before all that, what keeps this kind of movie alive are the wonderful special effects created by John Fulton. The parachute scene is quite impressive, and so is the cream scene. An enjoyable movie, representative of the Universal's evolution at that time, when the studio capitalized on the "addition principle" (pardon me for my poor English): since we are in war and since Frankenstein can meet the werewolf, why couldn't the Invisible man fight the Gestapo? After all, Nazis were way much scary than any Universal monster… because they were real (nevertheless, America ignored the horrors of concentration-camps at that time, that's why Nazis could still be funny in the movies). A regret anyway: where the hell are Claude Rains and his incredible voice?

pjmuck Like most American war propaganda films, this film probably presented the perfect propaganda needed at the time to rally a nation, but viewing it today it manages to make the allied forces (and most specifically Americans) look like racist ignorant buffoons in the process. It makes no excuses for it's blatant propaganda messages and obvious opinions of the German or Japanese ("I can't tell you people apart", to quote one of Hall's lines), nor does it even attempt to understand their cultures (Hari Kari, for example, is grossly misunderstood and misrepresented in this film). But I won't argue the issue, because, after all, it's only a movie, and America needed their villians clearly cut and defined to swallow the bitter pill of war.But honestly, how inept is our "hero" in this film? He's supposed to be on a serious mission to thwart an air raid on New York city (I consider that pretty serious), yet the minute he touches ground on German soil he takes great risks in exposing himself by opting to make his presence known by playing pranks rather than staying low and "out of sight". He frequently jeopardizes the success of the mission because he can't resist grabbing a chicken leg or a glass of wine while in the company of the Gestapo, or falling asleep in facial makeup. And while it makes for some entertaining scenes that utilize the invisible effects, his behavior is completely implausible and downright ridiculous. Think of how easy his mission would have been had he just quietly moved about and retrieved the info he needed without bringing attention to himself. (But that doesn't make for a very entertaining movie, now does it?).If I were the Maria Sorenson character in this film, I would have kicked him in his unmentionables.