Skip to main content

If I had eyes and teeth, I’d be a whole head.

Memoirs of an Invisible Man
(1992)

(SPOILERS) A huge box office bomb for Warner Bros, but unlike the later Escape from L.A., its problems can’t really be laid at director John Carpenter’s door. Indeed, it sounds as if he brought exactly the right instincts to the project (“North by Northwest meets Starman”); it’s almost entirely the presence of Chevy Chase that does for Memoirs of an Invisible Man, a vanity project the star had nurtured but which proved entirely ill-fitting and scuppered his serious thesping designs as quickly as they took form.

Perhaps Chevy envied the success of the likes of Bruce Willis – or sometime co-star Steve Martin – who turned himself from a comedy-ish guy into a serious dramatic lead, although the genesis of Memoirs of an Invisible Man came prior to Die Hard, when he got Warner Bros to buy Harry F Saint’s novel of the same name. Why the studio felt this would remotely work or that they should indulge Chase may seem hard to fathom, but as William Goldman notes in Which Lie Did I Tell? he was the world’s number five box office star in the mid-80s.

Certainly, Ivan Reitman, initially attached as director, baulked at the straight-drama directive, and the studio went with Chevy in a him-or-me ultimatum. William Goldman had been very much of a mind with Reitman on the tone (the screenplay, rewritten, is also credited to Dana Olsen and Robert Collector) and his take on the ridiculousness of Chevy’s intention, to explore “the loneliness of invisibility”, has accordingly become the plaque to hang around the picture’s failure.

Although, I’ve never been convinced by Reitman’s directorial chops, even as a comedy director; he felt he had another Ghostbusters in the offing – doubtless he felt the same about Evolution, and look what happened there. Goldman was initially placated regarding the star and director coming at the project from different directions, with CAA suggesting “Just write the script. It will all sort itself out”. It didn’t. Goldman had to admit Chevy had a point, thematically, on the presumption that being invisible wouldn’t be a bed of roses – it had, after all, sent previous transparencies completely loony – but he came back to the harsh truth that while he liked the star, and the theme had merit, “I just didn’t want to investigate it with Chevy Chase” who had become famous through “playing a goof who had trouble with stairs”.

So Carpenter came in, worked with the new guys on rewrites, and directed Chase and Daryl Hannah as his romantic leads. Both of whom were, apparently, nightmarish to work with. More importantly, since its what’s up there on screen that counts, they entirely don’t work as a romantic couple. Carpenter’s quite right to make the movie essentially a chase, but Chase isn’t Cary Grant (although he did occasionally put me in mind of cardboard version of Warren Beatty), and whenever the picture stops for the love story or the contemplative elements, it sinks like a stone. Chase made a virtue of deadpan narration in the Fletch series, but his serious approach to the voiceover here is a killer. He has neither the range nor the gravitas, and while some of his quips are decent, they’re very much asides.

The irony is that, production-wise, this is pretty impressive. Carpenter has six-time Oscar nominee William A Fraker as his DP (The President’s Analyst, 1941 and WarGames amongst others) rather than his pal Gary K Kibbe. The special effects are, for the most part, quite special (the semi-visible lab, invisible Chase silhouetted in water – the practical effects, however… well, Chase in makeup looks like something out of Welcome to Marwen, and his blackface, turbaned taxi driver is… unfortunate). The score, by Shirley Walker rather than Carpenter, has a dramatically rousing Flight of the Bumblebee motif during pursuit scenes. It looks great and is highly polished, basically. Carpenter’s taking his time, and when you aren’t concentrating on Chase being in it, the flight of the protagonist and cat-and-mouse games work well.

It’s also helped considerably by Sam Neill’s villainous Jenkins; the actor knows he’s playing a less suave James Mason and has a lot of fun with the part on that basis. Carpenter was doubtless on board with the shadowy government vibe (also present in surrounding pictures They Live and Village of the Damned), and their unscrupulousness is a lot of fun (Stephen Tobolowsky is Neill’s nervy superior, while Jim “Bishop Brennan” Norton plays a scientist on the wrong end of Jenkins’ clean-up operation).

There’s also strong comedic support from Michael McKean and Patricia Heaton as Chase’s friends who show up at their beach house while Chevy’s hiding out there, along with Hannah and English rotter Gregory Paul Martin. The latter has ungentlemanly intentions towards her and also delivers the best line, regarding Chevy’s likely fate (“He’ll probably wash up on the shore one day all bloated and eaten by crabs” – it’s all in the delivery).

The frustrating thing with Memoirs of an Invisible Man is that you can see how it could have worked, both as a comedy and a straight chase thriller, but it ends up as neither fish nor fowl, failing to up the ante sufficiently to succeed as a thriller and stymied by Chevy’s presence in the romantic stakes (at one-point Neill refers to him as “cool, imaginative, elegant” and you’re “Huh?”) Carpenter had detoured into low-budget fare because of issues with studio control, so arguably knew what he was getting himself into here; as a production, it’s one of the most accomplished pieces with his name on it, but as a complete movie, it’s crippled by a (self) miscast star and a screenplay that needed to decide what it wanted to achieve. As some one says at one point of the lab, “It’s not what it is. It’s what it isn’t”.



Agree? Disagree? Mildly or vehemently? Let me know in the comments below.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

No matter how innocent you are, or how hard you try, they’ll find you guilty.

The Wrong Man (1956) (SPOILERS) I hate to say it, but old Truffaut called it right on this one. More often than not showing obeisance to the might of Hitchcock during his career-spanning interview, the French critic turned director was surprisingly blunt when it came to The Wrong Man . He told Hitch “ your style, which has found its perfection in the fiction area, happens to be in total conflict with the aesthetics of the documentary and that contradiction is apparent throughout the picture ”. There’s also another, connected issue with this, one Hitch acknowledged: too much fidelity to the true story upon which the film is based.

He’s so persistent! He always gets his man.

Speed (1994) (SPOILERS) It must have been a couple of decades since I last viewed Speed all the way through, so it’s pleasing to confirm that it holds up. Sure, Jan de Bont’s debut as a director can’t compete with the work of John McTiernan, for whom he acted as cinematographer and who recommended de Bont when he passed on the picture, but he nevertheless does a more than competent work. Which makes his later turkeys all the more tragic. And Keanu and Sandra Bullock display the kind of effortless chemistry you can’t put a price tag on. And then there’s Dennis Hopper, having a great old sober-but-still-looning time.

Another case of the screaming oopizootics.

Doctor Who Season 14 – Worst to Best The best Doctor Who season? In terms of general recognition and unadulterated celebration, there’s certainly a strong case to be made for Fourteen. The zenith of Robert Holmes and Philip Hinchcliffe’s plans for the series finds it relinquishing the cosy rapport of the Doctor and Sarah in favour of the less-trodden terrain of a solo adventure and underlying conflict with new companion Leela. More especially, it finds the production team finally stretching themselves conceptually after thoroughly exploring their “gothic horror” template over the course of the previous two seasons (well, mostly the previous one).

He is a brigand and a lout. Pay him no serious mention.

The Wind and the Lion (1975) (SPOILERS) John Milius called his second feature a boy’s-own adventure, on the basis of the not-so-terrified responses of one of those kidnapped by Sean Connery’s Arab Raisuli. Really, he could have been referring to himself, in all his cigar-chomping, gun-toting reactionary glory, dreaming of the days of real heroes. The Wind and the Lion rather had its thunder stolen by Jaws on release, and it’s easy to see why. As polished as the picture is, and simultaneously broad-stroke and self-aware in its politics, it’s very definitely a throwback to the pictures of yesteryear. Only without the finger-on-the-pulse contemporaneity of execution that would make Spielberg and Lucas’ genre dives so memorable in a few short years’ time.

But everything is wonderful. We are in Paris.

Cold War (2018) (SPOILERS) Pawel Pawlikowski’s elliptical tale – you can’t discuss Cold War without saying “elliptical” at least once – of frustrated love charts a course that almost seems to be a caricature of a certain brand of self-congratulatorily tragic European cinema. It was, it seems “ loosely inspired ” by his parents (I suspect I see where the looseness comes in), but there’s a sense of calculation to the progression of this love story against an inescapable political backdrop that rather diminishes it.

The game is rigged, and it does not reward people who play by the rules.

Hustlers (2019) (SPOILERS) Sold as a female Goodfellas – to the extent that the producers had Scorsese in mind – this strippers-and-crime tale is actually a big, glossy puff piece, closer to Todd Phillips as fashioned by Lorene Scarfia. There are some attractive performances in Hustlers, notably from Constance Wu, but for all its “progressive” women work male objectification to their advantage posturing, it’s incredibly traditional and conservative deep down.

What do they do, sing madrigals?

The Singing Detective (2003) Icon’s remake of the 1986 BBC serial, from a screenplay by Dennis Potter himself. The Singing Detective fares less well than Icon’s later adaptation of Edge of Darkness , even though it’s probably more faithful to Potter’s original. Perhaps the fault lies in the compression of six episodes into a feature running a quarter of that time, but the noir fantasy and childhood flashbacks fail to engage, and if the hospital reality scans better, it too suffers eventually.

They literally call themselves “Decepticons”. That doesn’t set off any red flags?

Bumblebee  (2018) (SPOILERS) Bumblebee is by some distance the best Transformers movie, simply by dint of having a smattering of heart (one might argue the first Shia LaBeouf one also does, and it’s certainly significantly better than the others, but it’s still a soulless Michael Bay “machine”). Laika VP and director Travis Knight brings personality to a series that has traditionally consisted of shamelessly selling product, by way of a nostalgia piece that nods to the likes of Herbie (the original), The Iron Giant and even Robocop .

How would Horatio Alger have handled this situation?

Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas (1998) (SPOILERS) Gilliam’s last great movie – The Zero Theorem (2013) is definitely underrated, but I don’t think it’s that underrated – Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas could easily have been too much. At times it is, but in such instances, intentionally so. The combination of a visual stylist and Hunter S Thompson’s embellished, propulsive turn of phrase turns out, for the most part, to be a cosmically aligned affair, embracing the anarchic abandon of Raoul Duke and Doctor Gonzo’s Las Vegas debauch while contriving to pull back at crucial junctures in order to engender a perspective on all this hedonism. Would Alex Cox, who exited stage left, making way for the Python, have produced something interesting? I suspect, ironically, he would have diluted Thompson in favour of whatever commentary preoccupied him at the time (indeed, Johnny Depp said as much: “ Cox had this great material to work with and he took it and he added his own stuff to it ”). Plus

That’s what people call necromancer’s weather.

The Changes (1975) This adaptation of Peter Dickinson’s novel trilogy carries a degree of cult nostalgia cachet due to it being one of those more “adult” 1970s children’s serials (see also The Children of the Stones , The Owl Service ). I was too young to see it on its initial screening – or at any rate, too young to remember it – but it’s easy to see why it lingered in the minds of those who did. Well, the first episode, anyway. Not for nothing is The Changes seen as a precursor to The Survivors in the rural apocalypse sub-genre – see also the decidedly nastier No Blade of Grass – as following a fairly gripping opener, it drifts off into the realm of plodding travelogue.