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

I just hope my death makes more cents than my life.

Joker (2019)
(SPOILERS) So the murder sprees didn’t happen, and a thousand puff pieces desperate to fan the flames of such events and then told-ya-so have fallen flat on their faces. The biggest takeaway from Joker is not that the movie is an event, when once that seemed plausible but not a given, but that any mainstream press perspective on the picture appears unable to divorce its quality from its alleged or actual politics. Joker may be zeitgeisty, but isn’t another Taxi Driver in terms of cultural import, in the sense that Taxi Driver didn’t have a Taxi Driver in mind when Paul Schrader wrote it. It is, if you like, faux-incendiary, and can only ever play out on that level. It might be more accurately described as a grubbier, grimier (but still polished and glossy) The Talented Ripley, the tale of developing psychopathy, only tailored for a cinemagoing audience with few options left outside of comic book fare.

My name is Dr. King Schultz, this is my valet, Django, and these are our horses, Fritz, and Tony.

Django Unchained (2012)
(MINOR SPOILERS) Since the painful misstep of Grindhouse/Death Proof, Quentin Tarantino has regained the higher ground like never before. Pulp Fiction, his previous commercial and critical peak, has been at very least equalled by the back-to-back hits of Inglourious Basterds and Django Unchained. Having been underwhelmed by his post Pulp Fiction efforts (albeit, I admired his technical advances as a director in Kill Bill), I was pleasantly surprised by Inglourious Basterds. It was no work of genius (so not Pulp Fiction) by any means, but there was a gleeful irreverence in its treatment of history and even to the nominal heroic status of its titular protagonists. Tonally, it was a good fit for the director’s “cool” aesthetic. As a purveyor of postmodern pastiche, where the surface level is the subtext, in some ways he was operating at his zenith. Django Unchained is a retreat from that position, the director caught in the tug between his all-important aesthetic pr…

I'm reliable, I'm a very good listener, and I'm extremely funny.

Terminator: Dark Fate (2019)
(SPOILERS) When I wrote my 23 to see in 2019, I speculated that James Cameron might be purposefully giving his hand-me-downs to lesser talents because he hubristically didn’t want anyone making a movie that was within a spit of the proficiency we’ve come to expect from him. Certainly, Robert Rodriguez and Tim Miller are leagues beneath Kathryn Bigelow, Jimbo’s former spouse and director of his Strange Days screenplay. Miller’s no slouch when it comes to action – which is what these movies are all about, let’s face it – but neither is he a craftsman, so all those reviews attesting that Terminator: Dark Fate is the best in the franchise since Terminator 2: Judgment Day may be right, but there’s a considerable gulf between the first sequel (which I’m not that big a fan of) and this retcon sequel to that sequel.

This is very cruel, Oskar. You're giving them hope. You shouldn't do that.

Schindler’s List (1993)
(SPOILERS) Such is the status of Schindler’s List, it all but defies criticism; it’s the worthiest of all the many worthy Best Picture Oscar winners, a film noble of purpose and sensitive in the treatment and depiction of the Holocaust as the backdrop to one man’s redemption. There is much to admire in Steven Spielberg’s film. But it is still a Steven Spielberg film. From a director whose driving impulse is the manufacture of popcorn entertainments, not intellectual introspection. Which means it’s a film that, for all its commendable features, is made to manipulate its audience in the manner of any of his “lesser” genre offerings. One’s mileage doubtless varies on this, but for me there are times during this, his crowning achievement, where the berg gets in the way of telling the most respectful version of this story by simple dint of being the berg. But then, to a great or lesser extent, this is true of almost all, if not all, his prestige pictures.

She writes Twilight fan fiction.

Vampire Academy (2014)
My willingness to give writer Daniel Waters some slack on the grounds of early glories sometimes pays off (Sex and Death 101) and sometimes, as with this messy and indistinct Young Adult adaptation, it doesn’t. If Vampire Academy plods along as a less than innovative smart-mouthed Buffy rip-off that might be because, if you added vampires to Heathers, you would probably get something not so far from the world of Joss Whedon. Unfortunately inspiration is a low ebb throughout, not helped any by tepid direction from Daniel’s sometimes-reliable brother Mark and a couple of hopelessly plankish leads who do their best to dampen down any wit that occasionally attempts to surface.

I can only presume there’s a never-ending pile of Young Adult fiction poised for big screen failure, all of it comprising multi-novel storylines just begging for a moment in the Sun. Every time an adaptation crashes and burns (and the odds are that they will) another one rises, hydra-like, hoping…

We’re Americans. We read your emails.

Domino (2019)
(SPOILERS) Brian De Palma essentially appears to have disowned his unhappy latest motion picture experience (“I never experienced such a horrible movie set”). He opined that he came in on a script that wasn’t of his own devising (by Petter Skavlan of Kon-Tiki) and did his failing best to apply his unique vision to it. And you can see that vision, occasionally, but more than that you can see unaccustomed cheapness and lacklustre material that likely wouldn’t play no matter how much cash was thrown at it.

Exit bear, pursued by an actor.

Paddington 2 (2017)
(SPOILERS) Paddington 2 is every bit as upbeat and well-meaning as its predecessor. It also has more money thrown at it, a much better villain (an infinitely better villain) and, in terms of plotting, is more developed, offering greater variety and a more satisfying structure. Additionally, crucially, it succeeds in offering continued emotional heft and heart to the Peruvian bear’s further adventures. It isn’t, however, quite as funny.

Even suggesting such a thing sounds curmudgeonly, given the universal applause greeting the movie, but I say that having revisited the original a couple of days prior and found myself enjoying it even more than on first viewing. Writer-director Paul King and co-writer Simon Farnaby introduce a highly impressive array of set-ups with huge potential to milk their absurdity to comic ends, but don’t so much squander as frequently leave them undertapped.

Paddington’s succession of odd jobs don’t quite escalate as uproariously as they migh…

There’s nothing stock about a stock car.

Days of Thunder (1990)
(SPOILERS) The summer of 1990 was beset with box office underperformers. Sure-thing sequels – Another 48Hrs, Robocop 2, Gremlins 2: The New Batch, The Exorcist III, even Back to the Future Part III – either belly flopped or failed to hit the hoped for highs, while franchise hopefuls – Dick Tracy, Arachnophobia – most certainly did not ascend to the stratospheric levels of the previous year’s Batman. Even the big hitters, Total Recall and Die Hard 2: Die Harder, were somewhat offset by costing a fortune in the first place. Price-tag-wise, Days of Thunder, a thematic sequel to the phenomenon that was Top Gun, was in their category. Business-wise, it was definitely in the former. Tom Cruise didn’t quite suffer his first misfire since Legend – he’d made charmed choices ever since playing Maverick – but it was a close-run thing.

You ever heard the saying, “Don’t rob the bank across from the diner that has the best donuts in three counties”?

2 Guns (2013)
(SPOILERS) Denzel Washington is such a reliable performer, that it can get a bit boring. You end up knowing every gesture or inflection in advance, whether he’s playing a good guy or a bad guy. And his films are generally at least half decent, so you end up seeing them. Even in Flight (or perhaps especially in Flight; just watch him chugging down that vodka) where he’s giving it his Oscar-nominatable best, he seems too familiar. I think it may be because he’s an actor who is more effective the less he does. In 2 Guns he’s not doing less, but sometimes it seems like it. That’s because the last person I’d ever expect blows him off the screen; Mark Wahlberg.

My dear, sweet brother Numsie!

The Golden Child (1986)
Post-Beverly Hills Cop, Eddie Murphy could have filmed himself washing the dishes and it would have been a huge hit. Which might not have been a bad idea, since he chose to make this misconceived stinker.