Talk:The Invisible Man (1933 film)

Raines in the film...

I think this info may be inaccurate. Claude Raines does appear in the movie (you see his face) as the man who became the invisible man.

• Absolutely. Someone's been reading fanbooks again instead of watching films...

Invisibility Category?

For this film and many others, even television shows such as Fantomcat, I think we need a category.Mermaid from the Baltic Sea 19:45, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. --GHcool 00:04, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Okay, I've created the category at Category:Invisibility. Mermaid from the Baltic Sea 20:41, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Monocane redirected to here

Tom Tresser has redirected this article on Monocane to this movie Invisible Man without any discussion on the appropriateness of his act, based on his opinion that the Monocane article was "non-notable"

To me, the mere fact that so many references from the entertainment world references it -- as a sort of inside joke -- clearly makes it notable, and makes it a suitable target for Wikipedia. I went to the monocane article when I heard it on a Matlock and wanted to know what it was. I found the article useful in my quest.

With Tom's redirection, the information on what monocane is would be hidden in the body of the Invisible man article, and its nature as a running (and therefore non-accidental) reference is not available at all.

I'm not sure why he persists on deleting information without gaining consensus or even engaging in discussion on this. I don't believe this arbitrary behavior is typical of him or appropriate for Wikipedia. Please, someone who agrees with me, revert this article and continue to argue for its existence. Let's see what others have to say, Please give your justifications and comments on the discussion page

Mjchonoles (talk) 09:55, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

I think Monocane isn't notable enough for its own article, but I do like the little section about it in this one. --GHcool (talk) 21:17, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

I've altered the redirect from Monocane to go directly to the appropriate section here. Ed Fitzgerald (unfutz) ^{(talk / cont)} 08:10, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Good idea. Thanks for doing this.  :) --GHcool (talk) 20:56, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Disambiguation

Just a thought on this: I'm of a mind to create a Monocane/Monocaine disambiguation page along the lines of User:The Parting Glass/Sandbox, and then have Monocane redirect there. It would have the effect of tying the information together without trying to assert or suggesting that a mention of a word homonymic to "Monocane" (let's face it, we haven't verified the spelling on these) necessarily means a reference to The Invisible Man, as well as serving those who've typed in "Monocane" when they actually meant the dental anesthetic. – The Parting Glass 14:43, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:The Invisible Man.jpg

Image:The Invisible Man.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 09:32, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Plot Summary

This line appeared at the beginning of the summary: "However, his dark secret is slowly revealed to his suspicious landlady and the villagers: he is an invisible man." On the contrary, Griffin's secret is revealed quite suddenly during his maniacal removal of his clothes and bandages. The meddlesome landlady and the villagers are extremely suspicious of Griffin's peculiar behavior and attempt to spy on him until that time, but "his dark secret" is not "slowly revealed"; it's rather abrupt. Finwailin (talk) 19:24, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:The Invisible Man (1933 film)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Some Dude From North Carolina (talk · contribs) 11:45, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

Hey, I'm going to be reviewing this article. Expect comments by the end of the week. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 11:45, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

Infobox and lead

• "Style B" image looks good while the unused "Style A" is going to give me nightmares.

Normally I'd stick with a style A myself, but I think there's a good reason why style B i the more used. I'm leaning more towards it as it better represents the film. That's just my hunch though! Andrzejbanas (talk) 18:39, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

• No current issues with the infobox, billing block matches, and parameters are sourced.
• Is there no info for "gross" in the infobox? I know Box Office Mojo mentions a bit.

Per Mank's book in the release or reception seciton, the total gross is unknown. The gross from BoxOfficeMojo appears to be from some minor theatreical re-releases (and this is just me assuming this from their dates) so I don't feel they are really that important. Andrzejbanas (talk) 18:39, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

• Is there a reason a language parameter is also missing?

I didn't have a source for it. I mean, it's in English, but I can just add it. Andrzejbanas (talk) 18:39, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

Best to fill parameters so I suggest adding it in. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 19:46, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

Done. Andrzejbanas (talk) 22:20, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

• Why is the AFI reference marked as dead? It works for me.

I don't see where it's marked as dead in the article. Could you point this out to me? Andrzejbanas (talk) 18:39, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

I mean, the link sends me to the archive. This can be fixed by adding the "|url-status=live" parameter. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 19:46, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

Done. Andrzejbanas (talk) 22:20, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

• Add a serial comma after the first mention of Gloria Stuart.

Done. Andrzejbanas (talk) 18:39, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

• Is there a word missing between "covered in bandages whose eyes".

Re-phrased. Andrzejbanas (talk) 18:39, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

• It should be mentioned with parentheses that Rains portrays the title character.

That's not really his name in the film. Characters refer to him as that as they don't know who he is, but in credits he's credited as he is in the citation. I feel like anyone reading this opening paragraph can figure this out from reading the sentence. Andrzejbanas (talk) 18:39, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

I meant mentioning Rains portrays him. As in changing "Dr. Jack Griffin" to "Dr. Jack Griffin (Rains)". Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 19:46, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

Done. Andrzejbanas (talk) 22:20, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

• Add serial commas after Cyril Gardner, Preston Sturges, Jack Sullivan, and Joe Dante.

Done. Andrzejbanas (talk) 18:39, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

• Also, now that I notice it, is there a reason British English is being used when talking about an American film? See WP:COFAQ#ENGLISH and this archived discussion.

This was added before I worked on the article. I wasn't quite sure of the reasoning, but I'd be happy to set it back to American English within the article itself if need be. Andrzejbanas (talk) 18:41, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, that would probably be for the best; I'll also mention the words that need to be changed. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 19:46, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

Also change the "Use British English" template to "Use American English". Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 00:20, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

Done. Andrzejbanas (talk) 19:48, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

General words per WP:ENGVAR that need changes

• "favourite" → "favorite"

Changed. Andrzejbanas (talk) 22:20, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

• "fulfil" → "fulfill"

Changed. Andrzejbanas (talk) 22:20, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

Plot and cast

• Plot summary is under 700 words so that passes WP:FILMPLOT.
• Is the phrase "Griffin is sleeping, move." correct? The word "move" seems out of place.

I didn't write this plot, but it's about spotting the hay move on its own. I think I got it organized. Andrzejbanas (talk) 22:20, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

• Cast list looks good. To the image, add "|upright|" per MOS:UPRIGHT.

Done. Andrzejbanas (talk) 22:20, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

• "Later a farmer enters; and spots movement in the hay where Griffin is sleeping, move." → "Later a farmer enters and spots movement in the hay where Griffin is sleeping." or "Later a farmer enters and sees the hay where Griffin is sleeping, move." (remove ";" and repetition of "move")

Production

• "H.G. Wells" → "H. G. Wells" (consistency with lead; also change this in the references).

Done. Andrzejbanas (talk) 22:20, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

• Combine the sources after "from Universal", making the "|pp=" or "|loc=" parameter say "147; 198".

Done. Andrzejbanas (talk) 22:20, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

• Do the same thing with references from the same source (here and in other sections).

Done Andrzejbanas (talk) 22:20, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

• There appears to be a bracket in between the references after "Wells' story". Remove it.

Done. Andrzejbanas (talk) 22:20, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

• Additionally, add year dates to films mentioned in this section and in others.

Done, didn't add it to some sections where the date is already mentioned as part of the sentence or earlier in the article though. Andrzejbanas (talk) 22:20, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

• Remove the space between the references after "finished shooting".

Done as they have been combined. Andrzejbanas (talk) 22:20, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

• Add a serial comma after "invisible rats".

Done. Andrzejbanas (talk) 22:20, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

• Change "set-up" to "set up".

Done. Andrzejbanas (talk) 22:20, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

• "reading the scene" → "reading of the scene"

Done. Andrzejbanas (talk) 22:20, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

• Remove the comma after "the role to Rains".

Done. Andrzejbanas (talk) 22:20, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

• Add a serial comma after the first mention of The Black Cat.

Done. Andrzejbanas (talk) 22:20, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

• Principal photography sounds like a better term than "Initial shooting". Maybe swap it.

Sure, Done. Andrzejbanas (talk) 22:20, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

• In the last paragraph, combine "wire frame" into "wireframe".

Done. Andrzejbanas (talk) 22:20, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

Release

• Here and in #Reception, change "..." to "[...]" as it's more visually pleasing.

Done. Andrzejbanas (talk) 22:34, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

• Should be an en-dash between "1932-1933".

Done. Andrzejbanas (talk) 22:34, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

• The phrase "the film to be held" doesn't sound right. Maybe reword.

Rephrased. Andrzejbanas (talk) 22:34, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

• "Universal Studios celebrating its 100th anniversary" → "Universal Studios celebrated its 100th anniversary and"

Done. Andrzejbanas (talk) 22:34, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

• "scratches and stains and improved sound" → "scratches, stains, and improved sound"

Done. Andrzejbanas (talk) 22:34, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

• "by six-film release" → "by a six-film release"

Done. Andrzejbanas (talk) 22:34, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

Reception

• The New York Daily News → the New York Daily News

Done. Andrzejbanas (talk) 13:46, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

• Try removing the use of quotes and [a from b said c] per WP:RECEPTION.

I tried doing that for the most part, most reviews I've found seems to be mostly gushing without any serious focus on certain elements of the film (it's so much easier to write these when critics harp on negative aspects of the film, but here people seem to really like this one. The few bits and bobs of negativity don't seem to be consistent either). I've re-phrased the contemporary reviews but I kind of left the retrospective intact as I sort of liked how it went through a few decades of later reception to see reviewers still prasing the film throughout. I'm open to some more specific suggestions if you have any! Andrzejbanas (talk) 13:46, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

Legacy

• Remove the comma after "future films" and change "story line" to "storyline".

Done. Andrzejbanas (talk) 14:20, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

• "To many" should be "Too many" and "To many young people nowadays I am" sounds off on its own.

Re-looking at the source, I must have mismanaged some sources here as the book doesn't have a sentence to clarify. I'll re-add it when I can locate it. but for now it can be passed on.Andrzejbanas (talk) 14:20, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

• In that same sentence, there appears to be missing punctuation at the end.

Fixed. Andrzejbanas (talk) 14:20, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

• Remove the space between the references after "considered it slumming".

Done. Andrzejbanas (talk) 14:20, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

• Is "potchpee" an actual word? If she said it, I would put it in quotes and explain what it means. If not, swap it.

Yeah, i tried to solve this earlier with no luck. Replaced the word. Andrzejbanas (talk) 14:20, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

• There are a lot of problems with "terrible.Real B stuff" such as a missing space and sentences that should be combined.

Rephrased. Andrzejbanas (talk) 14:20, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

• In #Remake, the "Borys 2016" reference isn't working for me, as in it doesn't open to an actual source as two sources have the same author/year.

Hey. Fixed that name. It shouldnt' have issues now. Andrzejbanas (talk) 19:47, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

• Also in #Remake, I'm not sure if the quote block is necessary. Do you have a reason to include it?

I tightened this down. I re-added the citation to appear at the end of quotes.

• If you decide to keep the quote, "He compared" should be changed to "Whannell compared" as it followed a quote.

Done. Andrzejbanas (talk) 19:47, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

References

• Change the header to "References" instead of "Notes".

Done Andrzejbanas (talk) 15:04, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

• Also add a subsection header titled #Citations.

Done Andrzejbanas (talk) 15:04, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

• With that in mind, references are well-sourced and archived.

Progress

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written. a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): It is factually accurate and verifiable. a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism): It is broad in its coverage. a (major aspects): b (focused): It follows the neutral point of view policy. Fair representation without bias: It is stable. No edit wars, etc.: It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate. a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall: Pass/Fail:
· · ·

Hey @Some Dude From North Carolina:, I think I've covered everything and responded to some others. Tell me what you think when you are free. :) Andrzejbanas (talk) 19:49, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

@Andrzejbanas: Combine references [51] and [52] in #Filming, the two sources after "fairy-tale magic", the three references after "must overlap", and the two sources after "slumming". In #Reception, also change "..." to "[...]". After that, ping me, and I'll pass the article. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 19:59, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

@Some Dude From North Carolina:, Done! Andrzejbanas (talk) 20:08, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

@Andrzejbanas: Don't forget the references after "fairy-tale magic" and to change "..." to "[...]". Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 20:11, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

Whups! Your are right. Sorry was juggling some tasks. Done now. Andrzejbanas (talk) 20:23, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

Cast

I am adding not only the cast here, but also facts about them that isn't there in the production page, the sources were I got the explanations for the Cast Lists are from IMDB:

• Claude Rains as Jack Griffin/The Invisible Man, According to information given on TCM before the movie is shown, Claude Rains was also chosen for the role because he spoke with such clarity and could be easily understood. This was important since his face was covered for almost the entire film. Rains' performance in this film also inspired Mark Hamill's portrayal of The Joker.
• Gloria Stuart as Flora Cranley
• William Harrigan as Professor Arthur Kemp
• Henry Travers as Dr. Cranley
• Una O'Connor as Jenny Hall, During the scenes with Una O'Connor, the hysterical pub landlady, James Whale struggled to control his own laughter, as he adored O' Connor's humor.
• Forrester Harvey as Herbert Hall
• Dudley Digges as Police Lieutenant
• Harry Stubbs as Police Commissioner
• E. E. Clive as Constable Jaffers
• Dwight Frye as Reporter, The reporter who offers suggestions to the police chief was played by Dwight Frye. He is best known for playing Renfield in "Dracula (1931)." He also played Fritz in "Frankenstein (1931)" and Karl Glutz in "The Bride of Frankenstein (1935)."

94.201.206.212 (talk) 15:57, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

The article has a cast list and IMDB is unreliable. PrisonerB (talk) 13:10, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

"The Invisible Man (1933film)" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect The Invisible Man (1933film) and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 November 19#The Invisible Man (1933film) until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Regards, SONIC⁶⁷⁸ 17:17, 19 November 2022 (UTC)

Comedy and variants

I've recently removed "black comedy" from the lead of the article. I erroneously mentioned it wasn't mentioned in the article. It certainly was. While much has been said how humorourous the film is, most studies and reception to it seems to have received it as part of the 1930s horror film cycle and later reception seems to connect it primarily with with either horror or science fiction or both. Generally, I did not see a lot of discussion of it relating to comedy primarily, so I do not think it warrants an inclusion in the lead per MOS:FILM standards on genre. Andrzejbanas (talk) 15:12, 23 July 2024 (UTC)