Talk:The Invisible Man (2020 film)
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the The Invisible Man (2020 film) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report 2 times. The weeks in which this happened: |
 | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Ratings
editShould we add movie ratings? Mastergerwe97 (talk) 00:04, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
- Only if particular ratings have received substantial coverage by reliable sources to show they are relevant. See WP:FILMRATING for more. – wallyfromdilbert (talk) 21:55, 4 February 2020 (UTC)
Elizabeth Banks's upcoming film the invisible woman is not connected to the invisible man (2020)
editI am writing this to remind everyone that Elizabeth Banks's upcoming film the invisible woman is not related nor connected to the invisible man (2020) film, it is nothing but a different film, Thank you --Belrien12 (talk) 08:37, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
@Belrien12: We know that. They don't need to be set in the same continuity to be a part of the same franchise, which they are, from the same studio. MacCready (talk) 19:41, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
Connection to Wells's novel
edit"A contemporary adaptation of the novel of the same name by H. G. Wells and a reboot of The Invisible Man film series of the 1930s-1950s..." Having just seen the film, I don't think that's true. About the only things it shares with the novel are its title and the fact that the Man himself is a very nasty piece of work. JH (talk page) 18:21, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
I agree with JH. H.G. Wells is not credited...and did not invent the notion either of invisibility nor of criminality. There's really no connection to the Wells title or plot, at all. Spanghew2fs (talk) 22:32, 24 October 2021 (UTC)
Support for adding content
edit@Wallyfromdilbert: The Rotten Tomatoes critical consensus, which is directly in the body of the article, says the film is "Smart, well-acted, and above all scary". I do not see how saying the film received praise for its story ("smart") and horror sequences ("above all scary") is unsupported by the article's body. Bluerules (talk) 19:48, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
- There are plenty of other reasons for describing a film as "smart" that are not merely based on its "story", and most films are not "scary" solely because of their "horror sequences". That is your personal interpretation of those terms. – wallyfromdilbert (talk) 23:08, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
- Your assertions lack verfiability. If you have "plenty of other reasons for describing a film as smart that are not merely based on its story" or examples of films not being "scary solely because of their horror sequences", provide evidence. Otherwise, the cited praise for the film being "smart" and "scary" refers to the story and horror sequences. Bluerules (talk) 21:24, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
Shouldn't the other upcoming Universal Monsters Reboots be included?
editI mean, this movie started a whole new wave of reboots of the classic monsters, like Renfield, starring Nicholas Hoult (as the titular protagonist) and Nicolas Cage(as Dracula), The Wolfman, starring Ryan Gosling, the futuristic reboot of Dracula by Chloe Zhao and other movies based on the classic franchise. I know they are not connected, but The Invisible Woman also isn't, and is going to be part of the same franchise 2804:14D:90AC:8387:446:6734:5F07:F5F5 (talk) 17:30, 14 September 2022 (UTC)