I'm not a fan of Abbott and Costello's brand of comedy movies, but this one does have a few good gags that play on the notions of concealment and what characters see and don't see, which is appropriate given that the duo meet the Invisible Man. One of their follow-up monster meetings after the monster-rally parody "Abbott and Costello Meet Frankenstein" (1948), "Abbott and Costello Meet the Invisible Man," besides borrowing from the H.G. Wells inspired Invisible Man horror films, also mash together the boxing, detective and gangster genres. The story involving a boxer becoming invisible to clear his name and uncover a murder mystery and dive-taking corruption in the ring is throwaway.
Costello is practically the entire show this time, with most of the humor revolving around his reactions. He's also the first character to "see" the Invisible Man, and he's the only one to see the invisible camera, as he repeatedly looks directly into it, at least in the early scene in their detective agency office. Dressed in a Sherlock Holmes getup, he even throws a quick wink at the camera. Additionally, he tries to be "invisible" in committing a couple scams, or slight of hand, involving taking money from Abbott and cheating at cards. My favorite gag, however, is when Lou ridiculously hides the Invisible Man under a table cloth.
Compared to Universal's prior Invisible Man films, the visual effects this time, indeed, appear more flawless, but I think that's largely because they avoid some of the more difficult ones, such as those involving the covering or uncovering of his face, such as the mirror shots in the 1933 "The Invisible Man" and the 1940 "The Invisible Man Returns." "John," as opposed to Jack, Griffin is mentioned here, with a portrait of Claude Rains on the wall, and the blood transfusion business from "The Invisible Man Returns" and "The Invisible Man's Revenge" (1944) is reused. Anyways, the ending here is distasteful and especially nonsensical, with Costello being naked for no reason during a blood transfusion, then becoming invisible and committing a series of sexual assaults on nurses before his legs reappear backwards. Why?
Which brings me to some other nagging questions I have from watching Universal's invisibility films. For starters, why do invisible men not wear underwear (like Claude Rains in the 1933 film, when this one strips, he also doesn't include them)? Also, why would a man sit naked playing cards just because he's invisible? And why would a woman stare an his invisible face while talking to him? It doesn't add up.
Costello is practically the entire show this time, with most of the humor revolving around his reactions. He's also the first character to "see" the Invisible Man, and he's the only one to see the invisible camera, as he repeatedly looks directly into it, at least in the early scene in their detective agency office. Dressed in a Sherlock Holmes getup, he even throws a quick wink at the camera. Additionally, he tries to be "invisible" in committing a couple scams, or slight of hand, involving taking money from Abbott and cheating at cards. My favorite gag, however, is when Lou ridiculously hides the Invisible Man under a table cloth.
Compared to Universal's prior Invisible Man films, the visual effects this time, indeed, appear more flawless, but I think that's largely because they avoid some of the more difficult ones, such as those involving the covering or uncovering of his face, such as the mirror shots in the 1933 "The Invisible Man" and the 1940 "The Invisible Man Returns." "John," as opposed to Jack, Griffin is mentioned here, with a portrait of Claude Rains on the wall, and the blood transfusion business from "The Invisible Man Returns" and "The Invisible Man's Revenge" (1944) is reused. Anyways, the ending here is distasteful and especially nonsensical, with Costello being naked for no reason during a blood transfusion, then becoming invisible and committing a series of sexual assaults on nurses before his legs reappear backwards. Why?
Which brings me to some other nagging questions I have from watching Universal's invisibility films. For starters, why do invisible men not wear underwear (like Claude Rains in the 1933 film, when this one strips, he also doesn't include them)? Also, why would a man sit naked playing cards just because he's invisible? And why would a woman stare an his invisible face while talking to him? It doesn't add up.