MovieChat Forums > The Invisible Man (1933) Discussion > Why add a love interest?

Why add a love interest?

posted 14 years ago by scyza
14 replies | jump to latest

I've both read the book and watched the film, and I thought the one big and unnecessary change they made in the film adaption was adding a love interest for Griffin. Granted, she played a very minor role, but still - Was it simply because a beautiful woman in the movie would make it more marketable? Or was it perhaps uncommon at the time to have a movie without some sort of love relationship?

It didn't bother me much, I just didn't quite see why this was done.

[–] movienerd666 14 years ago

i think it might have been to make us feel a bit more sympathetic to the invisible man , however, they failed, if that is the case, seeing as how its rather hard to sympathize with an insane, deranged, murderer (the movie's still great though)

you know there is a problem when games are smarter than movies

[–] noirgirl 14 years ago

They needed a reason to have a conversation through a gigantic bouquet!

[–] am_buglet_82 12 years ago

Sympathize? I was rootin for Griffin the whole time, he was the best character in this movie! XD

-Amanda

"She will remember your heart when men are fairy tales in storybooks written by rabbits"

[–] Doghouse-6 14 years ago

It was uncommon, and primarily about marketing; an appeal to the broadest demographic. Higher ticket sales went to films that pulled in both genders, and the studios' "market research" (or whatever passed for it then) told them that female viewers wanted "love interest."

Poe! You are...avenged!

[–] heelmaster2000 13 years ago

Ya know I was just thinking that. I didn't really feel that the film need the scenes where the romance between the two characters was really needed except for the very ending.

[–] Doghouse-6 13 years ago

I'd also add that the scene in which Flora comes to visit Jack at Kemp's house - where he explains his "madness" from his own point of view ("The chemicals seemed to light up my brain") and the invincibility he possesses ("Power, to make the world grovel at my feet") - is one of the best in the film.

Poe! You are...avenged!

[–] netshopper-2 13 years ago

^^Yes, the chemicals were maddening his brain but people like to think that love conquers all and feeling from the heart would have risen above his insanity.

[–] wallacesawyer 9 years ago

Never read the book, but in the movie Flora was really just someone to keep Jack's mind balanced. He was loosing it. Murder, talking about world domination. But he was gentler with her, almost as if all he really wanted was to be visible and return to her.

http://www.freewebs.com/demonictoys/

[–] practicepiano 8 years ago

This film is unusual, I think, because it hits the ground running, with the scientist already altered by his experiment.

We never get to see him as he was before he became invisible and maddened by the "bleach that will drive you nuts" substance in his formula (I forget the name of it).

So we don't get the sequences that are often in mad scientist films, showing the gradual build up of mania set against the breakdown of normal relationships the character has.

We never get to see the nice-guy scientist -- we are just asked to imagine that he was once someone this woman loved.

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

The movie was just going by the book. That's how it starts, with the main character already invisible. It starts off with him being a mystery and then another main character finally tracking him down and learning more about who he was.

And he was never a nice guy in the book. It was established that he was kind of an arrogant student who no one really liked.

[–] Cult_of_Kibner 8 years ago

She definitely wasn't necessary to the plot but I think her presence allowed for a couple of nice touches. We got see that Griffin still had a gentle side and I think his death scene would have been diminished without a loved one present for him to interact with.

[–] pepperdog61 8 years ago

Yes, I think it enabled them to illustrate that Griffin had been a good man before the monocaine drove him murderously insane, and that in fact some traces of kindness were still there (though being rapidly snuffed out by his derangement).

Plus as has been mentioned, "love interest" was considered key to box office at that time.

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

I agree that the love interest wasn't necessary at all. There was none in the book, and the one in the movie doesn't add anything to the story. They did the same thing with The Most Dangerous Game.

[–] GreenGoblinsOck8 (7790) 5 years ago

I could've done without the love interest too but it's just how they did things back then. Except for the Wizard of Oz, I can't think of any fictional movie back then that didn't have a love interest in it.