I'm not so sure. I don't think of it as one. It's SciFi to me.
When the filmmakers, or studio, or distributor, or whoever, proclaim that a movie is a comedy, many critics and amateur critics, like IMDB posters, will judge it as a comedy and just ncount the audible laughs. That's all that is important to them at that point, how many laughs.
This is a good story. Sam Neill is really good. CC does alright too, in his mostly dramatic role.
I think of this movie more as action than comedy. It wasn't a very dark movie, but pretty serious. I also thought that Sam Neil was an excellant villian.
shareSadly, they made it more of a comedy than it originally was. This is one of the major reasons why I prefer the novel a hundred times over. In the novel Nick is at times pretty ironic with his observations, but there's not a single element of slapstick humor in it.
I actually think Chevy Chase is badly miscast, he's just too funny for the role. He makes Nick look a lot more foolish than he actually is.
Sam Neill on the other hand was absolutely fantastic, they couldn't possibly have found a better David Jenkins.
[deleted]
No doubt Sam Neill was excellent. I'm wondering if the filmmakers didn't think there maybe was some slapstick in the various invisible man situations, and positioned themselves for that option in the editing, via Chevy Chase.
But besides being suitable for the comic direction of it, I think he had an edgy, hapless-victim way about him that was effective here, and with which he might have pulled off a more serious treatment. So I think it wasn't just casting CC, but the comical scenes included, that gave it the dark vs. comical confusion.
Action , drama and a lot of humor...all blended together
Mr Carpenter, you are a true movie master
open your minds, people.. not because is a Chevy Chase movie it has to be an entire comedy...
When I was a teenager and then in college, from the 1980s and into the 1990s, I have seen just about every movie starring Chevy Chase and Goldie Hawn, often comparing their acting styles from each film they have made from one year to the next. You can see that Michael Ritchie directed Chevy in "Fletch" in 1985 and Goldie in "Wildcats" in 1986, and their acting styles are essentially the same comedic formula. Also, you can see Goldie in "Protocol" in 1984 and Chevy in "Spies Like Us" in 1985 playing accidental Washington diplomats going to foreign countries to follow their missions. You see, how every year, more so during the 1980s, one comic style followed the other as their films were released.
Then came the early 1990s and both wanted to give drama a try. In 1991, Goldie made "Deceived," a moody suspense thriller where she is dead serious and almost never smiles. Chevy wanted to do drama himself in "Memoirs of an Invisible Man," which was released the next year. He would pitch in his trademark smirk every once in a while, but his tone was mostly somber and mellow than usual, and he would raise his voice with real rage in some scenes. I did not consider "Invisible Man" a comedy at all. It was more a sci-fi drama than a comedy, and the comedy was at a bare minimum. Blockbuster Video categorized it in the Sci-Fi section. Neither "Deceived" nor "Invisible Man" were successful, and audiences would rather laugh with Goldie and Chevy.
Keep thinking. There are numerous comparisons of Goldie Hawn movies and Chevy Chase movies during their heyday in Hollywood. There are even comparisons to Goldie and Chevy on TV. "Laugh-In" and "Saturday Night Live" got them going, and get this - both were the anchors during the news segments. Can you imagine Goldie belting out "Hi, I'm Goldie Hawn and you're not" during the Laugh-In news skits? They also both had their own TV specials back in the day as well. Lorne Michaels was a writer for "Laugh In" and the original producer (and went back to it) of "SNL." We can easily blame it on Lorne for launching both Goldie and Chevy. But getting back to the movies, I can also add "Caddyshack" and "Private Benjamin," both in 1980, to this list because the main color of both movies were green. Even though these movies are many years apart, "Death Becomes Her" is very much like "Modern Problems" in terms of special effects for laughs, the former more critically acclaimed than the latter. I also want to add Chevy's "Deal of the Century" in 1983 as his first attempt at seriocomedy, along with Goldie's "Swing Shift" in 1984 as a serious comedy. Goldie is no stranger to serious acting, and whether her dramatics are successful or not, she can pull it off much better than Chevy any time, as the old "Annie Get Your Gun" song goes. If you can think of any more comparisons of these two comedic greats in the movies, let me know.
I have to admit I am a lengthy writer when it comes to topics like Hawn and Chase, Siskel and Ebert (two great duos), and other passions I grew up with. I'll try to keep it short next time.
It's not a comedy. I think it just gets billed as one because some idiot in a suit said, "Oh, Chevy Chase is in it, it's a comedy." Sure, there's some humor in it, but that's not the main focus of the story.
I think Chase actually did a good job in this film. He was plausible as a guy whose sole focus is business and money-oriented, not terribly concerned with other interests. He enjoys his lifestyle, isn't politically or otherwise motivated, does his job well enough that he can coast a bit here and there.
No, no - Pillage first, then burn! Stupid Vikings...