MovieChat Forums > Hollow Man (2000) Discussion > Strange, but I keep routing for Kevin Ba...

Strange, but I keep routing for Kevin Bacon

posted 16 years ago by bennet-battle
88 replies | jump to latest

Every time I watch it I end up routing for Kevin Bacon's character because everyone else is so boring.

It's the weirdest thing with this movie.
Then when she blows him with the fire I'm thinking, that b*tch.
He almost made it.
I was more interested in seeing what he would do after leaving the lab than whether the rest of the cast survived or not.

Few movies have such a boring characters so arrogant, and unlikable that I actually want the bad to win.

Kevin Bacon's character, even as psychotic as he is, seems to be the only character in this movie to possess any depth.

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] glynis23-282-577521 12 years ago

We rooted for Kevin because his team didn't approve of him as project leader and his conduct as a scientist, he wasn't worthy of their respect and loyality so they turned on him, they hurled insults at him, locked him up and told on him, if they given him the respect he needed the whole issue wouldn't have come in the experiments and he wouldn't have snaped.

[–] bennet-battle 12 years ago

Well, I agree with that. The experiments did affect his mental condition, and his team didn't deal with him because they were intimidated by him from the beginning.

This is simply a strange movie in which we understand the “bad guy” Kevin Bacon's character better than everyone else. As if Kevin Bacon's character is the protagonist that becomes psychotic then everyone else becomes the protagonist half way through the film and is forced to turn on him by the ending.

It is as if the writers became too involved in explaining Kevin's character in the beginning that there wasn't any other interesting way to wrap it up but to make it into a horror by the ending.

[–] glynis23-282-577521 12 years ago

You don't work with your team leader because you like the way he parks his hair you work with him because he's got the job or your no good.

Perhaps someone thought (when writing) it would be better for the main heroes if they make out behind Kevin Bacon's back (probably a excuse for sex) which is problematic because your suppose to like your hero instantly.

[–] bennet-battle 12 years ago

I agree. They knew his mental state was being affect both physically, and by the isolation. Had his team been more interested in the project succeeding they would have sought to treat his mental state.

Honestly I believe they could have had a much better movie had the whole lab experimentation government funding issue been chopped down, and attempted to tell a bigger story about Kevin Bacon's character out loose in the real world implementing his plans.

Scientists running out of military funding is an over done movie cliché done in almost EVERY lab project experiment scenario.

But, as mentioned below; invisible people fighting would look silly. It is peculiar that an invisible character needs visible counter-parts for conflict or else we wouldn't be able to see the action or fighting.

[–] glynis23-282-577521 12 years ago

Verhoeven probably has a knack for horribe characters like Denise Richards from Starship Troopers and Elizabeth Berkley from Showgirls, he probably tends to constraint on unpleasant aspects like sex, violence, swearing and negative qualities of others.

Would've been better to see him more in the real world as a invisible man and reek havoc, think the filmmakers were more into the special effects than the characters.

[–] bennet-battle 12 years ago

Verhoeven is part of the older generation of Directors who firmly believed in telling one whole story in one movie (similar to Ridley Scott, or Stanley Kubrick ) which is problematic if the story needs further explanation.

Unless a movie is pitched to the studio as a possible trilogy it is intended as being made a one time deal. Only if the movie accumulates financial success then sequels are likely.

[–] glynis23-282-577521 12 years ago

Why does Verhoeven have horrible characters in his movies?

He probably tends to constraint on unpleasant aspects like sex, violence, swearing and negative qualities of others, think sometimes people are not use to this they like seeing heroes as people who they can relate to and root for while Verhoeven is focused on immoral aspects like Carmen's dear Johnny letterfrom Starship Troopers.

[–] bennet-battle 12 years ago

I began to notice Verhoeven's signature character traits since Total Recall. He seemed to like having characters in an electrified psychotic state. I couldn't explain why. Seems to be what he likes. In RoboCop, Jesus' resurrection was Verhoeven's driving inspiration for Murphy coming back to life as RoboCop.

Starship Troopers was a mess of writing, that was held back several times for years for re-writes which ultimately Verhoeven left out of frustration & dissatisfaction. I honestly couldn't say what or why with Starship Troopers since so much of it was reconstructed so many times.

[–] glynis23-282-577521 12 years ago

His characters often mouth off especially in Hollow Man and Showgirls, he often has mouthy women.

[–] glynis23-282-577521 11 years ago

I don't remember reading anything about multiple rewrites on Starship Troopers.

Think the Linda/Matt affair was nothing but a excuse for sex, Verhoeven biggest problem as a story teller is that more than often he tries too hard to make his character edgy by going off point in making them unsympathetic especially in his post Total Recall movies, at the end of the day Verhoeven and the writers were out of touch with why should the audience care about the protagonists.

[–] bennet-battle 11 years ago

According to Wikipedia Verhoeven mentions on the Starship Troopers DVD that he didn't finish reading the book, and it made him depressed. Don't think he liked it much, and the conflicting satire of the military is proof of that. The enemies were bugs with no interest in peace, so satire of military there was more of an obstruction.

Paul Verhoeven seems to enjoy high intensity with most characters being over the top which worked well in Robocop.
My opinion is that Paul Verhoeven enjoys loud characters inflammatory, over the top screaming in each other's faces. Tight camera views of people being stern, and intimidating. Sometimes it works depending on the film, but not so well with the protagonists in this film.
For a film such as Robocop set in a dark future criminal characters needed to be frightening, insane, and louder which worked perfectly well. In that film we needed to feel that only Robocop could deal with that kind of insanity in a world falling apart.

[–] glynis23-282-577521 11 years ago

On the Black Book DVD interview Verhoeven stated he just did Hollow Man because he could do it not because he felt it should be done, after that he felt he shouldn't do that anymore and should only make a movie that he cares about.

Hollow man felt like it was written by someone who didn't understand the scientist sensibility expert from all the David Cronenberg movies that he had seen.

Verhoeven thinks he can just throw intensity and bad mouthing into any old story, puts it out and it's poo, As you said it works for RoboCop because it's a crime thing but not for a invisible man scientist thing, he's one of those filmmakers who does the exact same thing over and over.

[–] MickyMac (3209) 7 years ago

Hollow Man is his least favorite film he's directed in his entire career and because of it he went back to the Netherlands.

[–] glynis23-282-577521 12 years ago

Whats the point of having heroes that nobody cares about?

[–] bennet-battle 12 years ago

Imagine instead if they had all become invisible how ridiculous watching furniture bouncing back & forth off of other invisible people would have looked?
Watching invisible people fight doesn't exactly make for a visually entertaining and exciting conclusion.

Random fighting noises from invisible people:“Ooouwa!”-“UH!”-“SHMACK-PUNCH!”-“CRASH!”

“Who won?”....“I, don't know. I might have killed one of our guys. I didn't know who I was strangling.”

Would be an amazing comedy piece.

[–] wiiztec 12 years ago

That little test vial of nitroglycerin should have been thrown into the freezer

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] glynis23-282-577521 12 years ago

Think they had them making out behind his back because there wasn't enough sex in the script because Verhoeven likes sex and violence?

There's no point in having characters that nobody cares about your not making a film for yourself in a darkroom your making it for a commerical audience maybe it was not their intention to root for Kevin Bacon or creating interesting characters, the film felt nothing more than a special effects extravaganzain because the filmmakers were like maybe too busy figuring out ways to make him visible.

[–] Kard_Shooter 12 years ago

I agree with you up to a point. The rest of the characters were very bland and the acts he committed weren't THAT outrageous. If you're a straight male and you were invisible, you WOULD be out there fondling girls breasts and doing god knows what to them. And the murder of that chairman guy was ok because he was a douche. But i felt repulsed when he killed that animal in the cage so i kind of did want to see him get his comeuppance for that. But i really could not give less of a *beep* about the other characters' fates.

MY FAVE ONLINE FILM CRITIC =http://www.youtube.com/user/JeremyJahns?feature=watch

[–] glynis23-282-577521 12 years ago

In Hollywood sometimes you get to the point where you are not telling a story or writing great characters, your writing 2 hour excuses for special effects or sex and violence.

All the things that happened in Hollow Man like all the dislikable characters, Elizabeth Shue love affair with Josh Brolin, underground lab and special effects treated as a plot device were just done because they could do them not because they felt they should be done and was a step too far.

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]