The Erotic Misadventures of the Invisible Man (2003 Video) User Reviews (5)

Not too bad.

[BlackJack_B · 5/10 · 1 August 2013]

If City T.V. and Sex T.V. didn't decide to go PC or not even bother promoting what their channel was created for, respectively, I would have seen this one sooner. It wasn't until yesterday that I saw Invisible Man and for what it's worth, it's actually decent.

In one of her final performances, Gabriella Hall plays Kelli Parkinson, a struggling actress trying to get a job. She hangs out with a fired caterer named Norman Parent, who somehow got turned invisible by spilling a butterscotch smelling formula in a sophomoric scene that ranks among the worst ever in 100+ years of film. They go across the ocean to England to help perform an exorcism and then to Italy where Kelli has a film opportunity. Unbeknownst to them, an agent named Robert Bull (who also got into the butterscotch and is invisible as well) attempts to sabotage her career for being dumped by her as her representative.

The movie features lame special effects but they do the trick but I doubt anybody watches this film to see those. It's to see a very healthy and fit Gabby Hall naked and she is in top form and health here. The other ladies, like Kim Dawson, came to showcase their assets in grand style. The Invisible Men do things that Claude Rains wasn't allowed to do back in 1933, of course. Obviously, you won't be disappointed with the women. The acting isn't great, with people in England and Italy speaking stereotypical accented English.

If you want to see the last vestiges of the softcore era before The Asylum took over with American raunch, this isn't bad. There's better, though.

Lame--not "really" what I expected

[gregopego12 · 3/10 · 16 November 2005]

I rented this type of "soft core" before, but I can honestly say, I wasn't expecting this to be in the same type as "Rod Steele: You Only Live Until You Die"--which was both sexy AND funny. It had a good script, a sincere leading man, and a sense of purpose. It also has Gabriella Hall who is hot. The reason why I didn't expect this movie, was because the box was missing the "Must be 18 to Rent" Sticker. I was looking for more "cheese" and less "cheesecake."

First of all, I think movies shouldn't be allowed to start with "actors" rehearsing for a part at a talent agency (or wherever "actors" rehearse). In this movies seeing the "actors" rehearsing highlights the lack of preparation that went into acting out the real characters in the movie.

Okay, having found out that this WAS a soft core movie, I didn't necessarily turn it off and demand my money back. But, the dizzying way the extended video "erotic" scenes are added to what was probably a late night pay-cable release are very annoying and easy to fast-forward through without the sustained quality of, say, Rod Steele. You know they must've had some money, because I think some of it is filmed overseas.

I will have to say the main actor trying NOT to spill the invisibility potion on himself is one of the most baffling acting jobs I've ever seen. And, I've seen Torgo from Manos! It may actually have been worth the dollar rental fee (that and Gabriella Hall). Still, there are better corny movies to rent with your friends.

Horrible!

[nwardr1 · 1/10 · 25 April 2005]

After just viewing the movie, I must say this is one of the worst films I have ever seen. This takes my worst movie award away from Komodo, which is no easy feat. It is neither a porno nor a legitimate film and it gives them both a bad name. The acting, camera-work, plot, script, and sound are all awful. My personal favorite part of the movie is the duck asking the bartender if he has any grapes. Why was a joke such as this put in the film? Was the director thinking; "I need a humorous scene to balance out the great acting so I will use some lame ass joke I read on a Laffy Taffy wrapper." Another retarded part is when Norman spills the invisibility potion on himself as he attempts to keep it from spilling. Why did they even bother to give the film a NC-17 rating, were they hoping to get as large of an audience as possible? At least if it were rated X it would be more sexual and therefore taking the viewers focus away from the overall low quality. I pray for someone who worked on this panty waste of a flick to respond.

Very Funny Movie

[MarkWHowell · 7/10 · 23 August 2009]

Whatever that movie first guy was watching it was NOT this movie. There is NO time travel in this movie. It is a movie about an actor that was turned invisible and wants to be visible again. He gets dump by his girlfriend, gets fired from his catering job, gets covered in a potion that smells like butterscotch and then turns invisible. the story deals with him finding a girlfriend and their attempt to turn him visible. The movie was very funny with a lot of nudity but it is not a hardcore porn movie. If you are looking for porn you will be disappointed however, if you are look for a comedy with adult overtones then try this movie. This would be a good movie to watch with your girlfriend or wife.

Rating is compared to movies in genre

[VetteRanger · 8/10 · 9 June 2023]

Two great things about this movie to begin. Kim Dawson and Gabriella Hall, although the movie has a wholesome number of great looking actresses.

There is a trick, the "invisible man" is plotted as having sex with a few of the actresses, but since he's invisible they all have to pretend they're making love to someone, and for the most part they do a good job with the erotic pantomime.

However, this is one of the rare skin flicks where you can watch it for more than the sex scenes. It's genuinely funny, with many clever scenes and a lot of funny dialogue.

Gabriella Hall does the best job with the pantomimes, with a memorable scene where she plays as if TWO invisible men are pulling her back and forth.

Good watch.