Shouldn't we be seeing the invisible man's outline? Even though he IS invisible and is naked, dust particles in the air would be landing on his skin creating an outline of him. It would be impossible for him to be completely invisible.
shareNot that much, and we do see his outline, when he gets wet, etc.
Yeah but there's tons of dust in the air and they all land on our skin. We don't notice it because we're visible. But if we're INVISIBLE, the dust is the only thing that can be seen. So we should be seeing an outline of a man walking around, not nothing.
shareTo be honest, good point. But then, this IS a poor movie. I wonder what the new movie's like?
It's on Netflix but I couldn't be bothered to watch it. My parents saw it and they say it's good but I already read the entire plot on Wikipedia and the story just doesn't interest me at all. If they made an invisible man comedy like "Memoirs of an Invisible Man" with Chevy Chase, I would definitely watch it.
shareYou should read H. F. Saint's novel "Memoirs of an Invisible Man" on which Chevy Chase's movie is loosely based. The story is far superior to the movie which is basically just a parody.
BTW: Saint actually addresses the very problem you inquired about in the novel.
I think you might be able to see parts of his outline if you looked really closely in good light. Dust particles aren’t big and in average conditions would not do much to give someone away, neither would loose hair. Water or even smoke would make him far more vulnerable to the naked eye.
sharePerhaps but for a horror movie, where's the fun in that?
share