Hollow Man II (2006)

Absolutely Fantastic

It’s not bad or unwatchable but despite the amplitude of the spectacle, the end result is underwhelming.

I think this is a new genre that they're all sort of working their way through it and haven't got all the kinks worked out yet but it's a genre that works for me.

The story, direction, characters, and writing/dialogue is akin to taking a tranquilizer shot to the neck, but everything else was so well done.

An invisible man attacks Dr. Devin Villiers demanding something called buffer. Villiers tells him that Maggie Dalton (Laura Regan) should have buffers and he kills Villiers. Police detectives Frank Turner (Peter Facinelli) and Lisa Martinez investigates but is soon pulled off the case. They are reduced to guarding Maggie. The invisible man attacks killing Martinez. Dr. William Reisner (David McIlwraith) and Col. Gavin Bishop (William MacDonald) had set up the trap with Maggie as bait. Turner with Dalton goes on the run from both the military and the invisible man. Maggie reveals that a DOD program code name Silent Knight run by Reisner had picked up from the previous failed experiment. Maggie had created a buffer to keep the invisible subjects from dying. Special forces member Michael Griffin (Christian Slater) had been turned invisible but is now on the run.This actually started well considering this is strictly straight to DVD. Although the teens doing night vision sex tape is pretty stupid. I have no idea why the invisible man was in that room other than to see some boobs. The voyeuristic aspect of the original is still bleeding into this movie. This one needed to go all out action, but the money isn't there for that. Christian Slater is headlining but he's barely in this. He does some voice work but his character is invisible. The best option was probably for this to go far more into horror if they can't afford big time action.

It's one thing to make a sequel with different characters but it's another thing to make a sequel with a plot that is so contradictory to its predecessor that it almost seems pointless to even watch. I was not the biggest fan of the first Hollow Man (2000) mostly because of its story. The same goes for this film, however, there a couple elements that still leave this sequel watchable.Hollow Man 2 continues the story of the first film by involving its characters with an almost identical plot. After the failure of Sebastian Caine as a test subject to test the power of invisibility, the government decided to try out this experiment again. The difference is that they tested it on a well-trained soldier. And guess what; nothings changed! The test subject was Michael Griffin (Christian Slater) and now he's become uncontrollable for anyone to handle.Someone tell me why making a new invisible villain was such important thing to do? If the test didn't work the first time, what made them think performing the test on another unstable subject was a good idea? This is just another problem child.To try and contain him, the government sends out task forces to try and capture Griffin but like we all know, predictable as ever, they won't. Along side this, Frank Turner (Peter Facinelli) is sent to protect the doctor, Maggie Dalton (Laura Regan) who performed the experiment on Griffin because now Griffin is after her. As the plot continues, Turner and Dalton will develop a relationship, which will allow them to be closer to each other than they thought they ever would be. But this kind of subplot is minimally explored due to its slimmed running time.The things that still held up during this add-on were the carnage and visual effects. It's no Paul Verhoeven film, but it still has some strong scenes of violence. And for a Direct-to-Video sequel, the visual effects are top notch looking. I'm surprised the crew could still do that with such a smaller budget. I was definitely impressed with that. And to not give the ending away, I'm curious to if there is hope for an invisible person, because maybe not all of them are unstable. Could this lead to a Hollow Man 3? Probably not, but it would be interesting if it goes that route.For a Direct-to-Video sequel, the visuals are good and so is the violence but it doesn't add anything knew to the story. If anything, it ignores the first film almost entirely.

I enjoyed the original Hollow Man for all its flaws, so I was expecting something along the same lines for this sequel. It is such a shame though that Hollow Man 2 is such a mess. Not even Christian Slater could save it, I like him and he seemed a good choice, but with the characters being as stock and as irritating as they were and the script being as thin and as cheesy as it was he can't do anything with the role. Visuals are a step-down, not cheap as such, but they aren't amazing either. The music is not as atmospheric or as fitting, while the story is rushed and uninteresting with little suspense or thrills to satisfy. Overall, a real let-down. 1/10 Bethany Cox

this sequel to 2000's "Hollow Man"has nothing to do with the 1st one. the characters are all different.for me,this movie lacked the excitement of the 1st.i found it boring and drawn out for in many scenes.i just didn't find it compelling at all.it does not have any of the style of the 1st one,and,to me, no sense of urgency or distress.i didn't think the storyline was very good and the acting was good,but the actors weren't given much to work with.i thought the scope of the movie was too narrow,considering the subject matter.if you have an invisible man in a movie,you should expect some major implications and repercussions.i didn't see that here.it's true that many times,the sequel is not up to par with the original,but this one isn't even close.in my opinion,this movie is not even average.i give Hollow Man 2" 4/10