By Kevin Jagernauth | The Playlist August 25, 2011 at 1:18AM
We have to admit, we totally forgot this had even happened, but way back in 2007 David S. Goyer signed on to write and direct a new take on "The Invisible Man" for Universal. Not much has been heard since, with Goyer in the interim delivering "The Unborn" and of course, taking on the Christopher Nolan Batman films and the upcoming "Man Of Steel." But, the project is still very much alive and Hero Complex recently caught up with the writer/director on the set of the currently shooting Superman movie, and revealed that his take is forgoing the more serious path taken by recent Universal horror franchise films like "Van Helsing" and "The Wolf Man."
“It’s a period film but it’s period like Downey’s ’Sherlock Holmes,’” Goyer said. “It’s period but it’s a reinvention of the character in the sort of way that Stephen Sommers exploded ‘The Mummy’ into a much bigger kind of mythology. That’s kind of what we’ve done with ‘The Invisible Man.’”
Based on the H.G. Wells novel, the story has seen numerous adaptations over the years from the iconic 1933 film starring Claude Rains, to a couple of television series', graphic novels and that Chevy Chase/Darryl Hannah movie directed by John Carpenter. Those latter iterations failed to capture the imagination the way the James Whale-directed classic did, but this new reboot looks to update the story to the blockbuster/tentpole age. However, with Universal recently dropping projects left and right, letting "The Dark Tower," "Clue" and "Ouija" go, it's no surprise the studio is taking their time before giving it a go.
“It’s something slowly working its way through the Universal development channels,” Goyer said, adding, ”We did some pre-vis tests and things like that that they were very happy with. Now we’re going through the casting process. If they get the right lead, they’ll make it.”
It's not too surprising that Universal isn't messing around anymore, opting for a splashier take on the story, even though it seems like a somewhat uninspired direction to move in. But as both the aforementioned 'Holmes' and 'Mummy' have shown, audiences don't particularly care about faithful adaptations if there is enough sizzle and laughter up on the big screen. But the question remains, which star won't mind going invisible for the lead role?