I am not really sure why the film has an overall score of 3.2 at this time--it's really NOT a bad film. And, for the budget behind it, the people responsible for INDESTRUCTIBLE MAN should be proud of the final product.
Oddly enough, this is a film that doesn't easily fit in one genre. The best way to categorize it is a "sci-fi/horror film with strong Film Noir overtones". Why sci-fi/horror? Well, the plot involves a scientist accidentally reviving a man who was executed. Upon being revived, the man finds he is practically indestructible and goes on a killing spree--to kill those who framed him as well as any other person who just happens to get in his way. Now as to the Noir aspects, the film is shown in a semi-documentary style like many Film Noir movies and features the usual narration--this time by the detective working on the case. In this sense, it's reminiscent of Noir films such as HE WALKED BY NIGHT and T-MEN.
Despite the merging of these genres, I think the film worked because the acting was decent and the writing showed imagination and a slight Noir edge to it. Considering two of my favorite genres are Noir and 50s horror/sci-fi, it's not at all surprising I liked it. About the only negative was the stupid and needless inter-cutting of closeups of Lon Chaney's rheumy-looking eyes (i.e., watery and perhaps looking like he was drunk--a distinct possibility in Chaney's case). This just looked cheap and seeing the same pointless closeup shot again and again was sloppy.
Oddly enough, this is a film that doesn't easily fit in one genre. The best way to categorize it is a "sci-fi/horror film with strong Film Noir overtones". Why sci-fi/horror? Well, the plot involves a scientist accidentally reviving a man who was executed. Upon being revived, the man finds he is practically indestructible and goes on a killing spree--to kill those who framed him as well as any other person who just happens to get in his way. Now as to the Noir aspects, the film is shown in a semi-documentary style like many Film Noir movies and features the usual narration--this time by the detective working on the case. In this sense, it's reminiscent of Noir films such as HE WALKED BY NIGHT and T-MEN.
Despite the merging of these genres, I think the film worked because the acting was decent and the writing showed imagination and a slight Noir edge to it. Considering two of my favorite genres are Noir and 50s horror/sci-fi, it's not at all surprising I liked it. About the only negative was the stupid and needless inter-cutting of closeups of Lon Chaney's rheumy-looking eyes (i.e., watery and perhaps looking like he was drunk--a distinct possibility in Chaney's case). This just looked cheap and seeing the same pointless closeup shot again and again was sloppy.