in black velvet. Price also spoke about working with Hardwicke, who he recalled "didn't like doing this film; he was facing home problems at the time. We became very close". Production ended on the film on November 11. Post-production Following the main production three to four days of post-production work needed to be done for the special effects. This was supervised by the special effects artist John Fulton who worked 15 nights, with the last day of shooting having May work his crew until 4:15 am. The score of the film makes use of Frank Skinner's score from Son of Frankenstein, while Hans J. Salters main title score would be re-used in Man Made Monster and The Strange Case of Doctor Rx. Release The Invisible Man Returns was distributed theatrically by Universal Pictures on January 12, 1940. The film grossed a total of $815,000 from both domestic and international box office rentals. At New York's Rialto Theatre, the ticket sales were equal to that of Tower of London which was their previous all-time record breaker in the previous season. The film was followed with a sequel, the comedy film The Invisible Woman in 1940. The film received a pseudo-remake with Abbott and Costello Meet the Invisible Man in 1951 with the Invisible Man character being re-written as a boxer but with much of the dialogue from the film being lifted from The Invisible Man Returns. Another unofficial remake was the Mexican production El Hombre Que Lorgro' ser Invisible which featured the same plot as The Invisible Man Returns but with the ending being taken from Philip Wylie's novel The Murderer Invisible. Reception From contemporary reviews, Archer Winsten praised the film in The New York Post, stating that "the suspense, accruing from all sides, mounts to an impressive total" and specifically praised Hardwicke who "accomplishes his shift from early suavity to gibbering fear with a conviction rarely seen in unimportant or trick effect films". Kate Cameron of The New York Daily News stated that "some of the novelty of the strange situation has worn off" and that the film had some of the humor that "made the Topper so popular". Frank Nugent of The New York Times negatively compared the film to The Invisible Man, stating it was "neither so horrendous nor so humours" as the original film. Nugent blamed this on the popularity of the film Topper and that the