For me, House of Wax is a very good movie, but I am not sure if it is Price's best horror film. I did prefer the Corman-Price-Poe collaborations Pit and the Pendulum, The Raven, The Fall of the House of Usher and especially The Masque of the Red Death. The story occasionally loses bite and Phyllis Kirk is a rather bland female lead(though in all fairness her character is as well). Conversely, the Gothic sets look gorgeous and add a real sensual beauty to a lot of scenes. The photography is just as lavish. On the subject of visuals, I had the pleasure of watching House of Wax in 3D, I am not a fan of 3D and find it distracts from the film and doesn't focus on the story enough. In the case of House of Wax however, not only does the 3D look good, but it enhances the scares without making them gimmicky. Igor appearing to have leapt out of the audience was a standout. House of Wax is fine in 2D, but even better in 3D in my view, and I thought I'd never say that. The music is haunting and robust, the writing is sharp and the story is suspenseful and mostly exciting. There are some very effective scenes, such as the sight of the figure in the cloak, Jarrod chasing Sue down the alleyways(pure suspense and horror), the murders especially that of Jarrod's partner, the heart-breaking scene where Jarrod tries in vain to save his wax works and Sue strapped nude on the table in the climax. The wax works are very creepy as well. The pace is brisk and the direction handles the atmosphere very well. The performances are very good on the whole, Carolyn Jones went on to do better things but is interesting to see. Frank Lovejoy is great at just playing it straight, Reggie Rymal provides another of the 3D's finest moments with the paddle-ball and Charles Bronson is wonderfully creepy even without uttering a word. Best of all is Vincent Price in his first array into horror and for me still one of his best roles, his make-up is exceptional and he is very malevolent and sympathetic, a type of role that always saw him at his best. Looking at him also, you'd never guess that it was his first horror role, he looks as though he'd done it for years beforehand. In conclusion, a very good film and a great 3D experience. 8/10 Bethany Cox
176 Reviews
Suffering for beauty
BrandtSponseller3 May 2005
"Professor" Henry Jarrod (Vincent Price) is a sculptor who works in wax. He's living in New York City in the late 19th Century, and he's displaying his handiwork in a wax museum. When his partner, Matthew Burke (Roy Robert)--really his primary investor--balks at Jarrod's receipts and tries to talk him into moving in a more commercial direction, perhaps with a "Chamber of Horrors", Jarrod protests that he's creating meticulous works of art, not cheap sensationalism. Jarrod tries to interest a new investor, but when the prospect says he can't make a decision for a few months, Burke says he can't wait. He suggests torching the place and collecting the insurance money. When Jarrod refuses, Burke torches the museum anyway, and the two fight. Jarrod supposedly dies in the fire, leaving Burke to collect. However, when a mysterious, disfigured stranger shows up, the resolution may not be so simple.
The debate that Jarrod and Burke have in the opening scene of this remake of Mystery of the Wax Museum (1933) is particularly ironic in light of the film's history. House of Wax was made as a 3D film--a fact made more than obvious from the film's opening credits, which are presented in a font made to look like it is bursting forth from the screen.
In the early 1950s, movie theater box office receipts were down because of television. Film studios and movie theaters were looking for gimmicks that would make films seem more special. They were looking to do things that television couldn't do. According to film editor Rudi Fehr, "The House of Wax was made because the theaters were empty, people were staying home to watch television. In order to lure the audiences back to the theaters, Warner's came out with 3D." While this wasn't the first commercial 3D film--1952's Bwana Devil holds that honor, this was certainly one of the more popular ones.
Studio head Jack Warner told Fehr that he would have five weeks to edit the film after shooting was done. Fehr said they could get it done even quicker if director Andre De Toth would shoot the film in sequence. So Warner demanded just that, despite De Toth's protests. Shooting in sequence is unusual and can make the on-set crew's job much more difficult. But it certainly didn't negatively affect the performances or De Toth's direction, which are both outstanding despite a couple strangely truncated bits of exposition.
Like many 3D films, there are a few shots in House of Wax that might otherwise be inexplicable. The most prominent example here is a huckster who stands in front of the revamped House of Wax doing tricks with three paddleballs. We linger on him much longer than we normally would so that he can bounce the ball into our face. This shows part of the difficulty of 3D--it's difficult to reconcile the most impressive effects from the audience's perspective with narrative needs. Viewed now, in simple 2D on a television screen, the obligatory 3D shots of House of Wax play as quirky, campy curios. For me, that adds to the charm of the film.
Price has an unusual role here in that he plays a good portion of the film with disfigurement makeup, half-limping, hunched over, covered in bulky black cloaks in a manner that somewhat prefigures John Hurt's turn as John Merrick in The Elephant Man (1980). De Toth is excellent at building atmosphere, especially in the "external" shots, which frequently feel more like we're watching a version of the Jack the Ripper story set in London.
Most of the script by Crane Wilbur, based on a play by Charles Belden (which also served as the basis for 1933's Mystery of the Wax Museum, of course), is deliciously flagitious--degenerate in a more over the top manner than was usual for the period. The conflagration at the end of the opening is particularly unexpected and twisted, as is Jarrod's modus operandi throughout the film. It's only too bad that the self-enforced Hollywood "moral code" at the time could not have allowed for a more nihilistic ending. I for one was cheering on Jarrod and his assistant Igor, played by none other than Charles Bronson in one of his earlier roles, when he was still using "Charles Buchinsky".
Although it's difficult to say whether Belden, Wilbur or De Toth intended a message or subtext, it's easy to read a number of interesting angles into the film. To begin, the use of the name "Igor" for the assistant suggests a number of twisted turnabouts on Dr. Frankenstein. Jarrod is even more depraved than the good doctor as he "creates death" out of life, in the service of art. At least it seems depraved if you're not an artist. If you are, you might simply note that one must suffer to be beautiful. That's more than just a flippant remark, as Jarrod suffers financially for beauty early in the film, and Cathy Gray (Carolyn Jones) suffers physically for beauty as she nearly suffocates herself to make herself thin. And of course there's the literal, sinister sense in which the artist makes others suffer to create his beauty. There are also very interesting subtexts available related to goals of realism in art, and of course, the ironic messages noted earlier in the beginning of the film, where we are debating aesthetics versus financial, or more material considerations.
Although House of Wax was popular at the box office in 1953, there was no shortage of critical devaluations of the film as a cheap gimmick, and no shortage of complaints about image quality and eyestrain when trying to view the film in 3D. 3D was only prominent for another year or so (to make periodic returns later, often for "number 3" films in series), but House of Wax is a much better film than it was given credit for at the time. It's not Vincent Price's best, but it's well worth viewing.
The debate that Jarrod and Burke have in the opening scene of this remake of Mystery of the Wax Museum (1933) is particularly ironic in light of the film's history. House of Wax was made as a 3D film--a fact made more than obvious from the film's opening credits, which are presented in a font made to look like it is bursting forth from the screen.
In the early 1950s, movie theater box office receipts were down because of television. Film studios and movie theaters were looking for gimmicks that would make films seem more special. They were looking to do things that television couldn't do. According to film editor Rudi Fehr, "The House of Wax was made because the theaters were empty, people were staying home to watch television. In order to lure the audiences back to the theaters, Warner's came out with 3D." While this wasn't the first commercial 3D film--1952's Bwana Devil holds that honor, this was certainly one of the more popular ones.
Studio head Jack Warner told Fehr that he would have five weeks to edit the film after shooting was done. Fehr said they could get it done even quicker if director Andre De Toth would shoot the film in sequence. So Warner demanded just that, despite De Toth's protests. Shooting in sequence is unusual and can make the on-set crew's job much more difficult. But it certainly didn't negatively affect the performances or De Toth's direction, which are both outstanding despite a couple strangely truncated bits of exposition.
Like many 3D films, there are a few shots in House of Wax that might otherwise be inexplicable. The most prominent example here is a huckster who stands in front of the revamped House of Wax doing tricks with three paddleballs. We linger on him much longer than we normally would so that he can bounce the ball into our face. This shows part of the difficulty of 3D--it's difficult to reconcile the most impressive effects from the audience's perspective with narrative needs. Viewed now, in simple 2D on a television screen, the obligatory 3D shots of House of Wax play as quirky, campy curios. For me, that adds to the charm of the film.
Price has an unusual role here in that he plays a good portion of the film with disfigurement makeup, half-limping, hunched over, covered in bulky black cloaks in a manner that somewhat prefigures John Hurt's turn as John Merrick in The Elephant Man (1980). De Toth is excellent at building atmosphere, especially in the "external" shots, which frequently feel more like we're watching a version of the Jack the Ripper story set in London.
Most of the script by Crane Wilbur, based on a play by Charles Belden (which also served as the basis for 1933's Mystery of the Wax Museum, of course), is deliciously flagitious--degenerate in a more over the top manner than was usual for the period. The conflagration at the end of the opening is particularly unexpected and twisted, as is Jarrod's modus operandi throughout the film. It's only too bad that the self-enforced Hollywood "moral code" at the time could not have allowed for a more nihilistic ending. I for one was cheering on Jarrod and his assistant Igor, played by none other than Charles Bronson in one of his earlier roles, when he was still using "Charles Buchinsky".
Although it's difficult to say whether Belden, Wilbur or De Toth intended a message or subtext, it's easy to read a number of interesting angles into the film. To begin, the use of the name "Igor" for the assistant suggests a number of twisted turnabouts on Dr. Frankenstein. Jarrod is even more depraved than the good doctor as he "creates death" out of life, in the service of art. At least it seems depraved if you're not an artist. If you are, you might simply note that one must suffer to be beautiful. That's more than just a flippant remark, as Jarrod suffers financially for beauty early in the film, and Cathy Gray (Carolyn Jones) suffers physically for beauty as she nearly suffocates herself to make herself thin. And of course there's the literal, sinister sense in which the artist makes others suffer to create his beauty. There are also very interesting subtexts available related to goals of realism in art, and of course, the ironic messages noted earlier in the beginning of the film, where we are debating aesthetics versus financial, or more material considerations.
Although House of Wax was popular at the box office in 1953, there was no shortage of critical devaluations of the film as a cheap gimmick, and no shortage of complaints about image quality and eyestrain when trying to view the film in 3D. 3D was only prominent for another year or so (to make periodic returns later, often for "number 3" films in series), but House of Wax is a much better film than it was given credit for at the time. It's not Vincent Price's best, but it's well worth viewing.
In any format it's a genre highlight.
hitchcockthelegend5 March 2009
Henry Jarrod is a very talented sculptor of wax figures for a museum. But as the museum starts to flounder, Jarrod's partner, Matthew Burke, insists on taking a new direction, a row ensues and Jarrod is knocked unconscious. Burke seizes the opportunity to torch the museum and get the insurance money, with Jarrod still in the premises. Thought long since dead, Jarrod resurfaces, apparently wheel chair bound and with horribly burned hands. Opening up a new museum, his new figures (made by his protégé under his instruction) look ever more lifelike than before, could he be responsible for some despicable crimes in the area?
This marvellous film is a remake of the 1933 chiller, The Mystery Of The Wax Museum, directed by Michael Curtiz. Here this film is taken on by Andre de Toth, originally filmed in 3-D with the then bonus addition of Warner Phonic Sound, it's a picture that thankfully holds up real well even in its basic flat format. The reason it does hold up well is because director de Toth didn't get carried away with the gimmick, it's used sparingly so the narrative never gets lost amongst any trickery, and thus House Of Wax's excellently creepy story comes to the fore.
Having the ever supreme Vincent Price as your leading man (Jarrod) will always help your horror genre picture, and here he two folds the performance brilliantly. At first his Jarrod is charming and carrying a grace about his dedication to his craft, but then, devilment takes control as Price pumps creepy ardour into Jarrod's fractured mind. Quite a turn from Price who most definitely suffered for his art during the shoot, forced to do his own stunts (the 3D process needs more than one camera), he was involved in an accident that set him on fire and almost saw him crushed!Then there was the long and often painful make up sessions to get the desired effects of a burns victim, layers of rubber strangling his skin to the point of passing out, oh yes Vincent earned his money on this one!
We even get one of the earliest credited performances from Charles Bronson (here under his real name of Buchinsky) as Jarrod's assistant Igor, whilst fans of The Addams Family TV series will no doubt enjoy the performance of future Mortica, Carolyn Jones. The film was a big success on its release, and hugely popular with critics, and it's not hard to see why, because today it still stands proud as one of the finest exponents of classic horror, both as a story and as a technical construction. 9/10
This marvellous film is a remake of the 1933 chiller, The Mystery Of The Wax Museum, directed by Michael Curtiz. Here this film is taken on by Andre de Toth, originally filmed in 3-D with the then bonus addition of Warner Phonic Sound, it's a picture that thankfully holds up real well even in its basic flat format. The reason it does hold up well is because director de Toth didn't get carried away with the gimmick, it's used sparingly so the narrative never gets lost amongst any trickery, and thus House Of Wax's excellently creepy story comes to the fore.
Having the ever supreme Vincent Price as your leading man (Jarrod) will always help your horror genre picture, and here he two folds the performance brilliantly. At first his Jarrod is charming and carrying a grace about his dedication to his craft, but then, devilment takes control as Price pumps creepy ardour into Jarrod's fractured mind. Quite a turn from Price who most definitely suffered for his art during the shoot, forced to do his own stunts (the 3D process needs more than one camera), he was involved in an accident that set him on fire and almost saw him crushed!Then there was the long and often painful make up sessions to get the desired effects of a burns victim, layers of rubber strangling his skin to the point of passing out, oh yes Vincent earned his money on this one!
We even get one of the earliest credited performances from Charles Bronson (here under his real name of Buchinsky) as Jarrod's assistant Igor, whilst fans of The Addams Family TV series will no doubt enjoy the performance of future Mortica, Carolyn Jones. The film was a big success on its release, and hugely popular with critics, and it's not hard to see why, because today it still stands proud as one of the finest exponents of classic horror, both as a story and as a technical construction. 9/10
A horror classic, which every fan of the genre should see. Vincent Price's horror persona begins here!
Infofreak6 February 2004
I love Vincent Price, my all time favourite horror actor. 'House Of Wax' is an important movie in his career, because it was his first legitimate horror film, after thirty something pictures in a variety of genres. This really is where the Price persona fans know and love began. He made non-horror pictures after this, it was a few years later that he made 'The Fly' and the William Castle movies which made him a horror star, something cemented later in the 60s with Roger Corman's Poe movies. But you can see Vincent Price horror icon right here. He's terrific as Jarrod and he would draw upon this role for 'The Mad Magician', and later, the Phibes movies and 'Theatre Of Blood'. 'House Of Wax' is a remake of 'Mystery Of The Wax Museum' made twenty years earlier. In that one Lionel Atwill played the Price role (different name, but same character). Atwill was great but Price is even better, as is the movie overall. 'House Of Wax' sticks pretty much to the earlier movie, but with a few changes, most notably the absence of the girl reporter character that Fay Wray played in the original. In this, the policeman played by Frank Lovejoy ('In A Lonely Place') takes on a similar role. Phyllis Kirk is good as the female lead, better in my opinion than Glenda Farrell in the earlier picture. The supporting cast also includes Carolyn "Morticia Addams" Jones, and an early appearance by Charles Bronson, who plays a deaf mute named Igor. 'House Of Wax' was made specifically for 3D, so there's a few gimmicky shots, but that doesn't spoil the movie, which to me is a horror classic that every fan of the genre should see.
Classic Fun-Filled Horror!
Gafke20 June 2004
House of Wax was one of the few films made in 3D which was a huge success. This may have more to do with the fact that it had a good, strong story and great acting and did not rely solely upon it's 3D special effects.
The late great Vincent Price is Henry Jarrod, a sweet and dedicated artist who creates lifelike mannequins for a wax museum. His statues - depicting everyone from Marie Antoinette & Joan of Arc to John Wilkes Booth - are loved by Henry as much as if they were his own children. When he objects to creating more horrific sculptures to attract more paying customers, his partner sets the museum on fire, hoping to collect a tidy sum in insurance money. Henry supposedly perishes in the flames, trying in vain to rescue his beloved wax friends in a scene which is truly heartbreaking. Some time later, Henry reappears, wheelchair bound and just a tad bitter. He has opened a new wax museum which features realistic scenes of murder and horror, many of them taken from current headlines. Unfortunately, some of them are just a little TOO realistic: one looks like Henry's ex-partner, who was found hanging in an elevator shaft. Was it really a suicide, or something more sinister? Joan of Arc bears a striking resemblance to Cathy Gray, a young girl who has gone missing from her room. And Cathy's friend Sue looks exactly like the lost Marie Antoinette, the pride and joy of Henry's former exhibit. Soon, a horribly scarred monster is chasing Sue through the foggy night time streets. Can the police, and Sue's artistic young suitor, solve the mystery in time? Or will Sue wind up as yet another display in the House of Wax?
This is a wonderful, creepy scare-fest with great sets, beautiful colors and strong performances. Vincent Price as Henry Jarrod is both lovable and horrifying as the kind man driven mad. Charles Bronson, in a very early role, is super freaky as Henry's mute and morbid assistant. Carolyn Jones (in her pre-Morticia Addams days) is blond, pretty Cathy, the squeaky opportunist with the heart of gold. Phyllis Kirk is the sensible Sue, a slightly uptight but genuinely believable victim. The scene where she must run through the deserted, fog-soaked streets is very, convincingly creepy. When Sue actually stops long enough to remove her noisy and cumbersome high heeled shoes, which give away her every step on the cobblestone road, I very nearly applauded. The 3D effects are an added bonus to an already wonderfully fun movie - watch for the classic paddle ball scene!
This is one of Price's best starring role films. It is everything that a good horror film should be - funny without being ridiculous, scary without the gore and fantastical without being far fetched. 10 stars!!! Don't miss it!
The late great Vincent Price is Henry Jarrod, a sweet and dedicated artist who creates lifelike mannequins for a wax museum. His statues - depicting everyone from Marie Antoinette & Joan of Arc to John Wilkes Booth - are loved by Henry as much as if they were his own children. When he objects to creating more horrific sculptures to attract more paying customers, his partner sets the museum on fire, hoping to collect a tidy sum in insurance money. Henry supposedly perishes in the flames, trying in vain to rescue his beloved wax friends in a scene which is truly heartbreaking. Some time later, Henry reappears, wheelchair bound and just a tad bitter. He has opened a new wax museum which features realistic scenes of murder and horror, many of them taken from current headlines. Unfortunately, some of them are just a little TOO realistic: one looks like Henry's ex-partner, who was found hanging in an elevator shaft. Was it really a suicide, or something more sinister? Joan of Arc bears a striking resemblance to Cathy Gray, a young girl who has gone missing from her room. And Cathy's friend Sue looks exactly like the lost Marie Antoinette, the pride and joy of Henry's former exhibit. Soon, a horribly scarred monster is chasing Sue through the foggy night time streets. Can the police, and Sue's artistic young suitor, solve the mystery in time? Or will Sue wind up as yet another display in the House of Wax?
This is a wonderful, creepy scare-fest with great sets, beautiful colors and strong performances. Vincent Price as Henry Jarrod is both lovable and horrifying as the kind man driven mad. Charles Bronson, in a very early role, is super freaky as Henry's mute and morbid assistant. Carolyn Jones (in her pre-Morticia Addams days) is blond, pretty Cathy, the squeaky opportunist with the heart of gold. Phyllis Kirk is the sensible Sue, a slightly uptight but genuinely believable victim. The scene where she must run through the deserted, fog-soaked streets is very, convincingly creepy. When Sue actually stops long enough to remove her noisy and cumbersome high heeled shoes, which give away her every step on the cobblestone road, I very nearly applauded. The 3D effects are an added bonus to an already wonderfully fun movie - watch for the classic paddle ball scene!
This is one of Price's best starring role films. It is everything that a good horror film should be - funny without being ridiculous, scary without the gore and fantastical without being far fetched. 10 stars!!! Don't miss it!
The Morgue of Wax
claudio_carvalho6 January 2008
In 1900, in New York, Prof. Henry Jarrod (Vincent Price) is an artist, sculpting masterpieces in wax and exposing them in a small and non-profitable museum. When his partner Matthew Burke (Roy Roberts) proposes a criminal fire to receive the insurance, Henry does not accept and fights with him. Henry is knocked out, left in the burning place and considered dead by the insurance company. When Matthew receives the insurance money, a disfigured man kills him, and later many corpses vanish from the city morgue. The crippled Prof. Henry Jarrod reappears in a wheelchair and destroyed hands, preparing the grand-opening of his wax museum. Meanwhile, Sue Allen (Phyllis Kirk) is impressed with the resemblance of statue of Joan of Arc with her friend Cathy Gray (Carolyn Jones), who was killed and her corpse was missing, and she suspects that her body was covered by wax.
"House of Wax" is good, but also an absolutely unnecessary remake of Michael Curtiz's "Mystery of the Wax Museum", which is better resolved. There are many scenes and dialogs that are identical, and this remake does not add any value to the original movie. Vincent Price performs a creepy character and the movement of his body is one of the greatest differences in this remake. My vote is seven.
Title (Brazil): "Museu de Cera" ("Wax Museum")
"House of Wax" is good, but also an absolutely unnecessary remake of Michael Curtiz's "Mystery of the Wax Museum", which is better resolved. There are many scenes and dialogs that are identical, and this remake does not add any value to the original movie. Vincent Price performs a creepy character and the movement of his body is one of the greatest differences in this remake. My vote is seven.
Title (Brazil): "Museu de Cera" ("Wax Museum")
Is this movie as much fun in 2D?
Varlaam24 January 1999
Perhaps I've been lucky. I've only seen this film twice in the past 15 years, but both times were in 3D, the second time last night. The crowd just loved it, with a big round of applause at the end.
The paddle ball scene is a highlight, but the reprise of the paddle ball is even more hilarious. It's completely over the top, and helps to create the carnival atmosphere that makes the film so effective in a large group.
The really dramatic 3D effects in this film are played for laughs, and I think that's one of the keys to its overall success. Director André De Toth treats the gimmick as a gimmick, and doesn't try to get more out of it than that. Hitchcock, in "Dial M For Murder", tried to use the technology for dramatic effect, but that was a complete failure. The gimmick gets in the way of real drama. The attempted murder of Grace Kelly in "Dial M" is more shocking in 2D. In 3D, you're completely jolted out of your involvement in the scene when Grace's grasping hand comes lunging halfway out into the audience at you.
In "House of Wax", the effect found its real home, a melodramatic thriller, played by everyone with tongue firmly in cheek.
De Toth composes his shots really nicely, I think. There's some foregrounding of chandeliers and other props, but never too much. He mostly holds back on the effect until he can make the best use of it -- the paddle ball, the can-can dancer's round bottom, the bust of Charles Bronson at the end. There is one great 3D thrill, the shot where Bronson, playing Vincent Price's evil mute assistant, has to grapple with policeman Frank Lovejoy. Bronson appears to leap out of the audience and onto the screen; it's an unexpected moment, and a real treat.
The paddle ball scene is a highlight, but the reprise of the paddle ball is even more hilarious. It's completely over the top, and helps to create the carnival atmosphere that makes the film so effective in a large group.
The really dramatic 3D effects in this film are played for laughs, and I think that's one of the keys to its overall success. Director André De Toth treats the gimmick as a gimmick, and doesn't try to get more out of it than that. Hitchcock, in "Dial M For Murder", tried to use the technology for dramatic effect, but that was a complete failure. The gimmick gets in the way of real drama. The attempted murder of Grace Kelly in "Dial M" is more shocking in 2D. In 3D, you're completely jolted out of your involvement in the scene when Grace's grasping hand comes lunging halfway out into the audience at you.
In "House of Wax", the effect found its real home, a melodramatic thriller, played by everyone with tongue firmly in cheek.
De Toth composes his shots really nicely, I think. There's some foregrounding of chandeliers and other props, but never too much. He mostly holds back on the effect until he can make the best use of it -- the paddle ball, the can-can dancer's round bottom, the bust of Charles Bronson at the end. There is one great 3D thrill, the shot where Bronson, playing Vincent Price's evil mute assistant, has to grapple with policeman Frank Lovejoy. Bronson appears to leap out of the audience and onto the screen; it's an unexpected moment, and a real treat.
Even in flat screen, this looks 3-D.
mark.waltz17 May 2020
Warning: Spoilers
Technically, this is one of the most stunning films to come out of the cinemascope / 3D era of Hollywood in an effort to bring movie goers away from their television screens and back into the theater. It's a remake of "The Mystery of the Wax Museum", a classic in its own right, and in some ways is even better. Certainly the casting of Vincent Price in the leading role is one of those reasons, and he passionately portrays a wax museum artist who is betrayed by his business associate, left disfigured and without the use of his hands, believed to be dead. The business partner meets with a gruesome end, and before long, Price is back and planning his new museum, the original museum having been destroyed in a fire. But while the original figures were indeed made out of wax, there is a twist to this one. The wax figures are human corpse couch preserve swirl Price's own creation.
It must have been painful to the creator of the original figures, melted in efforts to create the lifelike destruction. They become gruesome and as horrific as Price's burnt face as they are destroyed. Price sets his sights on the pretty Phyllis Kirk, a friend of one of his victims (Carolyn Jones) call me hand towels to turn into Marie Antoinette. With assistant Charles Bronson, Price flights to give Kirk what he calls eternal life as boyfriend Paul Picerni fights to rescue her.
This is Price's true entry into the horror genre, having spent the better part of the last decade playing villains, and it is obvious that he is made for horror. The film would later be the model for many of his American International films, and even had an almost near like copy made the following year with Price called "The Mad Magician". There had not been many great horror films between the end of the Val Lewton era and this, and "House of Wax" is greatly responsible for the permanent return of that genre. This is Vincent Price at his eeriest best, and if there had been awards given for Grande Guignol like this, he would have been the front runner in that year.
It must have been painful to the creator of the original figures, melted in efforts to create the lifelike destruction. They become gruesome and as horrific as Price's burnt face as they are destroyed. Price sets his sights on the pretty Phyllis Kirk, a friend of one of his victims (Carolyn Jones) call me hand towels to turn into Marie Antoinette. With assistant Charles Bronson, Price flights to give Kirk what he calls eternal life as boyfriend Paul Picerni fights to rescue her.
This is Price's true entry into the horror genre, having spent the better part of the last decade playing villains, and it is obvious that he is made for horror. The film would later be the model for many of his American International films, and even had an almost near like copy made the following year with Price called "The Mad Magician". There had not been many great horror films between the end of the Val Lewton era and this, and "House of Wax" is greatly responsible for the permanent return of that genre. This is Vincent Price at his eeriest best, and if there had been awards given for Grande Guignol like this, he would have been the front runner in that year.
The greatest 3-D film of all time
FilmOtaku13 April 2004
House of Wax is a decent film without the three-dimensional effects, but it is a complete riot when viewed in the original 3-D, especially when we get to see the emcee in front of the theater. Vincent Price is at his creepy best in this film about a man who opens up a wax museum that has a secret as to why the figures look so life-like. This was the second time I had seen it in its original format, and I enjoyed it just as much this time, including its over the top melodrama and unbelievably dated dialogue. Do not miss this film if you can find it showing at a classic movie house, because it is extremely entertaining to experience.
--Shelly
--Shelly
When horror films were fun for everybody!
boris-268 February 2004
HOUSE OF WAX established Vincent Price as a horror film icon. He's never hammy here. He's best when describing gruesome details (like torture or murder) with a slight grin, as if he's building to a punchline. Crane Wilbur's screenplay has well researched details (regarding how wax sculpting works, the effects of chemical burns for example) improves on the 1933 original. Here Vincent Price plays Henry Jerrod, a wax sculptor whose first try at a wax museum meets the same infernal end as Atwill's museum in the first film. 12 years later, Jerrod opens a new museum. One of his intern sculptors dates a model, Sue (Phyllis Kirk) who is hounded by a mysterious man with a distorted face. In the original film version, made in 1933, Fay Wray plays a beautiful, but uninteresting damsel in distress. Phyllis Kirk fills Fay Wray's part here, and man, is she even more boring! But don't worry, you have plenty of Vincent to make this DVD worthwhile. It's easy to find in a bit part, young Charles Bronson (billed here as Charles Buchinsky) as one of Jerrod's s interns. HOUSE OF WAX's most famous element is that it was made in 3-D. This new gimmick, meant to lure television viewers back to the box office was novel, but it had it's kinks. (Warner Brothers improved the process a year later with the 3-D release of Hitchcock's DIAL M FOR MURDER, and yet another period horror film, PHANTOM OF THE RUE MORGUE.) The most amusing 3-D moment in HOUSE OF WAX has almost nothing to do with the story. A carnival barker, (played with crowd-pleasing energy by Reggie Rymal) constantly whacks a paddle-ball outside the wax museum, while heralding the museum's opening night thrills. He faces the camera (meaning us) and says `You! With the popcorn. Hold still.' and he proceeds to repeatingly whack the ball at the camera. HOUSE OF WAX is a lot of fun, and was a big hit at the time. The DVD does not come with a 3-D Process, but it does come with coverage of HOUSE OF WAX's Hollywood Premier. It's attended by Bela Lugosi and friend, Jack Warner, and Ronald Reagan (See, even Presidents watch horror movies!)
Still one of the most haunting pictures of our time
Smells_Like_Cheese27 November 2006
I saw the remake recently of House of Wax and mainly that was because I just wanted to see Paris Hilton die once and for all! I was a satisfied customer, but the movie actually turned out to be pretty good, so I was very curious to see the original, especially since I love Vincent Price. Who wouldn't love him? He's the king of B-Horror Movies. He has brought us House of Wax, the original haunting tale of an artist who went too far to create his works of art.
Henry Jarrod is an artist who has devoted his life to his wax museum, but when his partner is upset with the investment and wishing it had better success, he offers to burn the place down and split the insurance money with Henry. But Henry refuses, his partner goes through with it by burning the place down and knocking Henry unconscious and leaving him for dead. But a little while later, his partner convinces the insurance company that Henry is dead and collects the insurance money, but things start to happen like the partner dies but it looks like suicide and Cathy's, our leading lady, best friend is murdered by a horribly disfigured man and her best friend's body disappears only to happen to look like a figure of Henry's new exhibit.
House of Wax maybe be tame by today's standards, but just think of the time, no one ever thought in a million years of something this horrific. A sick artist taking our corpses or killing us just because we would inspire him, it's a scary thought. Vincent Price added so much horror and beauty to this picture that will never be forgotten once you have seen it.
8/10
Henry Jarrod is an artist who has devoted his life to his wax museum, but when his partner is upset with the investment and wishing it had better success, he offers to burn the place down and split the insurance money with Henry. But Henry refuses, his partner goes through with it by burning the place down and knocking Henry unconscious and leaving him for dead. But a little while later, his partner convinces the insurance company that Henry is dead and collects the insurance money, but things start to happen like the partner dies but it looks like suicide and Cathy's, our leading lady, best friend is murdered by a horribly disfigured man and her best friend's body disappears only to happen to look like a figure of Henry's new exhibit.
House of Wax maybe be tame by today's standards, but just think of the time, no one ever thought in a million years of something this horrific. A sick artist taking our corpses or killing us just because we would inspire him, it's a scary thought. Vincent Price added so much horror and beauty to this picture that will never be forgotten once you have seen it.
8/10
Better as a genre movie than the original.
Boba_Fett113823 August 2009
It's actually so this movie works out better than the 1933 original, due to the fact that this movie is more being an horror. It has the right style and ingredients and gets supported by a great story and cast.
Basically this movie has everything in it a typical good '50's horror production should need. But what makes this movie better to watch than just the average genre movie entry from the same era is its compelling story, that perhaps is not typical horror-wise. It's also a bit of a tragic story with a tragic main character, just like is the case in "Phantom of the Opera", which is also an excellent horror story.
Yet the movie foremost remains an horror, much more than was the case with the original. In this movie the 'monster' or murderer is showed with his face already very early on in the movie. He does a lot more evil. Also with Vincent Price you have a great and classy villainous main character, who can act with any material.
Also look out for the still very young Charlies Bronson in a non-speaking role. He used to play lots of roles early in his career before really breaking through in the '60's.
The movie also has a great atmosphere that perhaps is a bit more classy than usual is the case with an '50's genre movie. Or this perhaps is also due to the fact that this movie has a better and more compelling story than usual, which uplifts the movie on basically every level. Funny fun about this movie as well is that this was the first ever 3-D movie. It's probably also part of the reason why this movie became such an huge financial success for the Warner Bros. Studios.
A great genre movie from the '50's!
8/10
http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/
Basically this movie has everything in it a typical good '50's horror production should need. But what makes this movie better to watch than just the average genre movie entry from the same era is its compelling story, that perhaps is not typical horror-wise. It's also a bit of a tragic story with a tragic main character, just like is the case in "Phantom of the Opera", which is also an excellent horror story.
Yet the movie foremost remains an horror, much more than was the case with the original. In this movie the 'monster' or murderer is showed with his face already very early on in the movie. He does a lot more evil. Also with Vincent Price you have a great and classy villainous main character, who can act with any material.
Also look out for the still very young Charlies Bronson in a non-speaking role. He used to play lots of roles early in his career before really breaking through in the '60's.
The movie also has a great atmosphere that perhaps is a bit more classy than usual is the case with an '50's genre movie. Or this perhaps is also due to the fact that this movie has a better and more compelling story than usual, which uplifts the movie on basically every level. Funny fun about this movie as well is that this was the first ever 3-D movie. It's probably also part of the reason why this movie became such an huge financial success for the Warner Bros. Studios.
A great genre movie from the '50's!
8/10
http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/
Jeanne d'Arc et Marie-Antoinette
dbdumonteil12 November 2006
I urge the people who saw "House of wax" (2005) to have a little look at De Toth 's little gem.They will discover a movie with a good screenplay ,an unusually inventive use of colors and a strange fascination for History,particularly French history,for both Jeanne d'Arc and Marie-Antoinette play prominent parts in the story.Joan of Arc in a museum in flames ,it defies realism!The atmosphere is constantly disturbing ,in the streets where a ghostly shadowy figure pursues Sue or in the museum where doe-eyed Cathy seems so much alive.This is Victorian fantasy and horror tale (as there is the Gothic style) of the first order.
A remake that is at least as good as the original
AlsExGal24 July 2015
The 1953 version, unlike the 1933 version starring Glenda Farrell, is set in Victorian times. With the motion picture code in full force, you have nothing to lose by taking the story out of modern times. Again, the catalyst of the plot is an artist's greedy partner deciding to set fire to the wax museum that has become a real money loser and collect the insurance money. The artist (Vincent Price) wrestles with partner as he goes around setting fire to the place and ultimately is knocked unconscious, presumed dead by the greedy partner. He'd be wrong about that. I'm not spoiling anything here for you because this is revealed early on in the film.
Here the protagonists in the film are an apprentice sculptor and his girlfriend. From the beginning they suspect something fishy is going on when the wax figure of Joan of Arc seems to bear an uncanny resemblance to our heroine's murdered roommate, played by Carolyn Jones, who was last seen saying she was going out with a wealthy debonair man she had just met, and then she just disappeared. Also, this version uses a gimmick that was popular with audiences of the 1950's - 3D. It was the two-strip technicolor of its day.
The main attraction in this film is the charismatic Vincent Price. In the 40's he played a series of supporting roles in some noirish Fox films, and here he is just getting started in the horror genre. He breathes real life and brings range to the role of the mad murderous sculptor that Lionel Atwill didn't seem capable of delivering in the earlier version. Also, I like the fact that in this later version we actually get to see Price confront the former partner who left him to perish in his burning museum.
Here the protagonists in the film are an apprentice sculptor and his girlfriend. From the beginning they suspect something fishy is going on when the wax figure of Joan of Arc seems to bear an uncanny resemblance to our heroine's murdered roommate, played by Carolyn Jones, who was last seen saying she was going out with a wealthy debonair man she had just met, and then she just disappeared. Also, this version uses a gimmick that was popular with audiences of the 1950's - 3D. It was the two-strip technicolor of its day.
The main attraction in this film is the charismatic Vincent Price. In the 40's he played a series of supporting roles in some noirish Fox films, and here he is just getting started in the horror genre. He breathes real life and brings range to the role of the mad murderous sculptor that Lionel Atwill didn't seem capable of delivering in the earlier version. Also, I like the fact that in this later version we actually get to see Price confront the former partner who left him to perish in his burning museum.
A pure classical horror flick---and had my great great uncle in it.
lrymal14 October 2004
My great uncle was in this movie, being the barker. Watch this movie and get out of the way of his ''tricks''. His name was Reggie Rymal. I'm Larry...
My uncle was an entertainer and comedian in the early 1950s and was well known for his paddle-ball skills. He performed standup comedy and paddle-ball at hotels around the country. He appeared on many television shows during the early days of TV including "The Eddie Cantor Show, You Asked For It, and Ladies Choice.
I have always felt he was chosen for this movie due to the contribution in content for the 3-D effects. He was simply an amazing guy.
My uncle was an entertainer and comedian in the early 1950s and was well known for his paddle-ball skills. He performed standup comedy and paddle-ball at hotels around the country. He appeared on many television shows during the early days of TV including "The Eddie Cantor Show, You Asked For It, and Ladies Choice.
I have always felt he was chosen for this movie due to the contribution in content for the 3-D effects. He was simply an amazing guy.
House of Wax
jboothmillard4 August 2013
Warning: Spoilers
I saw the remake version starring Elisha Cuthbert and Paris Hilton before this original version, I was certainly keen to see how it would compare (from what I remember of the other), and being a fan of the leading actor. Basically Professor Henry Jarrod (Vincent Price) a an artist devoted to creating lifelike wax figure sculptures of historical figures in famous scenes, including John Wilkes Booth assassinating Abraham Lincoln, Joan of Arc burning at the stake, and his most beloved Marie Antoinette. Matthew Burke (Roy Roberts), his business partner, suggests a waxwork chamber of horrors should be created to draw in more visitors and get a return on his investment, but Jarrod refuses, so Burke goes mad and sets the place on fire, this would mean he could collect the insurance, all the beautiful works are destroyed and Jarrod is trapped inside when it explodes. Eighteen years later Jarrod unexpectedly reappears, opening a new waxworks exhibit, the House of Wax, where with the help of his deaf and mute assistant Igor (Charles Buchinsky, better known as Charles Bronson) he has recreated most of his former figures, but he has concentrated much more on macabre. The museum includes the popular "Chamber of Horrors", which displays many notable crimes of history, including more recent ones, such as the death of his former business partner Burke, who was found hanged, this was done by a hideous cloaked and facially disfigured killer. Burke's fiancée Cathy Gray (Carolyn Jones) is also murdered, and when her friend Sue Allen (Phyllis Kirk) visits the House of Wax she is intrigued by how realistic all the figures look, but also some of their faces may seem familiar, including Joan of Arc who looks exactly like Cathy, the Professor says he just borrowed her likeness from the newspaper report photograph, and he is yet to find the face of his beloved Marie Antoinette. Jarrod finds Sue Allen beautiful with the perfect face for Marie Antoinette, he asks her if she could pose, she agrees, but later wandering further into the museum she discovers the horrifying truth, all the waxworks are real bodies coated in wax, and Jarrod is the disfigured murderer who suffered severe burns those many months ago, but in the end he is defeated falling into the vat of scolding wax. Also starring Frank Lovejoy as Lt. Tom Brennan, Paul Picerni as Scott Andrews, Angela Clarke as Mrs. Andrews, Paul Cavanagh as Sidney Wallace and Dabbs Greer as Sgt. Jim Shane. Price is great being charming, but of course he is even better being secretly evil and looking hideous under the dark get-up, and then little known Bronson is creepy as the silent servant, it is an engaging scary story about revenge and madness, the Gothic feel is great, and without the gimmick used you can recognise things popping out at the you for the 3D version (which made a lot of money at the time), a fantastic period horror film. Very good!
Beauty should be viewed by all who appreciate it
thinker169124 June 2007
It is the heyday of wonder and it is no surprise it's roots are in Paris. In the dark lonely alleys, amid the wet streets of the heart of the city, a dark cloaked figure follows a beautiful woman. To say she is beautiful is to understate her natural qualities, but to further add that such beauty has attracted the most sinister and diabolical madman in Paris is also understating the danger or his intent. Such is background of the incredible black story entitle; "The House of Wax." Vincent Price, plays Prof. Henry Jarrod an artistic genius who boosts his collection of famous, historical wax-works, are the most unique in all the world. It is no idle boost, as his house contains more than just legendary wax figures from the pages of history, they also contain enough secrets that police Lt. Tom Brennan (Frank Lovejoy) finds more than interesting. Together with Sgt. Jim Shane (Dabbs Greer) there is more sinister mystery in the museum than either suspect. Price plays his role to the hilt as does his dutiful side kick " Igor" (Charles Bronsen) which audience will instantly recognize. Together they terrify audience while preparing their evil craft. On completion, they seek their prize, the beloved French beauty, Marie Antoinette, who is to be their crowning achievement. ****
The House of Wax is a true horror classic!
filmLove-216 July 2000
The House of Wax is a true horror classic! I saw it for the first time in 1953 at a local theatre in 3-D.
I have seen it many times since on video. It never ceases to entertain.
While watching it today I noticed something for the very first time: a most interesting anachronism.
This film takes place in old New York circa 1900. Every indoor scene has a gaslight in it, and the fire department responds with a horse-drawn wagon. Well, in one of the early scenes in the film Prof. Jarrod(Vincent Price)is conducting a prospective investor, Sidney Wallace(Paul Cavanagh), on a tour of his wax museum. There are gas lights everywhere. They arrive at an exhibit and Prof. Jarrod flips a wall switch, and presto the exhibit is illuminated in light. Somebody goofed!
If you've never seen The House of Wax, watch it. You'll love it.
One more interesting note. Dabbs Greer who plays Sergeant Jim Shane in this film also plays old Paul Edgecomb in the 1999 thriller The Green Mile.
I have seen it many times since on video. It never ceases to entertain.
While watching it today I noticed something for the very first time: a most interesting anachronism.
This film takes place in old New York circa 1900. Every indoor scene has a gaslight in it, and the fire department responds with a horse-drawn wagon. Well, in one of the early scenes in the film Prof. Jarrod(Vincent Price)is conducting a prospective investor, Sidney Wallace(Paul Cavanagh), on a tour of his wax museum. There are gas lights everywhere. They arrive at an exhibit and Prof. Jarrod flips a wall switch, and presto the exhibit is illuminated in light. Somebody goofed!
If you've never seen The House of Wax, watch it. You'll love it.
One more interesting note. Dabbs Greer who plays Sergeant Jim Shane in this film also plays old Paul Edgecomb in the 1999 thriller The Green Mile.
Vincent at His Vengeful Best
Hitchcoc5 December 2016
This is a great fifties horror film. As is often the case, Vincent Price plays a kind and gentle man. He is a great artist, sculpting some of the greatest historical figures in wax. His work is considered amazing. Unfortunately, he has a greedy partner who needs money. This guy sets fire to the museum to collect insurance money. Price's character is though to have died in the fire, but it turns out he has been badly burned and deformed. He is also filled with anger and vengeance. He sets out to rebuild the museum. Interestingly, some of his figures are quite lifelike. One looks a lot like his former partner. Others look like people who did him wrong. We can guess what he is doing. Because Price is such a great actor, he can be so menacing, so cruel. We have to root for him because the cause of his rancor is not his fault. Wonderful horror film.
Mad Vince's house of horrors!
ShadeGrenade24 March 2011
Warning: Spoilers
In response to a complaint about the increasing number of 3-D movies being made now, an I.M.D.B. member sneered: "Its the future, pal. Get used to it!". He did not appear to know the technology to create 3-D cinema was developed originally back in the 20's. It would, however, not be until 1953 that the first official 3-D blockbuster appeared - 'House Of Wax', a remake of Lionel Atwill's creepy 'The Mystery Of The Wax Museum'. Vincent Price plays Professor Henry Jarrod, a brilliant sculptor who makes life-like wax statues based on actual historical figures such as John Wilkes Booth and Marie Antoinette. Foillowing a row with his business partner, the museum catches fire, and Jarrod is horribly disfigured. Unable to make statues any longer, he takes to kidnapping people and converting them into waxworks. Sue Allen ( Phyllis Kirk ) finds her flighty roommate Cathy Gray ( Carolyn Jones, the Addams family's 'Morticia' ) dead, and is chased by her killer, a sinister figure in a cloak. Soon afterwards, a Joan Of Arc figure appears in Jarrod's museum, and Sue recognises it as being Cathy...
The great thing about 'House Of Wax' is that it is still good even without the 3-D. Andre De Toth, the director, only had one eye so it is even more of a remarkable achievement. Sequences like the man with the paddle-ball must have been tough to shoot. Audiences shrieked in terror as the burning waxworks dissolved in front of their every eyes. It might not have been actual people burning but the imagery was horrific all the same.
For Price, the film changed his career, typing him forever in the public mind as a horror film star. This was also one of the first pictures of its kind to feature nudity - the climax has Sue strapped naked to a table by Jarrod. We don't see anything we shouldn't ( this was 1953, after all ), but don't need to. Kirk looks sexier than other actresses do totally nude. Charles Bronson ( credited under his real name 'Buchinsky' is 'Igor', Jarrod's mute assistant. Why are all mad scientists' sidekicks named 'Igor'? )
The basic plot was later spoofed in the comedy 'Carry On Screaming!' ( 1966 ) with Kenneth Williams in the Price role.
3-D quickly palled with '50's audiences, as it did thirty years later when used on the 'Friday The 13th' and 'Jaws' franchises. While there's no denying it makes a good movie better, it can also be used to prop up some pretty dreadful films. It remains to be seen whether present-day audiences will also tire of 3-D or endorse it as the norm for movies from now on. James Cameron, whose 'Avatar' provoked the current 3-D revival, thinks the latter. We shall see.
The great thing about 'House Of Wax' is that it is still good even without the 3-D. Andre De Toth, the director, only had one eye so it is even more of a remarkable achievement. Sequences like the man with the paddle-ball must have been tough to shoot. Audiences shrieked in terror as the burning waxworks dissolved in front of their every eyes. It might not have been actual people burning but the imagery was horrific all the same.
For Price, the film changed his career, typing him forever in the public mind as a horror film star. This was also one of the first pictures of its kind to feature nudity - the climax has Sue strapped naked to a table by Jarrod. We don't see anything we shouldn't ( this was 1953, after all ), but don't need to. Kirk looks sexier than other actresses do totally nude. Charles Bronson ( credited under his real name 'Buchinsky' is 'Igor', Jarrod's mute assistant. Why are all mad scientists' sidekicks named 'Igor'? )
The basic plot was later spoofed in the comedy 'Carry On Screaming!' ( 1966 ) with Kenneth Williams in the Price role.
3-D quickly palled with '50's audiences, as it did thirty years later when used on the 'Friday The 13th' and 'Jaws' franchises. While there's no denying it makes a good movie better, it can also be used to prop up some pretty dreadful films. It remains to be seen whether present-day audiences will also tire of 3-D or endorse it as the norm for movies from now on. James Cameron, whose 'Avatar' provoked the current 3-D revival, thinks the latter. We shall see.
Hollywood's "Golden Era" melts into a . . .
oscaralbert1 November 2014
Warning: Spoilers
. . . HOUSE OF WAX in perhaps the most ironic movie of all time. Prior to 1953, all big films served the dual purpose of providing entertainment and history lessons with "redeeming social value." BIRTH OF A NATION. The first BEN-HUR and MUTINY ON THE BOUNTY. Then, in 1939, GONE WITH THE WIND, of course. HAMLET. Countless biographies, such as Emile Zola, the "great" Ziegfield, and Madame Curie. Then along came television, and everything changed. Everyone wanted to stay home to watch AMER1CAN BANDSTAND, DEATH VALLEY DAYS, and HOCKEY NIGHT IN CANADA for free on their expensive new home machines, rather than waste money on gas, concessions, and movie tickets to see "the same old, same old." (The "concessions" in the family Frigidaire were far cheaper, and Jiffy Pop was just a few years away.) Hollywood had to come up with something new, and they did, starting with HOUSE OF WAX: the so-called "3D" film, which continues to break the budget of every American family with spoiled kids right up to this very day! The crowning irony is that HOUSE OF WAX still is the best 3D flick of all time, especially with its paddle ball gimmick. Even more ironic, is spells out Hollywood's sinister game plan, to replace solid Western Civilization history lessons with Cheap Thrills. During the prologue of this story, Vincent Price's character represents Golden Age Hollywood, all about quality and worth. But when unprincipled rivals cut into his bottom line, this wax house proprietor sinks immediately to the bottom of the barrel to become a monstrously-deformed crass serial killer, only "in it for the money." Never before or since has a major America Industry been so honest about its evil intentions. So kudos for HOUSE OF WAX, the best 3D flick ever, as well as the most honest film in history!
Classic and frightening horror movie with an awesome acting by Vincent Price as a revenger sculptor
ma-cortes24 January 2014
This is a famous film for its pioneering use of 3-D , and the most popular the era in this format , a status it retains today . An associate burns down a wax museum with the owner (Vincent Price as a wax-dummy maker , this role launched on his terror film cycle , especially for Roger Corman) inside, but he survives only to become vengeful and murderous . As the deranged sculptor rebuilds his fire-destroyed showplace , as he creates a sinister wax museum which showcases amazing figures . The sculptor after a disfiguring face resorts to murder , strange experiments and installs wax-covered corpses . When he meets his new assistant's nice friend, Sue Allen , (Phyllis Kirk , though Joan Weldon and Vera Miles were both contenders for the role of Sue Allen ; Phyllis said that she had "no fond memories" of working with Charles Bronson) he knows he's found the perfect model .
This is an remake of the early horror flick and one of the 50s most popular 3-D films and it was the first film released with a stereophonic soundtrack . This is a chiller story with grisly horror , genuine thrills and shocks . This was reportedly Warner Brothers' one of the biggest success and the first 3-D color movie ever to be produced by a major American studio . The eerie story contains bit good fun with killings , chilling interpretations , relentless horror and thrilling events . The chiller version of the 50s packs scary chills and terrifying deaths . The wax figures are the real stars of this production , being rightly realized . Some scenes are clumsily shot but the movie has some good moments here and there , the illogical parts in the argument are more than compensated for the excitement provided by the creepy wax models , eerie killers and many other things . This one stills has the power to give the audience the creeps , thanks to another extraordinary acting by Vincent Price . Fine support cast such as Frank Lovejoy , Charles Bronson credited as Charles Buchinsky, Angela Clarke , Roy Roberts , Paul Cavanagh , Carolyn ¨Morticia Adams¨as a victim and Nedrick Young, who plays the alcoholic assistant Leon, was uncredited because he had been blacklisted during the McCarthy "Red scare" era in Hollywood . Rousing and suspenseful original music by David Buttolph . Colorful as well as glimmer cinematography with brilliant colors by Bert Glennon . This creepy and gory horror movie was professionally by director André De Toth - who was blind in one eye and hence could not see the effect . Andre De Toth was a classical director , Western usual (Indian fighter, Man in the saddle, Ramrod , Last of Comanches , The stranger wore a gun), but also made Peplum (Gold for the Caesar) and adventure (The Mongols , Morgan the pirate , Tanganyika) .
Other films dealing with ¨House of wax¨ are the followings : 1933 vintage horror classic and rarely seen ¨Mystery of the wax museum¨ , here main starring was a heroin addict but that had to be changed for the remake, it was starred by Lionel Atwill , Fay Wray , Glenda Farrell ; ¨Terror in the Wax Museum¨ (1973) by George Fenady with Ray Milland , Elsa Lanchester , Maurice Evans , John Carradine , Patrick Knowles , ¨Waxwork¨ (1988) by Anthony Hickcock with Zach Galligan , Joe Baker , Deborah Foreman , Michelle Johnson , David Warner . And modern retelling ¨House of wax¨ by Jaume Collet-Serra with Elisa Cuthbert , Jared Padalecki , Paris Hilton and Chad Murray .
This is an remake of the early horror flick and one of the 50s most popular 3-D films and it was the first film released with a stereophonic soundtrack . This is a chiller story with grisly horror , genuine thrills and shocks . This was reportedly Warner Brothers' one of the biggest success and the first 3-D color movie ever to be produced by a major American studio . The eerie story contains bit good fun with killings , chilling interpretations , relentless horror and thrilling events . The chiller version of the 50s packs scary chills and terrifying deaths . The wax figures are the real stars of this production , being rightly realized . Some scenes are clumsily shot but the movie has some good moments here and there , the illogical parts in the argument are more than compensated for the excitement provided by the creepy wax models , eerie killers and many other things . This one stills has the power to give the audience the creeps , thanks to another extraordinary acting by Vincent Price . Fine support cast such as Frank Lovejoy , Charles Bronson credited as Charles Buchinsky, Angela Clarke , Roy Roberts , Paul Cavanagh , Carolyn ¨Morticia Adams¨as a victim and Nedrick Young, who plays the alcoholic assistant Leon, was uncredited because he had been blacklisted during the McCarthy "Red scare" era in Hollywood . Rousing and suspenseful original music by David Buttolph . Colorful as well as glimmer cinematography with brilliant colors by Bert Glennon . This creepy and gory horror movie was professionally by director André De Toth - who was blind in one eye and hence could not see the effect . Andre De Toth was a classical director , Western usual (Indian fighter, Man in the saddle, Ramrod , Last of Comanches , The stranger wore a gun), but also made Peplum (Gold for the Caesar) and adventure (The Mongols , Morgan the pirate , Tanganyika) .
Other films dealing with ¨House of wax¨ are the followings : 1933 vintage horror classic and rarely seen ¨Mystery of the wax museum¨ , here main starring was a heroin addict but that had to be changed for the remake, it was starred by Lionel Atwill , Fay Wray , Glenda Farrell ; ¨Terror in the Wax Museum¨ (1973) by George Fenady with Ray Milland , Elsa Lanchester , Maurice Evans , John Carradine , Patrick Knowles , ¨Waxwork¨ (1988) by Anthony Hickcock with Zach Galligan , Joe Baker , Deborah Foreman , Michelle Johnson , David Warner . And modern retelling ¨House of wax¨ by Jaume Collet-Serra with Elisa Cuthbert , Jared Padalecki , Paris Hilton and Chad Murray .
The Rise Of Vincent Price
Witchfinder-General-66629 April 2008
Warning: Spoilers
Most true Horror fans will agree with my opinion that Vincent Price was one of the most brilliant actors who ever lived. While André De Toth's "House Of Wax" of 1953 is not one of the most brilliant films Price has ever starred in, it is definitely a great one, and, especially, an immensely important and influential one. What makes "House Of Wax" film especially essential to any lover of Horror or cineaste in general is the fact that this is the film that made Price a Horror icon. Sure, he had been in great films before. Price's early repertoire includes roles in such brilliant films as Otto Preminger's Film-Noir masterpiece "Laura" (1944) or "Dragonwyck" (1946), in which he also starred alongside Gene Tierney. It was "House Of Wax" however, that made Price one of the most popular leading men in Horror cinema, which subsequently made him one of the greatest (for me personally THE greatest) Horror icons in the history of motion pictures.
In early 20th century New York, Professor Henry Jarrod (Price) is an ingenious sculptor who runs a wax museum with his business partner. When the business partner sets the museum on fire in order to collect the insurance money, all of Jarrod's wax sculptures melt down, and the artist himself survives only by miracle. Years later, when he has still not yet quite recovered from his injuries, Jarrod opens a wax museum again. His wax museum includes many incredibly lifelike sculptures of famous historic people, as well as a chamber of Horrors. Some visitors, especially young Sue Allen (Phyllis Kirk) cannot help but recognize something sinister about the devoted sculptor and his wax museum, especially since some of his Wax figures bear strong resemblances to people who have been murdered or disappeared...
Vincent Price is, as always, brilliant in the role of Professor Jarrod. No one has ever portrayed madmen and other sinister characters as ingeniously as Price did, which, plain and simple, makes him one of the greatest actors ever. Phyllis Kirk makes a nice female lead, and the supporting cast includes non other than the great Charles Bronson (another favorite actor of mine) in a very early role as one of Jarrod's assistants. The film is extremely creepy at times, and visually stunning throughout. A great photography goes in hand with excellent settings, especially the colorful and uncanny Wax Museum is masterly made. "House Of Wax", which was released in 2D, as well as with 3D effects, is a remake of Michael Curtiz' "Mystery of The Wax Museum". While this film does, in my opinion, not reach the brilliance of later masterpieces with Vincent Price (such as "The Pit And The Pendulum", "The Haunted Palace", "The Masque Of The Red Death" or "Witchfinder General"), it is definitely a great and highly atmospheric Horror film, and an immensely influential one. The mere fact that this is the film that rose the great Vincent Price to stardom makes it an absolute must-see, and what a stunning film it is! All said, "House Of Wax" is a great Horror film that comes with my highest recommendations!
In early 20th century New York, Professor Henry Jarrod (Price) is an ingenious sculptor who runs a wax museum with his business partner. When the business partner sets the museum on fire in order to collect the insurance money, all of Jarrod's wax sculptures melt down, and the artist himself survives only by miracle. Years later, when he has still not yet quite recovered from his injuries, Jarrod opens a wax museum again. His wax museum includes many incredibly lifelike sculptures of famous historic people, as well as a chamber of Horrors. Some visitors, especially young Sue Allen (Phyllis Kirk) cannot help but recognize something sinister about the devoted sculptor and his wax museum, especially since some of his Wax figures bear strong resemblances to people who have been murdered or disappeared...
Vincent Price is, as always, brilliant in the role of Professor Jarrod. No one has ever portrayed madmen and other sinister characters as ingeniously as Price did, which, plain and simple, makes him one of the greatest actors ever. Phyllis Kirk makes a nice female lead, and the supporting cast includes non other than the great Charles Bronson (another favorite actor of mine) in a very early role as one of Jarrod's assistants. The film is extremely creepy at times, and visually stunning throughout. A great photography goes in hand with excellent settings, especially the colorful and uncanny Wax Museum is masterly made. "House Of Wax", which was released in 2D, as well as with 3D effects, is a remake of Michael Curtiz' "Mystery of The Wax Museum". While this film does, in my opinion, not reach the brilliance of later masterpieces with Vincent Price (such as "The Pit And The Pendulum", "The Haunted Palace", "The Masque Of The Red Death" or "Witchfinder General"), it is definitely a great and highly atmospheric Horror film, and an immensely influential one. The mere fact that this is the film that rose the great Vincent Price to stardom makes it an absolute must-see, and what a stunning film it is! All said, "House Of Wax" is a great Horror film that comes with my highest recommendations!
Vincent Price offers up a magnificent tale of terror
The_Void18 July 2005
The 1953 version of 'House of Wax' is notable for two main reasons. First and foremost, it helped the brilliant Vincent Price enormously on his journey to becoming the greatest horror icon of all time. His performance in this film is like a blueprint for what he would go on to achieve, and some of his later roles; including, most notably, Dr Phibes and Edward Lionheart from Theatre of Blood, where Price effectively plays the same role as he does in House of Wax. The second thing that House of Wax is famous for is that it has pretty much become a blueprint in itself, for films in which someone is wronged and decides to take their revenge. Of course, the story itself has a number of influences; from the classic tale of 'The Phantom of the Opera', to the obvious, the film that it was remade from; Michael Curtiz's 'The Mystery of the Wax Museum'. The plot of the film follows an artist who owns a wax museum. His partner and main financier to the business, however, isn't happy with the way things are going and, as he wants to recoup the money he's invested in the museum to spend elsewhere, he decides to set the place on fire to claim the insurance. Caught in the flames, our artist manages to survive; albeit badly deformed, and bearing a huge grudge...
The reason why Vincent Price works so well within the horror genre is that he's always dark and malevolent enough to be frightening, yet he's always got enough of a sympathy vote for us to feel for his plight and thereby connect with his character. Price is at his best when he's walking a fine line between evil and pathos; and that's exactly what he does here. Andres De Toth clearly knew what he wanted to do with this film, as the slightly understated presence that the original had has been changed to a much more exuberant, Gothic feel; and it does the film no end of favours, especially where the atmosphere is concerned. Throughout, the film presents the audience with large structures and rooms with ornate furnishing, and it helps to create the macabre art feel that the film is aiming for. Wax figures have always had something sinister about them, and the director has capitalised on that to great effect. The scenes that see them melting are superb, and the way the lifeless dolls stare at the other pieces of scenery helps to give the film an extra level of horror to work from. On the whole; House of Wax may well be one of the most important horror films ever made. And even if it's not...it still offers a damn good time.
The reason why Vincent Price works so well within the horror genre is that he's always dark and malevolent enough to be frightening, yet he's always got enough of a sympathy vote for us to feel for his plight and thereby connect with his character. Price is at his best when he's walking a fine line between evil and pathos; and that's exactly what he does here. Andres De Toth clearly knew what he wanted to do with this film, as the slightly understated presence that the original had has been changed to a much more exuberant, Gothic feel; and it does the film no end of favours, especially where the atmosphere is concerned. Throughout, the film presents the audience with large structures and rooms with ornate furnishing, and it helps to create the macabre art feel that the film is aiming for. Wax figures have always had something sinister about them, and the director has capitalised on that to great effect. The scenes that see them melting are superb, and the way the lifeless dolls stare at the other pieces of scenery helps to give the film an extra level of horror to work from. On the whole; House of Wax may well be one of the most important horror films ever made. And even if it's not...it still offers a damn good time.
One of the most important films of the 1950s.
the red duchess31 October 2000
Ostensibly a shocker and a spectacle, 'House of Wax' is one of the great films about films. It works brilliantly as a horror, one of the few films to reek of dread and death; some of the grisly images (Jarrod's partner hanging down an elevator shaft, later exhibited in the museum) are inspired; the suspense sequences combine eerie visual beauty with fundamental sexual fears (the film's treatment of independent women in a patriarchal world is very astute in the housewife 50s). Vincent Price's performance as a man who can only feel alive with the dead is very moving.
But 'Wax''s self-reflexivity is unprecedented in Hollywood films since the silents. It is a film using a novel spectacle (3-D) to encourage greater realism, concentrating on gruesome sensation. The film is about a museum, also called House of Wax, also a novel spectacle, also more realistic, and also gruesomely sensationalist. The film's artifice is always prominent, most violently with the ping-pong man, bridging the gap between film and audience by assailing us. What we are doing - watching a House of Wax - is what the characters are doing. And we know what happens to THEM...
But 'Wax''s self-reflexivity is unprecedented in Hollywood films since the silents. It is a film using a novel spectacle (3-D) to encourage greater realism, concentrating on gruesome sensation. The film is about a museum, also called House of Wax, also a novel spectacle, also more realistic, and also gruesomely sensationalist. The film's artifice is always prominent, most violently with the ping-pong man, bridging the gap between film and audience by assailing us. What we are doing - watching a House of Wax - is what the characters are doing. And we know what happens to THEM...
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews