Linbeymusol Wonderful character development!

GamerTab That was an excellent one.

Claysaba Excellent, Without a doubt!!

Phillipa Strong acting helps the film overcome an uncertain premise and create characters that hold our attention absolutely.

JohnHowardReid Producer: Bryan Foy. Copyright 21 May 1953 by Warner Brothers Pictures, Inc. New York opening at the Paramount: 10 April 1953. U.S. release: 25 April 1953. London opening (in 3-D): June 1953. Not generally released in the U.K. (a flat version) until 1955. Australian release (in 3-D): 14 May 1953. Sydney opening at the Mayfair in WarnerPhonic Sound. 88 minutes. NOTES: A re-make of the 1933 Mystery of the Wax Museum. Studio head Jack L. Warner wanted to become the first major studio to cash in on the 3-D boom. He told editor Rudi Fehr he would have only five weeks to edit the movie. Fehr thrilled Warner when he answered that he could actually finish the editing in less time if De Toth were to shoot the film in sequence. To do this required the use of two sound stages for interior sets, plus the backlot. Two cinematographers were employed so that DeToth and company could move instantly from one pre-lighted set to another. Blacklisted screenwriter Ned Young did have a simultaneous career as an actor. Here we catch him as Jarrod's bearded assistant. He has a great scene with Lovejoy (though his performance isn't a patch on that given by Arthur Edmund Carewe in the original movie. Admittedly, Carewe has the better lines and his part was not emasculated by the censor). This was the movie that marked a turning point in Vincent Price's career, catapulting him into stratospheric fame in the horror genre. Both a blessing and a curse, as he often remarked. It was nice to have security and the money to pursue his major interest in Art. On the other hand, he became typecast and was rarely offered roles he would have preferred to play outside the genre. Only movie appearance of Reggie Rymal, a night club comedian and expert paddle-ball artist. Negative cost: $658,000. Initial domestic rentals gross: $9,500,000. COMMENT: One of the most memorable cinemagoing experiences of the 1950s, "House of Wax" actually exerted a far greater impact on contemporary audiences than The Robe. Projected flat and without stereophonic sound, all the movie's excitements are lost. The movie was intended for 3-D. The sets were designed that way, the camera angles were chosen with 3-D in mind, and the screenplay was written to take advantage of 3-D effects and not worry about irrelevant side issues like believable characters, a credible plot or inaccuracies in the period setting. In the flat version, Price hams it up no end, his make-up is ridiculous, and most of the support players, including the lovely Phyllis Kirk, seem weak as water. Exceptions are stoically menacing Charles Bronson (who walks away with the acting honors) and out-of-step Carolyn Jones who manages the difficult feat of playing her part as an over-the-top parody and out-acting everyone else on the screen, including Mr Price. The plot has more holes than a carriage and four could be driven through, while most of the dialogue would not pass muster for the meanest effort of Producers Releasing Corporation. Needless to say, all this doesn't matter a fig in 3-D.

jadavix "House of Wax" is an entertaining horror yarn that gave the world the Vincent Price we all know and love. Prior to this highly successful film, Price had been a dependable character actor. "House of Wax" started his second, far more successful career as a villain in such films as "The Abominable Dr. Phibes" and "Masque of the Red Death".Price plays Henry Jarrod, a sculptor and curator of a wax museum in the 19th century. His works depict famous historical figures such as Joan of Arc and Marie Antoinette. An eccentric, he refers to his sculptures as his "friends", but his business partner is only interested in the profit: so much so that he burns the museum down for the insurance money. Jarrod is presumed dead but then shows up again eighteen months later, this time with a new exhibition of works more macabre and even more eerily "lifelike"."House of Wax" is an enjoyable horror film which was first screened in 3D. Look out for the trick where a barker hits his paddle-ball at the the camera, commenting that he's aiming for our popcorn. It also features some nifty sight gags which play on the realism of the sculptures, and perhaps one or two shocking moments. Most shocking to me, however, was hearing afterwards that that was a young Charles Bronson as Jarrod's deaf-mute servant. I had never seen him so young, and looking completely different.

MonsterVision99 House of Wax (1953) probably wouldn't be as remembered or liked as well if it wasn't for Vincent Price, the man helps to make a good movie a great one, and makes a bad movie watchable, fortunately, this film would have worked just fine without him, he just elevates the film.Vincent Price delivers a great performance, his characters are often tragic figures tormented by their past and looking for revenge. We have seen stories like this before but Vincent just nails these kind of roles, he makes them work every time.I will say that all the other actors were also good, the effects were good, the music was nice, the direction is serviceable, its all around a pretty decent movie. However, I do find the plot to be uninteresting, I guess is just because I have seen this kind of movie before, I liked the original film also and even then it felt somewhat predictable and tiresome.But don't let that discourage you from seeing this film, that's just how I find this kind of stories to be, even when they are as well executed as in this movie. Its well made, influential and entertaining, a classic.

mike48128 It's a remake of the old "Mystery of the Wax Museum" film from the 1930's. (Bonus-The Warner DVD has this on it's reverse side.) No mystery in this version. We know who the insane villain is, almost at once! Stylish and well done, it plays just fine in a good restored copy in 2D and "WarnerColor". Often shortened to 77 minutes by trimming out a bit of redundant dialog, and an almost risqué can-can number, which is totally unnecessary. Carolyn Jones has a small but important role as the bubble-headed blonde victim who becomes the body and head of "Joan of Arc". Charles Bronson (under his real name) plays the husky deaf-mute sculptor "Igor". Great fun as it doesn't take itself too seriously. The running gag is that people in the movie are "frozen" for a second, but not really wax figures, including Igor's head! Of course, things are thrown at the camera for the 3D gimmick, and one almost isn't in the scanned frame (it's too high). The paddle ball "barker" is slightly annoying and not impressive in 2D. As much fun as ever and a great Halloween movie that's certainly not too scary, by today's standards. The hot wax looks like "pink bubble gum soup". It should be closer to "flesh-tone". (Beware of the gory and stupidly horrible 2005 remake.)