House of Wax (1953)/ Mystery of the Wax Museum (1933)

Vincent Price is one of the few screen actors that was able to make a completely loathsome character likable.  Take House of Wax, for instance. Price stars as Henry Jarrod, a mad sculptor who murders people (who resemble historical figures), covers their bodies with wax, and then puts them on display at his wax museum.  He is the kind of character that audiences love to hate! Yet, we don’t hate Henry Jarrod, rather we find him sympathetic; he maybe the kindest villain ever to grace the silver screen.  When the meddlesome Sue Allen is taken aback by how much his Joan of Arc sculpture resembles her recently deceased friend, Cathy, Jarrod tries to put her mind ease by telling her he modeled his Joan of Arc after a picture of Cathy  he saw in the newspaper. Does she buy the explanation? NO! Her nonstop snooping (((SPOILERS))) eventually leads to poor Jarrod’s untimely demise. I remember watching House of Wax for the first time with my friend Joe and we kept getting annoyed at how Sue Allen kept sticking her nose where it wasn't wanted. Whenever she would touch the Joan of Arc wax figure, we would scream at the television, “He just told you not to touch the damn sculpture!”  The audience wants Jarrod to succeed, despite his homicidal tendencies.  This is entirely due to Vincent Price’s charismatic performance; Henry Jarrod is the most likable character in the entire film. It certainly doesn't help that Phyllis Kirk gives a rather stiff performance as Sue Allen.  If it was different actor portraying Jarrod, then chances are the audiences would cheer when he plunges head first into a vat of ((((AGAIN SPOILERS))) boiling wax.

 

House of Wax was a remake of the 1933 film, Mystery of the Wax Museum, and is one of the few remakes that is superior to its predecessor.  Mystery of the Wax Museum is fun horror film, highlighted by a wonderfully sinister performance by Lionel Atwill as the mad sculptor, Ivan Igor. However, it’s littered with too much comedy relief, provided by Glenda Farrell (as wisecracking reporter, Florence Dempsey), to be considered a true classic of the horror genre. I actually like Farrell’s performance, she is a lot of fun and energetic, and is certainly more interesting than Charlotte, the damsel in distress portrayed to perfection by Fay Wray. It is also interesting to note that it is Florence who drives the narrative of the story; she is investigating the disappearance of a body from the city morgue, and her fact finding leads her directly to Igor’s wax museum.  She’s a tough as nails reporter and is able to hold her own in a man’s world.  

The problem is that Farrell’s character seems more at home in a film like His Girl Friday than in a gruesome horror film.  The comedy is so prevalent that the horror is almost secondary; Farrell probably has more screen time than Atwill and Wray combined, and I am not exaggerating.  The comedy has the effect of defusing any tension that the filmmakers were hoping to build up, because Farrell is too busy trading barbs with her editor (Frank McHugh), or flirting with a murder suspect (Gavin Gordon), that there’s never a sense of urgency. It’s not until the movie’s last fifteen minutes (Charlotte finds herself in the clutches of the mad Igor) that the audience is given a time element. Will Florence and company save Charlotte? Or will she be turned into a permanent resident of Igor’s wax museum?

Fay Wray is given second billing in the credits, but probably has less than twenty minutes of actual screen time. The character of Charlotte doesn't first appear until the half hour mark, roughly the middle of the film. She isn't given much to do except scream at the top of her lungs. This, unfortunately, is what Miss Wray is best remembered for. Yet, Charlotte is an infinitely more appealing heroine than Sue Allen in the remake.  While Fay Wray’s acting was limited, she did have a genuine screen presence that usually made up for her short comings. She radiated warmth and sincerity when she was onscreen, which explains why she has become a film legend.  That and the fact that she starred opposite a giant ape the same year Wax Museum was released. She is the kind of woman that most men in the audience (excuse the sexism, ladies) would want to protect from all harm. We genuinely fear for her life, because she comes off as being so vulnerable. Sue Allen is a fairly distant character that we find ourselves less engaged in her peril.  Also, Charlotte unwittingly stumbles into Igor's web by happening to be at the wrong place at the wrong time, she is dating one of his assistants. Sue Allen, on the other hand, practically is asking for trouble by constantly sticking her nose where it isn't wanted. Sue Allen is a stronger heroine than Charlotte, but even she is relegated to being the damsel in distress at the film's climax.

Mystery of the Wax Museum takes many of it's cues from the previous year's Doctor X, made by the same cast and crew. Like Wax Museum, Doctor X's central character is reporter investigating a string of murders that happen on the night of a full moon.  Unlike Wax Museum, the reporter is a bumbling male, who not only serves as the film's comic relief, but as a love interest for Fay Wray as well. Poor Miss Wray! The comedy in  Doctor X is completely jarring given how gruesome the subject matter truly is: a murderer who dabbles in cannibalism. Doctor X has essentially the same strengths and flaws as Mystery of the Wax Museum; they both are wonderfully atmospheric and have exciting endings, but can be fairly tedious at times. Florence, however, is infinitely more likable than Lee Taylor, the male reporter who stumbles into the role of hero.

House of Wax improves on the original by writing out the reporter character and focusing more on the Henry Jarrod/ Sue Allen storyline.  There is a greater sense of danger in the remake then there was in the original film. The first victim in Mystery of the Wax Museum is Joan Gale, a young woman who apparently committed suicide, but it is later revealed to have been murdered. The problem is that Gale’s murder happens off screen and the only connection we have with her is a photograph printed in the newspapers obituary column. In House of Wax, the murder of Cathy Gray, close friend of Sue Allen, is genuinely shocking, because the audience empathizes with her.  Cathy, despite her brief screen time, is a fully developed character, wonderfully played by Carolyn Jones.  When we first meet Cathy, we assume that she is a dumb blonde, given her tendency to giggle at just about anything. However, her ditzy demeanor is just an act; a ruse into attracting potentially wealthy suitors.  House of Wax’s setting is in the 1890s, which was not a particularly kind time for single women.  Cathy does whatever she can to survive, even if means playing dumb and using her body to win the favor of Mathew Burke, Jarrod’s former partner, who hopes to be collecting insurance money really soon.   However, in span of five minutes, Cathy is dealt two blows:

1) Matthew Burke is murdered. He is hung by a horribly disfigured man dressed in black. Cathy dreams of being in a stable relationship are shattered.
2) Cathy suffers the same fate as Burke. She is murdered in her bedroom.

The murder of Cathy is genuinely surprising, because there is absolutely no build up to the moment. Sue Ellen returns to her apartment building from a job interview, only to find her landlord demanding her rent. Sue Allen is penniless at the moment, but Cathy has offered to lend her some money. Sue Ellen enters Cathy’s apartment and finds her asleep in the bedroom. She calls out Cathy’s name a few time, but gets no answer. She walks closer to the bed, only to find, much to her horror, that Cathy has been strangled.  Just when things couldn’t get any worse, a black figure emerges from behind the bed and chases after Sue Ellen.  It is a surprising turn of events, given that a few minutes earlier the two of them were enjoying each other’s company and having a few laughs.  It is very much the anti-thesis of the slasher films, which slowly builds to a victim’s inevitable death; the unseen killer has his target in sights and does them in any extremely protracted manner.  In the House of Wax, there is nothing to tip us off that Cathy is going to come to such a gruesome end; no POV shot of the killer looking outside apartment, etc.

House of Wax is remembered for two reasons, it jump started Vincent Price’s horror film career and it was made in 3D. I had the privilege of seeing House of Wax in 3D a few years ago at the Times Cinema in Milwaukee and it was a lot of fun. I think part of the fun is that director Andre de Toth is absolutely shameless with his use of the gimmick; there’s a scene in which Sue Ellen and Scott Andrews (her boyfriend) are at a Can Can and all the dancers stick their butts right out at the screen. Probably, the most famous scene is the paddle ball man; Jarrod hires a barker to drum up business for his wax museum, the guy’s specialty is doing tricks with a paddle ball. It’s a gratuitous scene, but extremely effective, at least in the 3D version, especially when the ball keeps bouncing at your eyes. 

Vincent Price would continue to make horror films throughout his career with varying success, but in House of Wax he is frightening, yet simultaneously sympathetic.  Henry Jarrod is slightly crazy at the film’s beginning; he talks to his sculptures and thinks of them as his children. When Burke sets fire to Jarrod’s wax museum (to collect insurance money), it not only scars Jarrod physically, but mentally as well. He completely losses any sense of reality; in his mind he is doing his victims are great service by immortalizing them in wax.  There is a lot pathos in Price’s performance that was lacking in Lionel Atwill’s no nonsense portrayal in the original film. Lionel Atwill was a terrific actor and his Igor is truly menacing, but his straightforward performance is at odds with the nonstop humor in the film. It is shame that Atwill constantly has to play second fiddle to wisecracking Glenda Farrell, when he should have been given his own starring vehicle to shine in. On the other hand, the comedy relief in the remake is not nearly as jarring, because Price allows for humor to creep into his performance; at point a woman becomes overwhelmed by the horrific waxworks and faints, Jarrod interrupts his tour of the wax museum and offers her friends some smelling salts.

 

Credits:

Mystery of the Wax Museum (1933)
Cast: Glenda Farrell (Florence Dempsey), Lionel Atwill (Ivan Igor), Fay Wray (Charlotte Duncan), Frank McHugh (Jim), Allen Vincent (Ralph Burton), Gavin Gordon (George Winton), Edwin Maxwell (Joe Worth), Arthur Edmund Carewe (Sparrow – Professor Darcy), Holmes Herbert (Dr. Rasmussen), Claude King (Mr. Galatalin), Thomas E. Jackson (Detective), DeWitt Jennings (Police Captain), Matthew Betz (Hugo), Monica Bannister (Joan Gale).

Director: Michael Curtiz
Screenplay: Don Mullaly, Carl Erickson.  Charles Belden (story).

Running Time: 77 min.

House of Wax (1953)
Cast: Vincent Price (Prof. Henry Jarrod), Frank Lovejoy (Lt. Tom Brennan), Phyllis Kirk (Sue Allen), Carolyn Jones (Cathy Gray), Paul Picerni (Scott Andrews), Roy Roberts (Matthew Burke), Dabbs Greer (Sgt. Jim Shane), Paul Cavanagh (Sidney Wallace), Angela Clarke (Mrs. Andrews), Charles Bronson (Igor), Nedrick Young (Leon Averill), Reggie Rymal (The Barker), Philip Tonge (Bruce Allison), Frank Ferguson (Medical Examiner). 

Director: Andre de Toth
Screenplay: Crane Wilbur.  Charles Belden (story)

Running Time: 88 min.

My Top 25 Horror/Monster Film, Part II (20-11)

20. The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (1974)

Dir: Tobe Hooper
Running Time: 84 min.
The Texas Chainsaw Massacre is one of the most unnerving films ever made; it is completely unrelenting in its horror and never allows the audience a moment to breathe. You never feel comfortable around the main characters, because they are often at each other’s throats.  Franklin, despite being in a wheel chair, is completely unsympathetic and is often a huge burden on Sally and her friends.  Despite it’s rather gruesome title, the film is fairly tame in its use of gore; most of the horror is implied, rather than shown in full detail. The 2003 remake with Jessica Biel tried to replicate the look of the original film, but failed in that in tried too hard in making Leatherface a sympathetic character by giving him a painful back story. In the original, it is implied that the family turned to cannibalism largely due to economic factors (the closing down of the slaughter house, the scarcity of gas). It was a nice, subtle touch that was completely lacking from the remake, which went for the whole, “Leatherface was picked on when he was a kid, which is why he hacks up people.” 

 

19. Horror of Dracula (1958)

Dir. Terence Fisher
Running Time: 80 min.
Horror of Dracula is far and away my favorite Dracula film, largely because it moves at a very swift pace. The 1931 Dracula starring Bela Lugosi has a great opening in Transylvania, but comes to a complete halt once it switches locations to London.  The actors just stand around, read their lines, and wait for their cue to exit the scene; it’s like watching a stage play.  Christopher Lee as Dracula is a commanding presence, while Peter Cushing is wonderful as Van Helsing. Cushing’s no nonsense approach to the role really sells the threat of Dracula, while Lee is menacing regardless of what he is doing, be it baring his fangs at his potential victims or just walking into the frame.

18. Black Christmas (1974) 

Dir: Bob Clark
Running Time: 98 min.
Black Christmas has one of the most interesting gimmicks in history; a horror film in which you never actually see the killer. It’s this very ambiguity that makes it such a creepy film, the audience is never given a back story on who the killer is and why he is stalking a house of sorority girls, so they have to rely on their imaginations to fill in the blanks. However, despite never seeing the killer, the audience is still never given a chance to fully relax, because they are forced to listen to the killer; he calls up the sorority and makes obscene phone calls; after he kills a victim he laughs for what seems to be an eternity.  The film was remade in 2006 and (as is the case for most horror remakes) the body count increased while the very little was left to the imagination; in this case the killer was given an elaborate back story and looked like a cast off from The Hills Have Eyes.

17. Poltergeist (1982)

Dir: Tobe Hooper
Running Time: 112 min.
Poltergeist has two scenes that still creep me out:
1)  The opening shot, which begins on a close up a television signing off and then follows the family dogs as it walks room to room. Nothing happens onscreen, but it is completely unnerving, mainly due to the fact that it shot from the point of view of a child. This scene establishes that the family is being watched by an unseen force and that it’s only a matter of time before it reveals itself to the Freelings.

2) The attack on Robbie by the freaky clown doll. This scene is set up beautifully; first there is a shot of the clown doll sitting on a chair facing Robbie while he’s in bed. Then it cuts to Robbie as he hides his head beneath his blanket. Then he pulls down the blanket to see if the clown is still there, only to find to his horror that it has disappeared. He then checks to see if it is hiding under the bed and when he gets back up, the clown doll is standing right behind him and proceeds to attack him. I've seen this scene numerous times and it gets me every time.

16. House of Wax (1953)

Dir: Andre de Toth
Running Time: 88 min.
House of Wax is a remake of the 1933 Warner Brothers film Mystery of the Wax Museum and is a vast improvement. The original film is laden with comedy relief; the main protagonist is a wisecracking blonde reporter (Glenda Farrell) who is trying to solve the mystery of all the disappearing corpses from the city morgue and her research leads her to a Wax Museum in New York, where her roommate is the mad sculptor’s next target.  The remake does away with this character and focuses more on the mad sculptor’s (Vincent Price) attempt to recreate his old Wax Museum (that was burned down by his greedy partner, hoping to cash in on the insurance) in London by using the cadavers of murder victims. It’s biggest claim to fame is that it was shot in 3-D and, having seen it in 3-D, it’s one of the few films that actually works, largely because the director Andre de Toth fully embraces the gimmick, whether it’s relevant to the story or not. The most famous 3-D scene is the paddle ball man, who for no reason other than to show off the effect, continuously hits rubber balls at the screen, while telling the audience all about the wonders of the wax museum. It’s hokey, but it is a lot of fun and Vincent Price is in top form as the mad sculptor Jarrod.

15. Night of the Living Dead (1968)

Dir: George A. Romero
Running Time: 96 min.
Night of the Living Dead is almost relentless in its horror, because you never get the feeling that the characters are safe from the terror lurking outside. They don’t board themselves inside a house, because they are trying to find a solution, but rather out of a fear.  Even when the zombies are off screen, you get the feeling that it’s all going to come crashing down sooner rather than later. This is largely due to the fact that when the characters aren’t fighting the zombies they are at odds with one another. Harry Cooper thinks its best that they all go into the cellar and try to wait out the night, while Ben (the character the audience roots for) is adamant they remain in the living room, where they at least have a fighting chance if the zombies should break in. However, the irony of the film is that Ben survives the night by locking himself in the cellar, after the shit has hit the fan.  It’s a film that plays with the audience’s expectations, where we think one thing is going to happen, only to get blindsided by something else; the two romantic leads are killed in explosions and their remains gets gobbled up by the zombies, Helen is viciously murdered by her daughter, and Ben shoots an unarmed Harry.  It’s a disturbing film and is hard to shake off after having seen it. 

14. The Mummy (1959)

Dir: Terence Fisher
Running Time: 88 min.
Christopher Lee is my favorite Mummy actor of all time, with apologies to the great Boris Karloff. What I like about Lee’s mummy is that he is nothing but sheer, brute strength...a force of a nature to be reckoned with.  Boris Karloff’s Mummy (Ardeth Bay) used black magic to strike terror into the hearts of his enemies, but was physically weak. When Universal revived the series in the 1940s, starting with The Mummy’s Hand, the character of Kharis plodded through the scenery and never seemed a believable threat, despite the look of horror on the actor’s faces. The problem was that Kharis only had one good leg and one good arm; his victims could have easily gotten out of harm’s way had they just walked at a brisk pace, instead of just gawking at him like complete morons. Lee’s Mummy is a sight to behold; he smashes through doors, bends prison bars, and in one case gets impaled by a poker and still keeps on coming.   

13. Halloween (1978)

Dir: John Carpenter
Running Time: 90 min.
The creepiest aspect of Halloween is the idea that a seemingly normal kid for a normal family could just one day flip out and murder his teenage sister. The film never explains why this happened, but the implication is terrifying. The horrible Rob Zombie remake tries to fill in the blanks by giving Michael Myers an over the top back story; he comes from a dysfunctional family, his mother is a stripper and his dad is an abusive redneck that is stuck in a wheel chair. It’s a pretty needless opening and really doesn't give you much insight into the character of Michael Myers.  The original film left things to the imagination, while Zombie’s version does a full assault on the viewer’s senses, there’s nothing ambiguous about his film. There’s really nothing more I can say about Carpenter’s film that hasn't been said before, so I will use the awful pun from the 2003 making of documentary, it’s a “cut above the rest.”

12. Carnival of Souls (1962)

Dir: Herk Harvey
Running Time: 84 min.
Carnival of Souls was the only full length commercial film Herk Harvey ever did and it’s a good one.  An emotionally aloof woman finds herself drawn to a crumbling lake side a pavilion, while being stalked by a pale faced man. The film is amazingly effective in its simplicity; in one scene the heroine finds herself wandering the streets of Salt Lake City while citizen’s fail to acknowledge her existence, she literally becomes a lost soul.  In another jarring sequence, the heroine is driving at night, only to find a face staring at her through the passenger window. It’s these little moments that make the film so eerie. If they film were remade now a days, they would probably be CG ghoulies run amok, mutilating the people closest to the heroine as she decides what her next course of action  should be.

11. Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde (1932)

Dir: Rouben Mamoulian
Running Time: 96 min.
There have been many adaptations of the Robert Louis Stevenson novel The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, but Rouben Mamoulian’s is by far the best. This is largely due to Mamoulian’s imaginative direction; the first transformation is done in a long continuous take, the camera never leaves Jekyll as he slowly begins to change. This simple effect baffled film historians for years, it was until the 1990s (and after Mamoulian’s death) that it was figured out how it was done, let’s just say it involved lighting and filters. Fredric March is terrific as the suffering Dr. Jekyll and the feral Mr.Hyde.  As the film progresses Mr. Hyde becomes increasingly more and more terrifying, at first his antics are slightly comical as he is more a prankster than a monster, but with each successive transformation he turns a tad bit darker until he’s a fully fledged homicidal maniac.