Mystery of the Wax Museum

This film, which was remade as "House Of Wax" 20 years later (as if you didn't know), might not enjoy quite the reputation it does today had it not been the basis for the better-known later film and, more importantly, believed lost for over 30 years, which made it something of a legend for many people who'd never even seen it. Legendary status can be rather difficult to live up to, and unless a viewer is approaching it with no advance knowledge of its history, MYSTERY OF THE WAX MUSEUM may not be quite what one expects. It is, nevertheless, an energetic and entertaining amalgam of genres: horror film meets newspaper crime drama. Dropping a rather Gothic tale of body-snatching, a mad sculptor and a museum of wax-covered corpses into the streamline-moderne milieu of fast-talking, wise-cracking reporters on the trail of a hot story makes for interesting contrasts. Lionel Atwill, as Ivan Igor, the artist driven to insanity and murder by the destruction of his wax "children" in an arson fire, was an immensely enjoyable performer whose best work came a bit later (see "Son Of Frankenstein" for his portrayal of the one-armed Insp. Krogh). His natural screen presence carries him through, though he never quite generates either the pathos or the smooth menace that Vincent Price displayed in the remake. But from the moment of her entrance, it's Glenda Farrell as Florence Dempsey, the reporter out to save her job by bringing in a scoop - barreling onto the screen with a full head of steam - who propels the story all the way to its finish. There's an awful lot going on here beyond the basic premise; bootlegging, a "dope fiend," a suicide and a falsely implicated millionaire playboy are thrown into the mix, packing quite a lot into the 77 minute running time (the remake improved the story by eliminating extraneous characters and subplots). A pre-"King Kong" Fay Wray (in her naturally red hair sans the "Kong" blond wig) is the damsel in actual distress, but despite her billing, she's basically a supporting player and has little to do - beyond enduring roommate Florence's snide comments about her penniless boyfriend - until the climactic confrontation between all the bad guys and good guys (and girls). MYSTERY is well-served by the direction of Michael Curtiz ("Adventures Of Robin Hood," "Casablanca"), who was something of a jack-of-all-genres, and there's plenty of snappy dialogue, some of which (Florence asking a cop, "How's your sex life?") wouldn't have made it to the screen a year later under the newly re-written Production Code. Depending on one's point of view, it could be said that the very effective production design either benefits, or suffers, from the pale pastels of the two-strip Technicolor photography. For my part, I'm guessing that the subdued tones we see today result from the lack of first-rate film elements available. Having seen far superior two-strip from years earlier, I'll wager that the original prints were much more vivid. If you're any kind of a fan of the remake, you do owe it to yourself to see this one, if only once. There are many things to enjoy in MYSTERY OF THE WAX MUSEUM, not the least of which are the fabulous ensembles worn by Farrell. Just how does a newspaper reporter one step away from the breadline afford a wardrobe like that?

...if the musical films of the early 30's had not fallen in such ill favor. Warner Brothers had contracted with the Technicolor corporation to make two more color films, and these were always musicals in those days. When that didn't pan out as economically feasible Warners decided to make two color horror films instead - this one and "Doctor X". Mystery of the Wax Museum is one of those rare depression-era films that availed itself of two-strip technicolor. It is a good example of a saucy pre-code film with dicey language that has a journalist investigating what turns out to be a horror story. In this way it compares well to 1932's "Doctor X". In this version, Glenda Farrell is really the lead as the fast-talking journalist who just knows that a recently opened wax museum is behind disappearances in the local morgue, and is out to prove it. She plays something you won't see for another 30 years in American cinema starting in 1934 - a hard-boiled girl with an equally hard-boiled mouth. For example, while searching for clues she walks up to a cop friend of hers, grabs the magazine from his hand and asks him "How's your sex life?". The now more famous Fay Wray actually has a minor role as the beautiful girl friend of the apprentice sculptor who plays the part of damsel in distress. Other than this small part at the end of the film she really has little to do here. Farrell carries the lead role well, but I kept thinking that if Ginger Rogers had been available perhaps she could have really made this role sizzle a bit more .

Michael Curtiz has over 170 directing credits, including "The Jazz Singer." Of the films on that list which I have seen, this is my favourite. It's filled with some quite amazing dolly and camera work, the story is fun and the acting is solid. This story has had a long life. This film, was based on a play. In 1953, it was re-made as a Vincent Price vehicle, "House of Wax" in 3-D. And in 2005, it was re-made again as a teen slasher. The premise is solidly creepy. Glenda Farrell is hilarious as the young journalist. Her energy leaps off the screen. I guess audiences of 1933 needed quite a bit of comic relief to make it through the rest of this. Lionel Atwill's make-up is fantastic. It's no surprise that it was designed by a Westmore: Hollywood's premiere make-up family. This was shot in a two-colour Technicolor process which makes the entire film rather distinctive and moody. The fantastic film noir lighting adds to it as well. If you can find this, it's a definite must-see! There are so many images and ideas borrowed from it in later horror films it's interesting to see their origins.

But one must consider its time period. 1933. Not a really sophisticated period in our history, nor particularly graphic. But the cast does a wonderful job, and the script is good--again, considering the year it was made. One cannot compare this movie to anything made even at the end of the 30s (SON OF FRANKENTSTEIN, for example.) It's a product of its time, and it succeeds as such. For my taste, it is far superior to any number of the no-plot slasher pics made in the past 25 years, the original HALLOWEEN being the exception. MYSTERY is not for everyone--but for fans of genre films of years past, this one ranks right up there with FRANKENSTEIN, KING KONG, and DR. JEKYLL AND MR. HYDE--all of the same era.

In 1921, in London, Ivan Igor (Lionel Atwill) is an artist, sculpting masterpieces in wax and exposing them in a small and non-profitable museum. When his partner proposes a criminal fire to receive the insurance, Ivan does not accept and fights with him, but he is knocked out and left in the burning place. In 1933, in New York, the crippled Ivan Igor reappears in a wheelchair and with hands destroyed by fire, preparing the grand-opening of his London Wax Museum. Meanwhile, the snoopy reporter of the New York Express Florence Dempsey (Glenda Farrell) is investigating the death of a woman, and finds that many corpses had vanished from the city morgue. She suspects that Ivan is stealing the bodies and covering them with wax for the museum. "The Mystery of the Wax Museum" is a creepy and funny classic horror movie, with a great story of insanity of a passionate artist that loses his ability to sculpt statues of wax, and decides to cover corpses with wax to expose in his museum. The creepy make-up of Lionel Arwill is very impressive and the art direction is awesome. This practically unknown film is better and better than the 1953 remake with Vincent Price. My vote is eight. Title (Brazil): "Os Crimes do Museu" ("The Crimes of the Museum")

A genuinely frightening film from Michael Curtiz, jack of no trades and master of all. Many of the tricks of classic 1930's horror are here, including the opening scene set in a dark, rainy London street, the long shadows on the wall, lengthy periods of silence, and all timed to perfection. Only the faster-than-the-speed-of-sound dialogue of Glenda Farrell truly lets the film down. But other than that it is a gothic masterpiece, an underrated movie probably due to the fact that it lay undiscovered, thought lost, for over half a century. Far more inventive and imaginative than the majority of horror films made today.

In the early 1930's Jack Warner was under contract to use the Two-strip technicolor process on a Warner Brothers film. Unfortunately, this primitive form of color cinematography had a limited pallet of colors. Everything had an unnatural pastel look. Warner wisely choose a genre not dependent on reality- the horror film. Their first color horror film was DOCTOR X, a wild and macabre who-dunnit complete with scary murders, truly mad doctors and a cannibal. DOCTOR X, released in 1932, was enough of a success, that Warner Brothers reunited it's director, Michael Curtiz, the two leads, Lionel Atwill and Fay Wray, and the two strip Technicolor process for yet another horror film. The new film, simply titled WAX MUSEUM during production was a fast moving creepy chiller that mixed the gloom of Depression era New York with the creepy going-ons of a wax museum. The film begins in 1921. Sculptor Ivan Igor (a bohemian looking Lionel Atwill), so obsessed creating his wax museum, that he ignores that he and his partner, Worth (Edwin Maxwell) are in deep financial trouble. Worth sets fire to the museum to collect on a fire insurance policy. The museum is destroyed, and Igor is left a cripple with useless hands. Twelve years later, in Manhattan, Igor opens a new wax museum. At the same time, a wisecracking reporter, Florence (Glenda Farrell) tracks a hot case of the corpse of a recently murdered socialite stolen from the morgue. She begins to suspect that creepy wax museum downtown of stealing bodies and posing them as wax statues. What makes things worse, is that her best friend, Ruth (Fay Wray) is dating the most innocent of the questionable wax-workers. THE MYSTERY OF THE WAX MUSEUM is a DVD shelf must-have.

The beauty of two-strip Technicolor rendering sensual pastel tones and settings in London (1921) and New York (1933), art direction by legendary Anton Grot, Orry-Kelly gowns, Lionel Atwill at his maddest and Fay Wray in all her splendor, make this one of the finest horror films of not only the 30s but of all time. The pace of this film is fast, the comedy relief enjoyable but not detracting from its story. Atwill imbues his character of Ivan Igor with all the menace and evil he could muster (and that was calibrated in tons!) So far superior to its remake (HOUSE OF WAX with Vincent Price) that it leaves its competitor in the dust. Easily my favorite film to look at after New Year's Eve parties. Fantastic fun and candy for the eyes with all that streamlined Art Deco grandeur!

This movie was remade 20 years later as "House of Wax," with Vincent Price in the role of the wax artist played in this original by Lionel Atwill. Interestingly - because (a) I don't usually care that much for remakes, and (b) I'm not big on Vincent Price - I thought the remake was the stronger of the two movies. Many won't agree with me on that, of course, but "House of Wax" was one of Price's better performances, and I found this version somewhat lacking in both atmosphere and suspense. The story is the same with only a few adjustments, but I felt it was pulled off better in '53. The cast didn't really blow me away. The most interesting thing about the cast was probably the opportunity to see Fay Wray in a movie other than "King Kong." But as Charlotte, her role was - similar to "Kong" - not a substantive acting performance. She looked both beautiful and vulnerable, so you hope she's going to be OK (and she does get to do a Fay Wray scream toward the end!), but I didn't find her performance particularly powerful. And, of course, she wasn't the lead actress. That would have been Glenda Farrell as Florence, the hard-nosed female reporter for the New York Express newspaper. Farrell was probably the strongest member of the cast. She pulled off the role well, and was quite believable for the most part. A major problem with this movie was the last scene. The ending of a movie (which I won't give away, although it's not all that important to the overall story) has to somehow connect to the rest of the movie - otherwise it just leaves me scratching my head. I was left scratching my head after this was over. I thought the writers made a very poor decision in coming up with a final scene that seemed both forced (between the actors) and artificial (between the characters.) I won't say more, except to say that it left me dry, which is not the way you should be left after watching a movie. (5/10)

Classic horror movie directed by Michael Curtiz and starring Lionel Atwill as a deranged sculptor with an "interesting" method of making the statues on display at his wax museum. The last (and best) of the three horror movies Lionel Atwill did with Fay Wray. Atwill is fantastic here and Wray is, as always, delightful. Nice support from Frank McHugh, Gavin Gordon, and Edwin Maxwell, among others. The scene stealer of the movie is Glenda Farrell as the fast-talking reporter heroine. She really has fun with the part. A few years later she would star in the Torchy Blane series and play a character very similar to the one she plays here. It's a good-looking movie, filmed in two-color Technicolor with nice atmospheric direction from Curtiz. The sets are great, especially Atwill's art deco laboratory. The makeup effects are terrific. It's a juicy Pre-Coder, as evidenced by the gruesome plot and the junkie character played by Arthur Edmund Carewe. Some viewers might be put off by the fact that a large chunk of the middle of the picture is more like a crime story/newspaper movie but I was always entertained, particularly by the back & forth between Farrell and McHugh. So it's not a straight horror movie from beginning to end but, so what, it's still a great film and worth a look. Remade in the '50s as House of Wax with Vincent Price. That version is more well-known than this one but I like rewatching this one more. It's just more fun.