WillSushyMedia This movie was so-so. It had it's moments, but wasn't the greatest.

Helloturia I have absolutely never seen anything like this movie before. You have to see this movie.

Blake Rivera If you like to be scared, if you like to laugh, and if you like to learn a thing or two at the movies, this absolutely cannot be missed.

Raymond Sierra The film may be flawed, but its message is not.

buckikris I never did get to see this awesome classic horror film in 3-D, but I bet it was something to see. This is one horror film I highly recommend, with classic actors; and a great story line you can't fail.The movie begins with Professor Jerrod in his workshop, working on a wax sculpture, he has invited Sidney Wallace( Paul Cavanaugh) to see his work. The time period is in the early 1900's, when Wax museums were very big. When Wallace arrives he is surprised by his work and wonders why he doesn't have a Wax Of Horror's? Jerrod says it his not his type of work, and continues with his new piece. In about 1/2 hour Jerrod's partner Matthew ( Ray Roberts) arrives. He is a stock broker that wants to make a deal with Jerrod. He asks him if he wants to split 25, 000 dollars. He feels he is losing money in the Wax Museum, and want to collect the insurance on the place. Jerrod freaks by the idea of arson, but Matthew strikes a match, and sets fire to the place.Matthew several months later is seen at a festival with his new girlfriend, Cathy( Carloyn Jones). Matthews has received the insurance money and he and Cathy plan to get married. They plan everything from when to where they will go afterwords. He tells her he has to go back to the office but he will see her later. When he returns to his office to get the money he is unaware Jerrod has survived the fire and his there for revenge. Jerrod strangles him, and makes it look like a suicide. Cathy lives with a roommate Sue( Phyllis Kirk) who is down on her luck trying to find a job. Tonight while helping Cathy get ready, she has a interview as a hatcheck clerk. They both live in this boarding house that is run, by a Mrs. Flanagan( Riza Royce). She is tough and believe in giving no one breaks on late rent. Sue returns, but doesn't get the job. She tries to avoid her landlady, but no dice. She catches her and tells Sue get the rent now, Cathy is there and she wants the rent. Sue opens the door and finds Cathy murdered, and a strange looking man in the room. Sue freaks , and runs to Scott Andrew(Paul Picerni) and his mother's place Mrs. Andrews( Angela Clarke's) house. Paul is also a sculpture and she tells him what happened. The three of them go to the police, and talk with Det. Lt. Tom Brennan( Frank Lovejoy) and Sgt. Jim Shane( Dabbs Greer). The officers inform Cathy and the Andrews that several bodies have be stolen from the morgue.Since his accident Professor Jerrod has decided to open up a new wax museum, with a chamber of horrors. He has hired 2 pupils to help him, Leon(Nedrick Young) and ex-con; and a deaf mute, Igor( Charles Bronson). Jerrod is now bent on vengeance and murder. Since the accident he is unhinged and doesn't care about anything except revenge on anybody. Instead of working with wax he steals bodies from the morgue, and forms a wax base over them.One day Sue and Scott visit the wax museum. There Sue notices something odd about the Joan of Arc piece. The wax figure seems to look so muck like her roommate to a T. When Professor Jerrod notices her examining the figure he approaches her. He tells her that he saw pictures of Cathy after her murder, and that's where his vision of Joan of Arc came from. He tells him his work is is passion and every detail has to be perfect. Sue and Scott think nothing off it at first. Then Jerrod becomes obsessed with Sue. He wants to make a figure of Marie Antoinette from her. Sue then starts to become suspicious of him. That night Jerrod breaks into her room, but fails.The police go back to the museum , and realize some of the wax figures resembles some of the people that have been stolen. They then become very curious of the figures and one day find out Leon is an ex-con. They bring him in for questioning. Leon finally breaks, and tells them about how Jerrod does his figures. He explains everything and the police realize they have to act quickly before someone else becomes a victim.When Sue goes to met Scott at the museum, he isn't there. She looks at the Joan of Arc figue again and discovers the truth. Just when she is leaving Jerrod finds her along with with Igor. She is captured and put into a box, where she is about to become a wax figure, a Marie Antoinette figure to be exact. When Scott doesn't her from her he returns to the museum, there Igor is waiting for him. He realizes he has to fight off Igor to save Sue. Igor gets the upper hand and captures Scott and puts him in a guillotine. The police arrive in five minutes release Scott from the guillotine and stop Jerrod from his madness.This film is great, I recommend it to anyone especially horror fans. You will be glued to this gem from beginning to end.

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.

BA_Harrison A colourful remake of Mystery of the Wax Museum (1933), with added 3-D gimmick, House of Wax might be a hokey old tale but it is too much fun to not enjoy, especially with star Vincent Price on top form as disfigured wax museum sculptor Prof. Henry Jarrod, who turns to murder to bring life to his exhibits.The film opens with Jarrod offering to buy out his business partner Matthew Burke (Roy Roberts) with help from potential investor Sidney Wallace (Paul Cavanagh); Burke would rather not wait for Wallace to seal the deal, however, and sets fire to the museum to claim on the insurance. Jarrod is presumed killed in the blaze, but returns several months later in a wheelchair to continue his work with help from deaf mute Igor (an early performance from Charles Bronson) and alcoholic criminal Leon (Nedrick Young), using real bodies coated with wax to guarantee realism. When a young woman, Sue Allen (Phyllis Kirk), recognises one of the waxwork figures as her missing friend Cathy (Carolyn 'Morticia Addams' Jones), she goes to the police, who decide to investigate her outlandish story.A lively production with sumptuous visuals, House of Wax is ghoulish, grand guignol fun from start to finish, Price putting in one of his finest performances (he's not nearly as hammy as he is in Roger Corman's Poe movies), with excellent support from a great cast. Director André De Toth keeps a brisk pace and enlivens matters with his use of 3D, objects thrust into the foreground for his viewers' amusement—oh, how I wish that I could see this on the big screen in 3D, but it's still fun to spot these things in 2D. Notable use of 3D includes a row of can can dancers kicking out at the audience and waggling their frilly bloomers, and the House of Wax barker, who uses a bat and ball to perform tricks.House of Wax would go on to be a huge success and inspire several other waxwork themed horrors including Carry On Screaming (1966), anthology-of-sorts Waxwork (1988) and, of course, the inevitable 'remake' House of Wax (2005).7.5/10, rounded up to 8 for IMDb.

Rob Starzec The premise for House of Wax was interesting; if only it wasn't so bloated with visuals thrown in primarily to get in our face since it was released in 3-D. It's awesome that this was one of the earliest movies to be released in 3-D, but it reminded me of what I dislike about 3-D in this day and age.At the core of this film is somewhat of a "mystery," which focuses on the question who is the man with the disfigured face murdering people all over town. Any audience member would think it has to be the wax sculptor who is trapped in a burning museum at the beginning of the film - and they would be right.There's the spoiler in this review, but what I dislike about it is that it is really not much of a spoiler at all. We have a murderer running loose, setting up situations that are later redesigned at a wax museum by the main character who just so happens to return, only injured at the legs as far as we can tell. How many people around have a motivation for these murders? That's right, one.Even worse than this is the idea that visuals including a paddle ball, dancers putting their rears to the camera, and a fist punching above a face at us tries to get us focused on the 3-D, and has little relevance to making a good story. Also, it throws off its fast pace when there is an intermission to his 90 minute film due to the fact it was filmed with 3-D cameras.I don't much like this film, but it somewhat redeems itself for themes such as spectator-ship - the sculptor is obsessed with various women he recreates and marvels at their beauty - along with the motif of art vs reality - a friend of one of the murdered victims swears that the Joan of Arc sculptor must be that victim; it is too similar not to be.