Get movie widget Recommend it Add to Favorites

Lionel Atwill, Fay Wray, Glenda Farrell, Frank McHugh, Gavin Gordon ... see more see more... , Allen Vincent , Holmes Herbert , Monica Bannister , Edwin Maxwell , Arthur Edmund Carewe , DeWitt Jennings , Pat O'Malley , Bull Anderson , Matthew Betz , Frank Darien , William B. Davidson , James Donlan , Robert E. Homans , Perry Ivins , Edward Keane , Claude King , Robert E. O'Connor , Guy Usher , Thomas E. Jackson , Lon Poff

The Mystery of the Wax Museum begins in London in the 1920s. Lionel Atwill plays Ivan Igor, a brilliant sculptor who manages a wax museum. Regarding his historical creations as his friends, Igor refus... read more read more...es the entreaties of his business partner, Joe Worth (Edwin Maxwell), to turn his labor-of-love museum into a more profitable "house of horror." Worth responds by setting fire to the museum, hoping to collect the insurance; as Igor looks on in horror, his effigies of Marie Antoinette, Queen Victoria, et al. grotesquely melt to the floor. Flash-forward to 1933: New York City is plagued by several disappearances -- not only of live people, but of recently deceased corpses from the morgue. Hard-boiled girl reporter Florence Dempsey (Glenda Farrell) browbeats her long-suffering editor Jim(Frank McHugh) into investigating these disappearances. Florence rooms with Charlotte Duncan (Fay Wray), the girlfriend of Ralph Burton (Allen Vincent), who works as a technician at a new midtown wax museum. This about-to-open attraction is run by Igor, who had survived the London fire but is now confined to a wheelchair. Igor's old enemy Worth is also in New York, his fingers in several crooked pies. It appears to Florence (and the audience) that somehow Worth is involved in the recent rash of disappearances; the guilty party could also be playboy George Winton (Gavin Gordon), Florence's boyfriend, who is deeply in debt to Worth. But once Igor decides that Charlotte is the living image of Marie Antoinette, the audience becomes uncomfortably suspicious that all those incredibly life-like statues in his museum are actually the paraffin-coated bodies of the missing people. Igor tips his hand when a terrified Charlotte, promised "eternal life" by being "transformed" into an Antoinette effigy, begins punching and clawing at his face -- revealing his countenance to be a mask, covering his hideously burned and gnarled features. Thus, the stage is set for the climactic race to prevent the strapped-down Charlotte from being permanently encased in wax. Long thought lost, The Mystery of the Wax Museum was rediscovered in Jack Warner's personal film collection in 1970. Its two-color Technicolor had faded to the point of monochrome, but fortunately its original hues were preserved by dedicated AFI technicians. The film was remade (and considerably simplified) as the 1953 3-D extravaganza House of Wax, with Vincent Price in the Atwill role. ~ Hal Erickson, Rovi

Flixster Users

67% liked it

574 ratings

Critics

100% liked it

8 critics

Unrated, 1 hr. 17 min.

Directed by: Michael Curtiz

Release Date: February 17, 1933

Invite friends to see

Stats: 90 reviews

Photos


None yet... Got one?

Your Rating



clear rating

Flixster Reviews (90)


  • September 24, 2011
    A very cool movie, I especially love Atwill, he's a favourite of mine, and he does a great job in this movie. The story is really engaging, the special effects are awesome, there are some funny moments, and the ending was interesting too. I just wish that the wax figures could ... read morehave been creepier like they are in real life. Overall I really liked this movie, though, and I highly recommend it.
  • October 29, 2009
    a landmark mystery/horror made by warner brothers, this was later remade (twice) as house of wax. much as i love vincent price, i think this one is superior altho it has a healthy dose of comedy too. after being disfigured in a fire at his london museum, lionel atwill moves to ... read morenew york and tries to recreate his masterpieces in wax. when bodies start vanishing from the morgue, intrepid reporter glenda farrell is on the case. also starring fay wray as farrell's rommate, who looks a little too much like marie antoinette...this was the last picture from a major studio in the early two color technicolor process
  • July 22, 2011
    7.0/10

    There is one fatal flaw to "Mystery of the Wax Museum". It does not have the twist that it wants to have. Thanks to the existence of plot synopses and the like, we already know what the big reveal is going to be. That's not to say that the film has a bad ending, ... read morebut it is underwhelming compared to the fear that we are intended to experience.

    Otherwise, the movie still makes for a pretty solid, creepy time. It is thoroughly entertaining. It is engaging. And while it's not really scary, it has a heck of an atmosphere, and that's more than enough. It's probably not as good as its first remake, "House of Wax", but it's still worth seeing just for what it's got; and believe me, it's got plenty. I liked how it looked, how it felt, and pretty much everything else. It was well-acted, somewhat well-written, and with only that one little-big flaw keeping it from absolute greatness.

    Ivan Igor, the owner and operator of a wax museum (which he sculpts for), loses his creations to a fire, the source of which was his greedy business partner; whose reason for burning the place was to use the insurance money for himself. Igor was left burn and disfigured both internally and externally after the incident, but it's clear that he's not ready to give up on life.

    Twelve years after the destructive fire, Igor re-opens a NEW Wax Museum for the entertainment and admiration of those who like his hard work. But will the wax make a Marie Antoinette? Will the man's "children" live once again? The answers to each question are predictably answered in the end, but I guess it's worth sticking around.

    Meanwhile, a reporter-woman investigates the disappearance and possible suicide of a local model. She is given the possibility that maybe it was murder, so she goes as deep as she possibly can with the case. The body is stolen from the morgue in which it resided, which adds to the mystery.

    The story is simple in an endearing sense. But what makes the movie work, as I said, is the fact that it redeems itself through atmosphere. It was tense, undeniably creepy, and man, I liked it quite a bit for that. The production is lush, colorful, and the cinematography is at least fairly interesting. I also liked how the film made time for humor and comic relief, which never really consists of stuff that I laughed at, but it made the experience a better one than it needed to be. I enjoyed myself, as much as I possibly could, whilst watching it. And I'm glad I sat through it.

    There are better horror movies. There are worse horror movies. I don't recommend this one, per se, but "Mystery of the Wax Museum" is definitely a good thriller if not a good horror movie. It works, as a chiller and a thriller; but I don't know about something that's actually scary. But what is "scary"? I mean, come on; you could do worse. I didn't jump, I didn't cringe, but the film definitely has a lot going for it, and I liked what I saw.

    I also would like to take some time to acknowledge the performance of Lionel Atwill, who plays Igor. He is very good in this role. He's one of the finer attractions, of the entire product. And while the film may be a tough sell with this generation of horror fans, you don't need to be an old-timer to appreciate such fine acting. All-in-all, I'd tell you to see this movie only if you like the genre, and if you're willing to accept a flawed ending. I'm eager to watch "House of Wax" now; and I'm hoping that it will be better; because better is...well, better.
  • April 10, 2011
    An abrasively brassy female newspaper reporter stumbles on the suspicious fact that a new figure featured in a wax museum strikingly resembles the missing corpse of an heiress. This is such a good premiss it inspired several later movies. Unlike those though this is played as a w... read morehodunit mystery, not as a horror movie. This is a sound movie ("Talkie") but the filmmakers are strangely oblivious to how it could be enhanced by scary or suspenseful music. This fact would make this a good choice for a cinema professor to play certain scenes for his class to show "gee, this scene fails for want of music!"
    The cinematography is notable here. Quite good for its day--check out the two-tone Technicolor. In 1933! (Instead of RGB, it's just RG, that is, Reds and Greens). As for dialogue? It's unintentionally hilarious at times--the repartee between the reporter and her hardboiled boss. Again, it's worthy of viewing in a cinema class as exemplary. As for the last-second, completely unexpected marriage proposal and assent of reporter and editor, I'd point to that as a paradigm example of some studio boss's interference: "Fine, fine. Mystery's solved, but where's the romance, damnit! Somebody's gotta get married at the end!" Haha. But still--cut this picture some slack. People who give it a terrible grade need to view some other less well-known pictures from the same era to realize what "Bad" is.
  • September 4, 2009
    There's no real mystery here. More creepy than anything. Years earlier in England the wax sculptor lost his museum to an unscrupulous business partner/accountant when the business partner torched it for the insurance money. Now in New York, the sculptor hopes to make a comeback w... read moreith even more realistic wax sculptures. An investigative journalist is following the story of a young celebrity who recently killed herself, and then the body goes missing from the morgue. The dialogue between the reporteress and her editor was reminiscent of His Girl Friday or the Thin Man series (also seen in the more recent Hudsucker Proxy), but lacked the wit or punch of those better examples. To note, this was shot in Technicolor, but looks different than the Technicolor that most are familiar with. Not bad, just different. One of the few horrors I have seen from the era that does not have a "gothic" atmosphere to it at all.
  • December 13, 2008
    Great mystery/horror film from the Golden Age.
    Lionel Atwill is insane and sinister (ugly too!) Fay Wray screams alot.
    The REAL star is Glenda Farrel,as a smartass reporter.
    The sub plot with the madman's junkie henchman was quite daring for the time (1933). And the dialou... read morege too-Glenda-"How's your sex life?". Fay Wray strips done to her skimpies too! Hubba hubba!
    Plus...it's in COLOR! (mostly shades of pink,blue and green).
  • October 8, 2008
    Looks like Hollywood has known for quite a while that wax figures are creepy. This came 20 years before House of Wax but has the exact same plot and story. However, it's definitely more of a mystery than a horror. And I found the Vincent Price one to be much more fun.
  • August 12, 2008
    Mystery Of The Wax Museum is a terribly underrated horror gem! There really isn't anything not to like: a fun plot, good acting, Fay Wray, and pure entertainment. I've been a fan of the 1953 remake for a couple of years until I remembered this was on the other side of the disc. A... read morend I'm so glad I remembered that.
  • June 13, 2008
    When the Paris Hilton HOUSE OF WAX came out a couple of years ago, lots of folks snickered. How bad must the movie be, they wondered, if the producers felt compelled to cast the bimbo du jour to sell tickets? A few people were actually offended, because the Vincent Price HOUSE OF... read more WAX from 1953 is a classic. Why remake this great movie when the original is such a wonderful film, and still so well-known? Everyone in the bar kept saying, ?Oh, the original is soooo much better.?
    Well, they were right, the original is better, but Vincent Price wasn?t in it. The original came out twenty years earlier. It was directed by Michael (Casablanca) Curtiz and starred Lionel Atwill (one of the coolest actors of the era), Glenda Farrell (the original tough cookie), and Fay Wray (?nuff said). Despite the presence of Price, the cast of the later film is grossly inferior; about the most that can be said for them is that it?s fun to recognize Carolyn (Morticia Addams) Jones as an early victim, and you might possibly be able to pick out an impossibly young Charles Bronson in a small part.
    Also, the Atwill version avoids the casual sexism so prevalent in the Price version. It says a lot about what a cultural and political wasteland the U.S. was in the Fifties that the strong, independent female characters of the first film become weak-kneed screamers twenty years later. It?s interesting intellectually that the two films could have such different vibes, with nearly identical screenplays; it shows the power that directors have regardless of the script. The censors of the fifties are shown up as sheltered prudes as well by the fact that Atwill?s assistant, a junkie, is transformed into an alcoholic in the remake. God forbid you mention drugs, even if the character using them is a disgusting, pathetic rat. I suppose the censors' logic was that kids in the Thirties were smart enough to handle that sort of thing, but kids had gotten a lot stupider by the Fifties.
    It is true that the Price version has great nostalgic value. That is, in fact, the only value it has. I like to watch it now and then as a ?blast from the past,? but when I want to watch a great movie, I watch THE MYSTERY OF THE WAX MUSEUM instead. Unfortunately, in spite of its superiority, it has been replaced in the public imagination by Price's remake. This film is already out of print on DVD, and now that there's yet another remake to distract people from this little gem, it's likely to be forgotten entirely. That's really a shame.

Critic Reviews


Dennis Schwartz
October 20, 2008
Dennis Schwartz, Ozus' World Movie Reviews

A fun weirdo classic pulp horror tale from the 1930s. Full Review

Steve Crum
February 22, 2008
Steve Crum, Video-Reviewmaster.com

Has its share of creeps, but noteworthy for its early 2-strip Technicolor.

John J. Puccio
August 8, 2003
John J. Puccio, Movie Metropolis

...the movie's quick-paced dialogue makes it a combination "Front Page" and "Frankenstein," representing two genres picking up steam in the early thirties. Full Review

Bill Chambers
August 4, 2003
Bill Chambers, Film Freak Central

Mystery of the Wax Museum is not without its drawing cards, but it's nowhere near as fun as its eventual remake. Full Review

James Sanford
April 30, 2003
James Sanford, Kalamazoo Gazette

A swell mix of comedy and creepiness

Ken Hanke
August 7, 2002
Ken Hanke, Mountain Xpress (Asheville, NC)

A true classic of horror. Full Review

March 26, 2009
Variety

Click to read the article Full Review

Mordaunt Hall
March 25, 2006
Mordaunt Hall, New York Times

Click to read the article Full Review

January 1, 2000
Chicago Reader

Click to read the article Full Review

Christopher Null
July 5, 2005
Christopher Null, Filmcritic.com

Click to read the article Full Review

Critic ratings and reviews powered by RottenTomatoes.com

Fresh (60% or more critics rated the movie positively)

Rotten (59% or fewer critics rated the movie positively)

More Like This


Click a thumb to vote on that suggestion, or add your own suggestions.

  • House of Wax
    House of Wax (100%)
  • Tourist Trap
    Tourist Trap (100%)
  • House of Wax
    House of Wax (50%)

Facts


No facts approved yet. Be the first

Mystery of the Wa... : Watch Free on TV


Mystery of the Wax Museum Trivia


  • In 1933 bodies are mysteriously disappearing all over town.   Answer »

Movie Quizzes


No quizzes for Mystery of the Wax Museum. Want to create one?

Video Clips


No video clips yet. Want to upload one?

Recent News


No recent headlines. Got one?

Recent Lists


Most Popular Skin


No skins yet. Interested in creating one?