House of Wax (2005)

[baumer]

Discuss

[baumer]

While HOUSE OF WAX will never be mistaken for Texas CHAINSAW MASSACRE or HALLOWEEN, it does try and ultimately succeed in being a worthy addition to quality horror film making. There is enough tension and enough implied gore in here to please the young audience of today and there is also enough explicit gore to please some of the purists of yesterday. Overall, it is quite a well done.

Six kids on the way to a football game get stranded in a DELIVERANCE like setting and what ensues actually looks like it may have been taken out from a discarded Deilverance sequel as the backwoods hicks seem to taunt the group. Eventually the group has to break up and half of them head into the desolate town to get some car parts. The other half of the group stays behind at camp and this sets up the second half of the film.

House of Wax has many strengths. The first is that it is blessed with a very likable cast. Paris Hilton is fine in her role but she is far from the focal point. Chad Michael Murray, Elisabeth Cuthbert and Brian Van Holt are three very charismatic actors and their presence in the film adds some panache, some credibility and some flair. I had never really heard of Chad Michael Murray, only that he was a pin-up type teen heartthrob. But he has a presence to him. He is instantly likable and he possesses a strong character trait. I enjoyed his performance much more than I figured I would and when he was on screen, the film flowed.

The question now becomes, "Is this film a worthy horror film?" And the answer to that is a resounding YES. As I mentioned off the top, it is not in the same class a NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET or LAST HOUSE ON THE LEFT, or even THE RING, but it is relatively tense, quite graphic and there are some very inventive death scenes. This is not the HOUSE OF WAX that your parents told you about. Vincent Price is nowhere to be seen and when you start seeing fingers being cut off and hot wax covering comatose bodies, you realize this film is a little on the edge.

I'd like to see an uncut director's X rated version. I bet there is one out there somewhere that would be much more violent than this one. Be that as it may, this is a very good entry into the horror genre and it is heads and shoulders above weak films like I KNOW WHAT YOU DID LAST SUMMER and DARK WATER and a few others. It is definitely worth a look.

 

My original review from 2005

8/10

[The Stingray]

Trash.

 

[Napoleon]

It was my favorite horror movie when I was a teenager, and it still holds well over a decade later. It's far from perfect, but it's definitely much better than it gets credit for. It's probably the last good slasher movie. There are some likable characters, inventive death scenes, it reverences the movie it is based on even though the concept gets completely retooled here as it was necessary. The script is quite smart in moving the characters around and using the physical space, if you know what I mean; it never gets boring even though it's over 1 hour and 50 minutes long. No surprise that the writers would later write the two Conjuring movies, and the director made last year's The Shallows. 

[baumer]

15 hours ago, The Stingray said:

Trash.

 

 

You're not big on slasher films, are you?  

[The Stingray]

6 hours ago, baumer said:

 

You're not big on slasher films, are you?  

 

You know I love slashers, baumer.

 

[baumer]

Yes but it just seems like the last few horror films that have been discussed that I kind of like you're not really big on LOL. Plus you liked it comes at night and the Babadook LOL and I hated those two movies