Just What Kind Of Movie is House of Wax?

It was pointed out to me earlier this evening that the House of Wax poster has a very odd similarity to a particular type of adult film fetish, one apparently popularized in Japan and frequently discussed on Howard Stern. I'm trying not to get to graphic here, but you can see the poster here and I'm wondering if perhaps this artwork isn't more suitable for "House of Whacks".

And please, let's keep this serious and not start making jokes like "House of Whacks - Coming Soon".

In Nagasaki!
They like buk. . . .

Wait. What are we talking about?

Tom, take a look at this pop album cover:

http://www.boingboing.net/images/ai_billboard_thumb.jpg

Is that about the same thing you had in mind? :p)

Eye of the beholder?

The image in the poster immediately reminded me of wax dripping off a candle base. The "twist" is that it's not a candle base; it's a person -- which is the well-known gimmick of the various House of Wax movies.

Other than the well-established sexual subtext in horror movies (and usually you don't have to look too deep), I'd say that any other similarities should be treated as a Rorschach test.

M.

Wow, I was going to crack wise about the apparant quality of the film, but you first post already took this down to a level I wasn't willing to risk. Good job!

So what would the tagline be? See Paris glazed like a honey donut?

Maybe the confusion stems from the fact that Paris Hilton is used as the model fro the poster art.

the kind of movie thats on MTV all damn day heh.

I just saw it ~ It had a very Texas Chainsaw Massacre feel to it.

I enjoyed it a great deal, I thought CMM did a good job (I enjoy him on One Tree Hill also). Paris Hilton is still on my shit list, thats for sure. She should just quit the act and just start acting in porno's full time. Maybe she'll read this thread and get an idea.

Very interesting concept, I dunno if this is a first, or someone above mentioned the other "house of wax" films. Will have to look into this.

Overall....a solid B

mike

It was ok.

This is also a film that's better to see with a group. More enjoyable to pick apart.

This is the most violent horror film of the year. It's also quite brutal in certain scenes. Though the movie doesn't go as far it should have. They pussied out on the spikes through the face scene for example.

The characters were way too stupid in this movie. It really is to the point of annoying after awhile. The main characters especially do way too many stupid things. Dumber than usual.

Paris Hilton is no worse than any disposable side character you usually see in slasher films. She's hardly even in the film. I still say Monica Keena (Freddy vs Jason) was probably the worst slasher character I have ever had the pleasure of seeing. And she was the hero.

As for Paris. She's in the beginning, completely vanishes for an hour, and then pops up near the end to die in Friday the 13th fashion. I mean she even gets chased out of a tent. But, where on earth did the building she go in come from? It appeared out of nowhere.

It's almost as if they forgot her character was even in the movie. Shoot me if you must, but I thought she had the best death scene and the funniest moments. She's really not as bad as everyone is making her out to be. If she was an unknown, no one would even question her disposable role.

Eberts quote which I agree with:

"The early reviewers have been harsh with Miss Hilton ("so bad she steals the show," says The Hollywood Reporter), but actually she is no better or worse than the typical Dead Post-Teenager, and does exactly what she is required to do in a movie like this, with all the skill, admittedly finite, that is required."

I am no butt muncher of Eberts in general, but I would agree with his 2 star review. I agree with just about everything he says. Once again. Not butt munching. I really do agree with his review almost exactly.

http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/...VIEWS/50426003

I haven't seen the film, but I'd already understand what Roger Ebert has said about Paris Hilton. The fact is, everyone had their minds made up that she'd be terrible even before the film ever shot its first frame.

It doesn't sound too promising for Elisha that two reviews fail to mention her at all. Does she make no impression? Isn't she the main lead?

Does this movie have anything at all in common with either "House of Wax" (1953) w/ Vincent Price or "Mystery of the Wax Museum" (1933) w/ Fay Wray. From everything that I've read, this move sounds like it has almost nothing in common with either of the originals. I don't have a problem with that, but why in the hell would they use the same damned title. This is one of my biggest pet peeves in movies today.

I enjoyed it. The characters did act in the typical slasher fashion. The gore was decent and one scene made me cring a bit. I had 2 problems witht he film though.


Warning Spoiler! Click to show

Eric ~ I believe they just borrowed some ideas and the title.
Warning Spoiler! Click to show I havent seen those yet but I am looking forward to checking them out.

I echo the thoughts about that building Paris ran into. Where the hell did that come from.

I think I'm gonna go back and see it later this week, some of my friends are interested in it. Wonder how well it will hold up on a second viewing, not to mention I can check out the
Warning Spoiler! Click to show

Looking back on it, maybe I set Paris up to fail too much. Granted, she did as well as any other actress does in a slasher flick.

Also, after thinking about it I found another thing to pick at:


Warning Spoiler! Click to show

Oh and finally, any thoughts on
Warning Spoiler! Click to show Was that just added to tie up that loose end or is there a
Warning Spoiler! Click to show .

Yeah, it wasn't great but it kept my attention. For what it was House of Wax was pretty good. A big reason why it was as good as it was was KNB. Those guys still do some of the most top-notch work today. The media (WB included) throws around Paris Hilton's name a lot because her name (like it(or her) or not) puts asses in the seats. This is Elisha Cuthbert's movie and she does as good an acting job as she has in anything else I've seen her in. I went in to see this because I had caught the 1953 version about a week ago on TCM (loved it) and just wanted to see how this compared. Expecting the worse I was actually surprise at how much I actually liked it. Other than it's basic premiss (dead people made into wax statues) and a character named Vincent this movie has nothing in common with the 1953 version, but it doesn't have to. This movie stands on it's own and for a post-teen slasher-esque movie it does it job pretty well. My biggest complaint is that there was no nudity (hey, I like my horror with a side of boobs, got a problem with it?). Why is it that so many actress today decide that they are too good for doing nudity? Paris Hilton (who's acting isn't really worse than anyone elses) pokes fun at her sex video (several times) throughout the movie and yet the most we see of her here is in small red bra and panties. Come on, the world knows what you look like naked so why not make your film a blockbuster and go all out with the nude scenes? But other than that I enjoyed this film for what it was and wasn't pissed because I didn't expect it to be something that is wasn't.

/

"Paris Hilton (who's acting isn't really worse than anyone elses)"

Oh man she was BRUTAL, her and her boyfriend were the worst octors ever!

Elisha was good, I had to laugh when she was hiding, it looked like Blair Witch

Paris's death was hilarious, I laughed out loud many times.

Brent

I simply don't get why everyone is so down on Paris Hilton? I mean sure she's ditzy, absurdly rich, a media whore and, yes, slutty, but from what i've observed of her she's essentially a nice person who is also completely harmless.

I mean I realize that a lot of the things you see her do on The Simple Life are set-up ahead of time, however on a lot of those shows she, and Nichole Richie too btw, seem to exhibit a genuine warmth and caring attitude for some of the people that host them, particularly kids. Like the episode when she and Nichole built, from scratch, a small bedroom for a kid who didn't have one of his own.

She's not a murderer, she's not a criminal, the only thing's she's guilty of is being young, beautiful, sexually aggressive and wealthy. I say leave her alone already and quit conforming to the popular opinion of her. I've heard people talk about her as if she weren't even a human being, but rather some empty void taking up space on the planet. She is a human being with feelings just like the rest of us.

I'm not completely innocent myself, I made a crack about her in another thread, but I felt bad afterwards.

John Williamson,

This thread is nothing. If someone doesn't like her, they don't like her. I also have taken cracks, but it was nothing more than light spirited joking. Not that it's right, but you know. I can't say I hate her. I never met her.

But, you should have seen some of the threads I have viewed on other sites. People who wish she was murdered just because she is rich in all out gory detail. People who wish that she was raped. People who wish she would develop life threatening illness. And the sad part was they were all 100% serious.

I am quite disturbed that crazies like these are loose on the streets. We should be more concerned about these people than we are about Paris Hilton.

People really hate her to the point of where it borders on pure mental illness. It's kind of scary to me. I mean for people to hate someone they never met so much that they wish her dead by severly wicked ways and literally mean it. Thats just not cool in my book.

Later Dudes!!!

I think it's because we hear about her on a daily basis when she really doesn't deserve the attention.....blame the media for the most part. This overload of all things Paris is like a form of japanese water torture. Personally, I don't hate her....but I'm tired of hearing about her.

Didn't think it was that bad. Typical slasher acting.

You don't need a Oscar winning performance from someone like Renee Zellweger in it. Oh wait, they tried her in Texas Chainsaw Massacre 4, and she blew just as bad as another fine actor Matthew McConaughey did.

I think she has done a pretty good job of creating her own image. People who see her are just commenting on that.

I enjoyed the movie. Not a great movie but better than I thought. Loved the first death which I didn't see coming and the rest of the deaths were grisly enough to hold my attention. It's nice to see an "R" rated Horror movie that doesn't cheat you on gore like so many of the movies out these days trying to appeal to a younger audience.
I Didn't care for the set up for another movie at the end though. God I hate that.

My main question is, though it sounds like a neat idea. How can an entire building be made of wax and not melt in the sun??

It wasn't too bad at all. I'd say the special effects, from gore to set design (especially in the finale) weren't bad in the least. Also, they did a bit of a rarity in horror films these days:
Warning Spoiler! Click to show .

The bad is, the plot is silly, the circumstances are full of plot holes, the acting is pretty bad all around (Elisha isn't terrible, but not as fun to watch as her near term predecessors Jennifer Love Hewitt and Jessica Biel) and Paris Hilton is only stunt casted to give the sex tape in jokes. Of course, if this were made in the '80s, Paris would have been topless.

See it at a bargain matinee for the special effects and you won't be too disappointed.

Ok, now for the big question, any good horror movie skin to be seen or is it just all tease and gore?

No skin. Just a nice cleavage shot.

Which actress? As far as I can tell, Elisha is pretty impressive, while Paris is a little emaciated.

Yes, when Elisha came out of her tent with a gray zip up hoodie.

There's lots of skin peeled off in the movie. Is that what you mean?

I dont always agree with ebert (his reviews of the lord the rings movies were insulting) but I usually do.

In this case I don't. On a horror movie scale, this movie should get four stars. As a horror movie it does everything we expect it to and it does those things very well indeed. I watched it with a couple of friends the night before halloween, and I tell ya I was scared shitless. If we hadn't followed it up with a viewing of "The Bogeyman", I would have had a hard time driving home alone. I have a pretty active imagination! Thankfully the bogeyman, with its totally ridiculous and incomrehensible storyline, and retarded remake of "The Haunting" style ending displaced my short term memory of the house of was just long enough to make it home to bed...

So what is the recipe for a good horror movie and does house of wax have it?

1.) creepy setting -check
2.) good build-up with (obvious) mis-directon? -check
3.) charcaters that are dumb enough that we wont be sad when they die? -check
4.) gore? -check
5.) scary villians that arent revealed until the end -check
6.) "jump" moments -check
7.) suspense moments -check
8.) and ending that doest throw the whole movie down the toilet? -check

so its not the excorist (and IMO the exorcist is a "horror/drama", not a true horror movie.) but its a damn fine scare fest that doesnt ruin everything with a silly ending, unlike the house on haunted hill, The Haunting, The Bogeyman. And it doesnt leave you with unanswered questions like er, the bogeyman (did ANYONE understand that story?) or Jeepers Creepers (where the **** did that *** **** creeper come from anyway? I wanna know where the ******* thing came from. I felt cheated by that movie.


Oh and about Paris Hilton. She does what she is supposed to do, and dare I say it she seems to put a lot more effort into it that shes done in her other films. (not that I've seen them, but if i had i would know that she essentially just lays there and answers her cell phone a couple times....)

When you call a movie "House of wax" you should get to the House of Wax in the first hour! 1hr of boring attempts at character building. If the effect is to make us dislike these characters and their mediocre acting actors, then it succeeds and we all want them to die. But I'm guessing that isn't really the case.

So the film is 1 hour of needless, dull boredom, followed by 45 minutes of exciting decently bad film. Then a really bad "twist" ending-ending that falls flat.


Warning Spoiler! Click to show

So, it would be your average mediocre scary movie, but the first hour is so pointless, and overlong it really drags the film back to bad-movie territory.

I must confess, i missed the first half hour...

I liked this movie. It was passable and fun with no ill effects.

The scene's that got me were when
Warning Spoiler! Click to show