Vashirdfel Simply A Masterpiece

Huievest Instead, you get a movie that's enjoyable enough, but leaves you feeling like it could have been much, much more.

Matylda Swan It is a whirlwind of delight --- attractive actors, stunning couture, spectacular sets and outrageous parties.

Rosie Searle It's the kind of movie you'll want to see a second time with someone who hasn't seen it yet, to remember what it was like to watch it for the first time.

Leofwine_draca If you know anything about Italian horror of the past few decades, then surely the names associated with this film will have some meaning to you. Written in big letters on the front of the VHS box is "Dario Argento presents...", and surely Argento's name means at least there is some attempted style and class injected into this film. Secondly, the director is none other than Sergio Stivaletti, the man responsible for the many gory FX of films like DEMONS, here making the transition from SFX man (although he did do the SFX in this film too - multi-talented, you see) to director. He does a good job, keeping the right mix of all the correct ingredients (somehow the analogy of a director strikes me as somebody stirring a stew and trying to get even qualities of the correct ingredients). Finally, partially responsible for the screenplay is Lucio Fulci, to whom this film is dedicated, as it was the last film he worked on before his death. His ghostly presence is noticeable in the gory proceedings and it's great to have him on board.While the film is essentially a remake of MYSTERY OF THE WAX MUSEUM (itself already remade in 1953 as HOUSE OF WAX), don't let that put you off. It almost rivals those two classics, becoming something of a classic in its own right. There are plenty of reasons for genre fans to enjoy watching, and even the dubbing is hardly noticeable these days. The acting is of a high calibre, from Mondello who adds depth to her role of the female lead, becoming more than just a pretty, screaming face. The perpetrator of the gruesome crimes is played by a memorably stony faced actor too, on the outside dignity and aloofness, on the inside a raving maniac. Especially sinister are the man's two servants, both twisted and perverted characters, one of whom ties a victim down, cuts her arms and lets pigs feed on her blood. He also indulges in some kinky games with a local prostitute. The only bland actor is the heroic male lead, but then again they usually are and there's no point breaking tradition.The plot has enough new twists and turns in the tale to keep fans of the original wax films interested. There is a healthy dose of Gothic atmosphere, and sumptuous costumes and sets, which really help to make the period believable. There is also a high level of gore and nudity (plenty of the latter) for exploitation fans to enjoy, the bloodiest moments being where a man has his hand ripped off, his throat slashed and his heart torn out...and these are just in the opening moments! Some clever CGI work is used effectively, while the SFX crew really did themselves proud with the gruesome make-ups. There's even a TERMINATOR-inspired monster on the rampage at the end of the film, except this is more chilling as it's made of bone instead of metal - yes, a living skeleton! THE WAX MASK is everything you could hope for a modern horror film and shows that if the effort is made, you can still make good, atmospheric period pieces like this.

Matthew Janovic This is a sorely-overlooked film that began as a project for the ailing Lucio Fulci (who died at the 11th-hour), and ended-up being the first film for Italian makeup-maestro, Sergio Stivaletti. While it is often daft, it is also so audacious and original in its reimagining of "House of Wax" that it inexplicably overcomes any of its weaknesses. Produced-by Dario Argento (as well as co-scripted in some areas), this alchemical-horror succeeds where the recent Hollywood-remake fails, and all on a $3 million-budget! That's catering for the recent "House of Wax", right? Its only major-downside--a minor one--is that Paris Hilton's murder isn't depicted here, which accounts for half the box-office of that version.It is difficult not to be won-over by the visual purity of this film, even with the problems of plot (common to Italian cinema, though much of this is explained-by a an emphasis on the "thematic"), and it is very-very entertaining and fantastical. One would assume that the alchemical-themes in the story were Argento's contributions, however, English horror-cineaste Alan Jones has written they are Stivaletti's, which is pretty amazing. For those who are familiar with the makeup-artisan's work in films by Argento, Soavi, and Lamberto Bava, you are in for a treat.While this film is definitely flawed, it succeeds in being a great romp for action, mystery, and naturally, gore. From a hardcore heart-ripping by mechanical-hands, to melting-cadavers, it is an original-contribution to bodily-defilement by the director and his makeup crew. With obvious expositions on nanotechnology and cybernetics, I was pretty creeped-out. Maybe it was me, but I thought a lot of the film had elements of the French silent serials like "Judex", or even "Les Vampiers". There are--of course--scenes that will make most Anglo-American audiences cringe, and you'll know them when you see them, but you knew you were watching an Italian genre-film, no? Yet, it is so very classical in its combination of Gaston Leroux and Jules Verne! One-remaining Fulci-subplot remains--it concerns a doppleganger of a main-character, and is oddly resonant with Stivaletti's-contributions. The familiar-theme of the misunderstood-genius, and the brutality of the human-condition creating monsters reminds one of Captain Nemo, or the Phantom of the Opera. But what this films really reminds-me-of is that many great Italian-filmmakers understand there is no line-between "high" and "low" art. This is often lost on us in North America, but it is common in mainland European culture. The alchemical themes are great too. Lucio Fulci, RIP.

arminio Well, I am big fan of Argento and Fulci and I admire Stivaletti as FX specialist but this movie has nothing of Argento or Fulci... I must admit that gore effect are pretty remarkable. But, direction is so "hollywoodish" and mainstream (usually works - but not for this type of movie, especially not for Italian horror production) and there is no anything "Italian" in it. Same remark goes to soundtrack. Entire movie looks like low budget hollywood product that are being shoot for video or TV and forgotten after few months. Basically, can't believe that three Italian horror legends worked on this film and there is no anything that characterize them (except Stivaletti's great FX) in this movie.Can't give anything more than 3 ...

iaido You can't help but go into Wax Mask with a little trepidation. First time director, written by an aged Luci Fulci and Dario Argento (who also produced), both of whom have had a less than impressive careers as of late. That said, Wax Mask is not a disappointment. It isn't a great film, but an entertaining one.The plot is liberally adapted from the classic Gaston Leroux story, also used for classic horror film House of Wax. A young girl sees her father killed by a metal handed maniac. Flash to 12? years later, she begins to work at a local wax museum that specializes in recreations of murders. We actually dont see much of the museum, just a few sculptures down one heavily draped hallway. A metal handed figure begins to go around town injecting and abducting prostitutes and children. All the while, the wax museum keeps a steady supply of figures that appear really lifelike. You know the story. A newspaper reporter begins to investigate the disappearances and takes a shine to the girl. Everything begins to point to the wax museum and its curator/mad inventor and his goons. The finale is ridiculous, but short enough to not ruin the film with its awkward turn.Stivaletti handles the film pretty evenly. You can tell he learned a lot about atmosphere in his years working for Argento, Bava, and Soavi, but Stivaletti doesn't showcase any revelatory talent, just competent skill. Italian horror films are always style first, general substance in the plot or performances is always secondary to the mood and movement. The film is paced well, and doesn't pretend that we all won't know who the killer is, after all this is well tread territory. The setting (early 1900's) and score are a welcome change, since Italian horror usually stays in modern times. Stivalletti makes use of heavy colours, POV, flashbacks, CGI, as well as old horror imagery like the gothic buildings, and a mad doctor laboratory with bubbling serums in tubes, and electrified levers. The lead actress is beautiful, sultry, wide eyed, and willing to take her top off. The hunky reporter is very lame and unappealing. He attempts to be suave, but he is just a dork. Miscasting him as the hero is the films real lowpoint. The curator is good, he doesn't overplay his part, not a drooling maniac, just threatening enough.Italian horror fans should find it a satisfactory film, nothing to astound you, but not overly disappointing, either. Other horror fans may be wary, but it does have a genuinely nice blend of old and new schools of horror. As far as Italian horror goes (where one must often not expect much in the acting and plotting department) it gets a B-. As far as standard horror it gets a C.