Wax Works (1922)

Waxworks (1922) Second Viewing: First Leni Film Ground-breaking German director Paul Leni?s 1924 silent classic Waxworks is one of the most innovative and interesting pieces of its era: a carnival of images, effects and innovation. Feared to be lost for almost a century it has rarely been seen compared to its other silent contemporaries until its 2002 re-release. The film is built upon an interesting premise. In the film a young poet (future Hollywood director William Dietrle) auditions for a job as a press agent for a carnival wax museum. In order to showcase his abilities, his future employer (John Gottowt) asks him to write a story about one of the characters. After breaking off the waxy arm of Middle Eastern Caliph Harroun al Raschid, the poet claims he will write a story of how the Caliph lost his arm. This produces the film?s first and longest sequence: a lusty humor filled slice of adventure and intrigue. Through his imagination, the poet transports himself and the Waxworks owner?s daughter (Olga Belajeff) to the ancient Middle East. There she becomes Zarah the wife of a poor baker named Assad (played by none other than Dieterle). The couple is smitten with each other, but the baker?s inability to take his eyes of his love results in his bread continually burning. This raises the ire of the local Caliph (Emil Jannings) who is already in a furious mood after losing another game of chess. Yet, his attempts to have the baker assassinated are thwarted by the inability of his men to murder Assad on account of the loveliness of his wife. Determined to see this women, the Caliph adorned in commoner?s clothes sneaks into Assad?s house in order to steal the asinine baker?s wife, while the latter attempts to pilfer the Caliph?s precious Wish Ring for his materialistic wife. Hilarity and innuendo ensues as the plump Caliph attempts to entice the rakish Zarah with the unique ring, while Assad is chased by the royal guard after ?murdering? the Caliph in order to capture the aforementioned jewel. This sequence is dominated by light humor and by a gargantuan (no pun intended) performance by the formidable German silent legend Emil Jannings. With his expressive face and charisma, Jannings provides the film?s opening story with layers of humor and warmth in one of his most energetic and fun-filled performances. While Balajeff is sub-par and overwrought in most of her performance, Dieterle holds up quite adequately in this sequence (and throughout the picture), though its Jannings performance which is utterly mesmerizing and captures the viewers attention with relative ease. While the story of this first sequence is the strongest in the picture, the second sequence may be the film?s hallmark, despite Jannings massive effort. The second sequence details the madness of Russian Tsar Ivan the Terrible. Ivan is played by legendary actor Conrad Veidt in a performance of astonishing magnitude which easily tops his own immortal effort as Cesare in The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari . In the episode, Ivan?s ruthlessness is demonstrated as he arrests and tortures people at a quirk of dissatisfaction. Worried about his own future, Ivan?s poison-maker decides to seek revenge upon his Tsar. Aware of Ivan?s theory that the name on a specific hourglass represents the next individual to be poisoned, the chemist carefully inscribes the Tsar?s name on the object before succumbing to his own fate. Blissfully unaware of the latter actions and already completely paranoid, the Tsar is unwilling to accept an invitation to the wedding of a local noble?s daughter. Believing the noble is plotting to have him assassinated, the Tsar reluctantly agrees on the condition the pair swap clothing. The following scenes result in the shocking assassination of the noble dressed in the Tsar?s regalia. Mocking death?s inability to kill him, the mad Tsar demands the joyous activities of the wedding reception to continue to take place despite the somber mood within and the monotonous crying of the noble?s daughter (played by Olga Belajeff). Angered by the Tsar, her husband (Dieterle) confronts him only to be taken to the torture chambers. Prior to this point Veidt?s performance was stunning in its own right as he captures the insanity and madness of Ivan with a unique authority. Veidt?s Ivan is not an angry lunatic, but motionless and stiff. The brilliance in his performance is that evil is not represented through fury, but through the Tsar?s chilling incapability to show affection and humanity. Rather than consoling the noble?s daughter, he demands the festivities resume with only his eyes moving, but ever so slightly. Yet, when the story reaches the torture chamber, Veidt takes his performance to an even superior level producing one of the greatest performances ever filmed. Veidt?s representation of the Tsar?s mental breakdown is both tragic and horrific. Through his supreme abilities Veidt forces us to be both sympathetic and appalled by the man as he cripples and crumbles as his advisor places an hourglass in front of him. Perhaps the greatest testament of Veidt?s portrayal of Ivan is that is was so commanding that it became the inspiration for renowned Russian filmmaker Sergei Eisenstein?s characterization of the figure in his own later Ivan the Terrible films. Though the film barely lasts 93 minutes one feels that this is an incomplete masterpiece. Yet, after doing some research on the web, I found a small history about this little-known film. It appears that Waxworks was a film which had great budget difficulties. Such restrictions excluded the filming of a proposed fourth story regarding Italian bandit Rinaldo Rinaldini: whose figure is barely visible in the museum. This wholly clarifies the sense of rushed urgency in the film, particularly in the hasty final sequence involving Werner Krauss. This last sequence featuring Krauss as Jack the Ripper- though referred to as an unrelated criminal figure named Spring-Heeled Jack- is perhaps the most oft-revered sequence in the film. Yet, this hurried sequence which barely lasts seven minutes is merely a surrealistic and expressionistic nightmare, rather than another episode. In this sequence the writer falls asleep and dreams he and the Waxworks owner?s daughter are being chased by the legendary killer. But this sequence fails to live up to expectation as Krauss walks around in a slow zombified manner through expressionist alleyways as Leni?s innovative layers of montage and superimposed imagery create a lurid phantasm. Though Leni?s direction and cinematography is exceptionally modern throughout, sadly this much ballyhooed sequence and other episodes are ruined by the quality of the film?s original tint. DVD boutique label Kino has provided us with the first authorized release of Waxworks onto either VHS or DVD the home video formats. The film is available separately or as part of Kino?s wonderful German Horror Classics set..The film uses its standard full frame 1:33:1 format with the original tinting process and has been restored by Cineteca del Comune di Bologna. The soundtrack is simple piano-led and fits in nicely with the film rather than some of Kino?s more avant-garde soundtracks for The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari and Nosferatu . The DVD extras include a clip demonstrating the influence of Waxworks upon Douglas Fairbanks? later Thief of Baghdad . The clip is entertaining, even if it doesn?t completely convince the viewer of astute similarities between the two films. Another feature is Leni?s experimental 1926 film Rebus I . The film attempts to replicate the recent success of crossword puzzles by making a ?crossword puzzle film.? This is done through the display of various images and words. Though the swift moving camera in the images is particularly interesting, many of the letters are absent due to cropping on the left-side of the picture. Still it is an interesting artifact from a more daring and experimental era in cinema. Kino?s DVD culls footage from two rare surviving prints of the film. This results in two different embodiments of clarity. Though the picture is quite gorgeous for an eighty-plus year old film, its original tinting suffers- greatly. Even in the more pristine of the two prints, the original tinting is somewhat over done. Sadly in some sequences the tinting process utilized ruins the entire effect of the film by heavily glossing over the image in return for given a singular tone color effect. This is perhaps because the shades Leni originally used were possibly far too dark; resulting in many of his exquisite expressionistic sets being completely drowned from view by his heavy moody tones. Often this results in actors performing in seemingly monotone surrounds. This is both disappointing and distracting. This is firstly disappointing, because it has robbed the audiences of fully appreciating Leni?s gorgeous sets, particularly in the scenes depicting the Caliphs quarters and the carnival, which bares an eerie resemblance to the fairground seen in The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari . Secondly, it is extremely distracting at times to the viewer since only the images were stage lights have heavily shone upon a certain object are revealed. Whether the scenes in which the tinting is overly disproportionate are the fault of Leni?s original tint work or poor preservation is unknown to this reviewer. Yet, because of it the overall effect of some of the film?s ground breaking visual effects particularly in Krauss? pursuit of the poet are all but lost forever. Though this blights the film?s overall power it does not warrant further isolation of this picture. Any print of this film is vital since this is an important and interesting piece of silent cinema. Firstly, because Waxworks is a rare film in housing the triumvirate of German silent acting genius together in one film in the form of Jannings, Veidt and Krauss. Secondly, even though tinting has robbed it of much of its stylistic glory, this is still a significant and influential aesthetic piece of cinema. Waxworks clearly showcases Leni as a vital and innovative talent within German cinema whose time was cut short far too early. His influence outlasted his lifetime and his work in this film can be seen in a variety of pictures from the Douglas Fairbanks silent epicThe Thief of Baghdad to Victor Fleming?s 1939 classic The Wizard of Oz . Still a poor print of Waxworks is better than no print. While more fantasy than horror, Waxworks is still an interesting picture under any genre. Even in its authorized and complete format, the film still emits the feeling of an incompleteness haunting this imperfect masterpiece throughout its finale. Despite not being in the greatest condition as far as tinting goes, this seemingly lost picture is thankfully restored to its original intent after years of being vanished from public view. An inventive and pioneering piece in terms of style and narrative, Waxworks has failed to capture the glory of its German silent contemporaries such as Metropolis and The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari due to its ?lost? status. Yet, through its sublime cast, strong imaginative direction and enjoyable approach Waxworks can now finally be re-appreciated as one of silent cinema?s smaller gems. B+ (8/10)