"Waxworks" is an early example in film history of a movie that's clearly in homage to another film--in this case, "The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari" (1920). The expressionistic stylization in the film is obviously influenced by "Caligari", and a few references to that film reinforces that, beginning with the title. The literal translation of "Das Wachsfigurenkabinett" is "The Wax Figures Cabinet"--the keyword being "cabinet". Additionally, the frame narrative is purposefully set at a carnival, although a more dimensional one than the stage setting in "Caligari".

The narrative structure is closer to Fritz Lang's "Destiny" (1921),with the framing of three odd stories. "Waxworks" has the clever device of a writer of the inner stories in the framing story. And, the three biggest stars of Weimar cinema (Emil Jannings, Conrad Veidt and Werner Krauss) play the historical villains and waxworks come alive in the inner stories. For the three stories, a different expressionistic technique dominates, each relating to and enhancing their respective themes. In the Harus al Raschid narrative featuring Jannings, it's the sets (Paul Leni's sphere) with oddly shaped architecture more akin to "Caligari' than Baghdad. Especially nice is the staircase set. Rather than the horrific, dreamlike abstraction of "Caligari", however, the sets are delightfully peculiar, as is Jannings and the silly story. Low-key lighting dominates the Ivan the Terrible episode featuring a darkly paranoid Veidt, and the multiple exposure kaleidoscope imagery places Krauss's stalking serial killer everywhere.

A clever film, and Leni and the other filmmakers seem to have had fun with it, which crosses over to viewers, but beyond that it's rather lackluster, not emotionally engaging as "Destiny", nor stunningly fresh as "Caligari".

In the 1920s, the German film industry was one of the best producers of films in the world--making many films that were about as good as anything coming out of Hollywood. Because of this, I had relatively high expectations for this film. Sadly, however, despite this and a wonderful idea for a movie, "Waxworks" turned out to be, at best, a mediocre film--mostly because it was written so poorly and the stories all were so unsatisfying.

The idea behind "Waxworks" is that the owner of some wax figures wants a writer to come up with some great stories about each of his three figures in order to lure in the public. This anthology notion is pretty good...but the execution left so much to be desired.

The first story is about a Caliph in ancient times and this story is by far the longest of the three. It seems that this Caliph has fallen for the baker's wife and he sneaks in to make love to her. At the same time, the baker is sneaking in to the nearby palace to steal the Caliph's magic ring. Unable to get it off the hand easily, he chops off the Caliph's arm! Oddly, the Caliph just lays there--but at the same time he IS at the baker's house--what gives? This Middle Eastern set is interesting because some of the artistic style looks almost like a book by Dr. Seuss. Unfortunately, the story itself isn't particularly interesting even if it starred the world-famous Emil Jannings. Sadly, it's the best of the three.

The second story is about Ivan the Terrible. Oddly, the sets are VERY tiny--almost claustrophobic. And the story about Ivan, poison and madness just isn't interesting in the least.

The final about Spring Heeled Jack wasn't great but at least it was visually arresting. That's because, like "The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari", it's a wonderful example of German Expressionism--with its crazy art style. It's all supposed to be a dream, so it makes sense that that they used this weird look.

Overall, the film looks pretty cool but the stories just bored me to death. I sure expected better writing.

"Das Wachsfigurenkabinett" or "Waxworks" is a German silent film from 1924, so over 90 years old by now. Apparently, several versions exist as the runtime is sometimes stated slightly over 60 minutes while the version I watched had a little bit more then 80 minutes. In retrospective, I have to say I'd have preferred the 60-minute version. Birinsky, Leni and especially writer Galeen have worked on some pretty famous films from that era, but their collaboration here did not result in anything memorable. I thought the production values looked pretty weak here for the most part and this already destroyed every chance at a good horror movie because it is so essential for the genre, especially as they could not make up for it via great dialogue for example. The copy I watched was not of great quality, but I guess that's not the filmmakers' fault. At least, I have seen stuff from decades earlier that was more refined. So despite the inclusion of some pretty big names, this one here was a disappointment. I do not recommend watching it.