data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/12590/125902905d4b7b5cadf88a8ef890a52f69dc56fe" alt=""
I've got to confess I was never a huge fan of the Hellraiser films. I had a friend as a teenager who loved them and made me a copy of the first four (on one VHS tape!) in the hopes of making me a fan too. At the time, I was massively freaked out by horror films and I remember watching them in 10 minute installments to make sure I didn't get too scared (Note: I've since manned up significantly). Anyway, I remember thinking they were okay but alternated between being ridiculously over-the-top and ploddingly dull. Fast forward several years and it turns out they've made nine of these films! So I thought the time was ripe to give them another go and watch them all from the beginning. Surely, if they made nine entries there must have been something I missed? No?
So the first film
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/a9f87/a9f871a22d3df03b839d7fcb8c87a8f071c45a86" alt=""
Hellraiser is actually adapted from Barker's own novella 'The Hellbound Heart' that he wrote in 1986. The storyline of the film is actually quite strong (far greater than any other entry in the series) and you can tell it's been adapted from a book. This isn't just a silly gore movie, there's some thought-provoking themes in the background. Barker's clearly trying to draw parallels between the sado-masochistic Cenobites and Julia's destructive (and submissive) affair with Frank. The part where a partially reanimated Frank forces Julia to lure several lonely businessmen back to her house and kill them is creepy not for the gory deaths but for how easily Julia agrees to do it. It's the lengths that she'll go for Frank (and the controlling influence that Frank has over her) that are most disturbing elements of the film.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/fde68/fde68950d56986c5947609a4482ac6d43e88b6ec" alt=""
The best part of the film is definitely Doug Bradley's portrayal of the lead Cenobite, Pinhead. He's a truly iconic cinematic monster. So weird, so bizarre, so creepy. Surprisingly, given that he's the only character on the film's poster, Pinhead is actually used very sparingly in the film and has only handful of lines. However each appearance and each line of dialogue is expertly delivered by Bradley. There's very few actors who could pull off a line like "We'll tear your soul apart." In fact all of the Cenobites are really well-realised. The lack of explanation of who they are and why they are linked to the box only add to the film's intrigue.
The acting
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/1ca91/1ca915136ae84d36ae1eb8069ed98e3cb03199a9" alt=""
All in all Hellraiser is still a very good film that deserves it's iconic status. It's a not a perfect film by any means but it's an important entry in the horror genre. The dated special effects have somewhat diminished it's power but some of the practical gore will never be topped. The shot of Frank reanimated was stunning and once you see that final shot of Larry/Frank getting pulled apart by hooks you'll never forget it!
GRADE: A-
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/43ced/43ced02f472ea88c632b33ade50fef3def836405" alt=""
Hellraiser was a smash hit at the box office and it was inevitable that sequel would happen but I'm surprised they turned one around so quickly. Barker stepped down from the directing chair and made way for Tony Randel, who would go on to do the live action anime Fist of the North Star in 1995. In a lot of ways the directing doesn't feel that different from the Barker's style, the only difference is the film seems even more stylised (and divorced from reality) than the previous entry - with an abundance of cheap set work that at times threatens to derail any sense of terror.
The
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/0c5be/0c5be719fccb6cd6d3438174e77016af478d5e30" alt=""
As mentioned the film is much larger in scope than the previous film; we're no longer confined to a small house. The characters travel to Hell itself - which resembles... a large maze of corridors! It's kind of a let down and worked much better in the first film where the Cenobites just appeared out of nowhere. One of the problems with Hellbound (and the series as a whole) is that the makers consistently went out of there way to explain things too much. I don't think we really needed to know that Pinhead used to be a WWI soldier. I don't think we needed to see what Hell looked like. I don't think we needed to know that Hell was ruled over by a floating rhombus called Leviathan. The more we see and the more explanations we get the less scary something becomes.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/f29c5/f29c5b446a29bfd1818995e001be016ecf7b140a" alt=""
It's always been a popular thing with horror sequels to pick up directly from the last installment (see: Friday the 13th, Halloween) but I can't help but feel that it wasn't necessary for Hellbound to bring Kirsty and everyone else back. It feels too much like a reunion for the sake of having a reunion. The Hellraiser series as a whole definitely hangs on the idea that death is far from permanent but bringing back characters again and again diminishes their impact. I think Clare Higgins had already done everything she could with the character of Julia in the first film, we didn't need to see her come back to torment Kirsty a second time (though interestingly, Barker actually thought Higgins should be the figure head for the series and tried to get her to come back for the third film).
Really,
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/030ed/030ed6feec14ce2473dd8ba025485f1622040522" alt=""
GRADE: B-
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/a63b4/a63b4ae8c0f868be1636072b32394ae356242dc0" alt=""
The third film is usually always a difficult and tricky one for any franchise and Hellraiser III is no exception. In the intervening years between the second and third film, the original producers, New World Pictures, had closed and the rights were sold to Bob Weinstein's Dimension Films. At the time Dimension weren't the huge label they are today but still they decided to use their "influence" as producers over the film in order to try and make alterations to make the film more commercially successful than the previous one. This meant not only shooting it very cheap again (this time in the US instead of Britain) but also twisting the film's formula to better fit a horror film mould.
Hellraiser III
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/4621a/4621a15c2f9b7b59e9175542c6f86861cdc61d5a" alt=""
Clearly, the change in Pinhead was designed to give audiences a villain more in keeping with other franchises like Freddy Kruger and the Leprechaun. A wise-cracking bad guy who kills people in novel ways while spouting some witty one liners. Unfortunately, however much the film's storyline tries to justify the change (split personality, really?), it just doesn't work. It's too much of a shift. What made Pinhead truly terrifying in the original film was how emotionless he was. Having him say corny lines and smile significantly diminishes his presence. The big change is that Hellraiser III is really the film that bumps Pinhead up to being the major antagonist. When you think about it, he wasn't really the villain in either of the first two films.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/59d50/59d50d75d227e9f70a540e8b6855b0e3b57228d7" alt=""
The acting is pretty bad across the board. Terry Farrell is thoroughly wooden as Joey as is Paula Marshall who plays her sidekick Terri. Bradley does his best with the lines he's given but his Captain Spencer personality is very boring and Pinhead's spoiled (not least by the fact that they don't alter his voice to make it sound deeper). You know you're watching a bad film when plot exposition comes in the form of the lead character... having a dream. And the final battle in which Spencer and Pinhead re-merge is just a horrible cheap looking CGI effect and serves one of the lamest final battles I've seen in any film.
Overall,
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/844fe/844fed9f1ae85fad86fdce976c6824996750417e" alt=""
GRADE: C+
NEXT TIME: Pinhead goes to Space and Beyond!
Agree about the terrible visual fx on Hellraiser, but I can't say I complain about the make up effects work which was excellent, also I enjoyed the use of puppets for some of the resurrection sequences, pretty cool stuff there too. Agree, not Barkers best, but it was a hell of a way to start his career.
ReplyDeleteI'm a fan of the second one, it is over the top and has some truly crazy visuals, but like you I hated some of the cheap looking sets, especially when they get to hell. Dr. Channard was a cool cenobyte, but I couldnt understand very well what the hell he was! Still, interesting just for that, Ive shown this movie to my friends, they always freak out.
Yeah, this is where the series started to go down, but I think part III is still very watchable in my book. Even though they essentially turn Pinhead into a work of art for most of the film, the film does manage to entertain in my book.
Part four well, that one has it's bits and pisses of coolness, but then we get laser guns...and a lot of things that simply shouldnt have been in a Hellraiser film.
I had a chance to see Hellraiser Reborn was it? The latest one? Wow...what a terrible film, watching it was like torture for me. I do not recommend it unless you're into true pain and suffering...
Hellraiser 9: Revelations. Yeah, unfortunately I did check that one out (just so I could say I've watched them all). It was a pretty bad movie but I guess it's appropriate given that the Hellraiser series is about torture and suffering. Can't think of a more painful film to watch!
ReplyDeleteYeah, I think my problem with Part III was that I hated Pinhead's "nice" alter ego Captain Spencer. It was cool to see Doug Bradley get a role without the make-up but I think they should have kept Pinhead's history vague. It's creepier that way.
Hellraiser 9: agree, painful and embarassing film. It feels almost as if they were aiming for a reboot but failed horribly.
DeleteAgree about keeping Pinhead a mistery, it would have been much better then humanizing him the way they did for part III.
I have to agree with you for the most part, with the exception being that I really, really love part 2. You're right, it's more of a gothic fable rather than a horror film, but it just looks so cool, cheap sets and all. And Christopher Young's score just elevates it significantly. It's one of my favorite film scores to date. It's not perfect, especially the ending when the cenobites seem to be defeated so easily (what's up with that?!). But overall a great film with great makeup effects and awesomely quotable lines. Love these "Completist Guides" by the way! :) Keep 'em coming!!
ReplyDeleteYeah, I did give Hellraiser 2 a bit of a hard time, didn't I? I did like it, I was just disappointed in the direction they took the story. Compared to some of the later DTV sequels it's a masterpiece!
ReplyDeleteCan't believe I haven't mentioned Chris Young's score in any of the reviews yet. It's absolutely perfect. So dark and gothic, it adds so much to the all the films' atmospheres.
Glad you're enjoy these Guides, got a lot more coming this month!
Nice overview and perfect for October! I've only seen the first Hellraiser and quite liked it. I agree about the lackluster special effects despite the great makeup and gore.
ReplyDeleteI always though that Pinhead looked like a borg, and wonder if the Star Trek Next Gen production crew took some influence from his design.
I enjoyed both Waxwork movies (first is better, second is funnier) so I can see why they would pick Hickox to direct the 3rd one since you noted the shift to a more comedic tone.
I'm still surprised that this series spawned 9 movies (I know some were direct to video) and after 25 years there still may be more!
Also I got up a banner linking to your blog on mine.
Hey Chris, yeah the first film is pretty awesome. Great acting, excellent make-up and a solid story.
ReplyDeleteThe same can't be said for the rest of the sequels. They aren't essential viewing but it's interesting to watch them just to see the different directions the filmmakers took the franchise.
There's a definite feeling in all the Hellraiser films that none of the filmmakers really had enough budget to fully realise the gothic grandeur that Barker wanted.
Yeah, I'll have to get on reviewing the Waxwork movies at some point. They were kind of fun, just needed a bit of tightening.
P.S. Cheers for the banner on your site. Much appreciated!
Terrific write-ups. I understand your problems with 3, but I think that one has improved with age, mostly because it's so braindead silly that it's hard not to like. I can't wait to see what you think of Part 4. I tend to think it's a tad underrated myself.
ReplyDeleteThanks Mitch. Yeah, I think we'll be on the same page about Part 4 - it's so crazy ambitious I couldn't hate it if I tried. My review will be up soon!
ReplyDelete