(Review originally written at 11 January 2010)

It's very simple why this movie does not work out as well, or is as great as, the first two movies. You can really blame the movie its script for that.

The movie has a quite messy story, that besides strays too much away from the first two movies. It's a movie that is different in its style and with its treatment of its characters. Pinhead for instance gets his hands way too dirty in this movie and does way too much. What was the case with the first two movies was that the evil was called upon by the human characters, who also did some horrible things themselves. In this movie it seems as if Pinhead wants more and more power, after he has been released again. This was not at all what the character at first was about. A lot of things just don't make sense within this movie, especially when you start comparing it with what happened in the first two movies.

This movie too desperately tries to be an horror movie, done in somewhat the same style as the A Nightmare on Elm Street movies. Even dreams play a quite prominent role in this movie its story.

What was more painful than Pinhead's pleasures of pain was the movie its acting. There are some real horrible actors in this movie and since they gave Doug Bradley way more lines and screen time this time it becomes all the more obvious that he just simply isn't a very talented actor.

The movie just doesn't ever become a very compelling one to watch. If you have seen the first two movies this one is still somewhat watchable, though you will foremost be still disappointed.


Watch trailer

About Frank Veenstra

Watches movies...writes about them...and that's it for now.
Newer Post
Older Post

1 reacties:

  1. jervaise brooke hamsterJuly 22, 2013 at 2:54 PM

    One of the problems i always have with the Hellraiser series is knowing that the original idea for them was derived from the mind of a disgusting and loathsome British faggot, that hideous fairy Clive Barker, the bloody dirty pansy queer bastard.