Last week I watched Part 1, last night I watched Part 2, and tonight I'm going to watch Part 3.
I must say that I enjoyed Part 2 more than the first one. Not quite sure why, I just found myself enjoying it more. It could be that it had a different director, possibly. I guess it's all downhill from here, though, ha. Quality wise, I mean. From part 3 onward, I haven't exactly heard good stuff. But I'll stick with it through the end.
[deleted]
If u check google u will see many also prefer Hellbound (part 2), so no surprise.
Watched it on youtube, not even gonna bother watch any others.
There's aspects of the direction that are sharper and more stylish than Clive, I think. The story itself wasn't quite as good. It's surprising too since this is Tony Randel's first solo directing gig.
share[deleted]
you kidding me? part one was way better than part 2. Part 2 made pinhead a wimp, and the scene were all the cenobites die in one hit, what kind of crap is that? in my opinion part 2 was pure garbage.
Snootchie Bootchie
yeah. To the guy who said google to see how many people prefer part two to part one...as if that's a legitimate argument. Tons and tons of people like the Michael Bay Transformers movies. That doesn't make them quality films.
There are aspects I like of Hellraiser 2. I wouldn't neccessarily say that I like the movie, but there are certain scenes, lines, things of that nature that are really awesome in this movie. As a whole, it's not that good of a movie and what they did to the cenobites is unforgivable.
Hellraiser 1 is a horror classic and happens to be my favorite horror movie.
You're not alone in this reaction. I just watched the first two for the first time when they both appeared on Hulu this Halloween. I found the first film kind of so-so--though better than the average slasher flick. I'm not much a fan of '80s horror, so my bar is set pretty low for this kind of thing.
As I was watching the second film, I was surprised to realize I was enjoying it more. I didn't find either film especially scary (and maybe that was intended--I remember an interview with Clive Barker in which he states that his primary aim isn't to scare but to excite). Their biggest strength, in my view, is their imaginative mythology, and that's part of why I liked the second film more. It really delivers on what the first film merely teased us with--an exploration of the realm called "Hell." I like how it subverts the traditional Christian concept of Hell and puts in its place a sort of New Age combination of vampirism and sadomasochism. (I also enjoyed the stop-motion special effects, which I still have a soft spot for; it's just so much more personable than CGI, if you catch my drift.)
Watched part 1 yesterday and part 2 just a few minutes ago.
Storywise, I think H1 is better, but H2 is better as a balls out horror/gorefest!
My ratings:
H1: 8/10
H2: 7/10
I've had the whole collection in my DVD "to watch" pile...think I'll keep it going through October (why not?) I recall seeing the one with the cop which barely had Pinhead & company in it (didn't think too highly of that one)..but nevertheless, time for a Hellraising Halloween marathon!
----
Im gonna punch you in the cooter, I swear to God!
[deleted]