Hellraiser: Revelations

I gritted my teeth and gave it a chance, but in the end there is no escaping it. No Doug Bradley, no Pinhead. No Pinhead, no Hellraiser. It's not worth talking through the awful script, the mediocre effects or the below par acting, others have covered those in existing reviews. My only comment would be that the actors on screen know they are making a fail movie and it shows on screen. And when the fake Pinhead arrives on screen, it's game over. After watching this, I looked up the interviews with Doug Bradley to find out why he didn't get onboard with the project, after all, he's been involved with every Hellraiser film so far. I would recommend watching the interviews BEFORE the film, it might save you 90 minutes of your life that you won't get back.

In 1987, Clive Barker unleashed the first film in the "Hellraiser" saga onto the masses, from his literary work "The Hellbound Heart." The first film was, and still is in many ways, an iconic, classic entry in the horror genre. The rest is history. At the time I am writing this review, the series has spanned nine films (with rumors of a TV-show possibly in the works), and countless spin-off media including a popular line of graphic novels and comics.

"Hellraiser" is a staple in horror, which is what makes this latest film so infuriating and heart-wrenching.

"Hellraiser: Revelations" is the latest in the series (beginning with the fifth film, all releases have skipped theaters and been plagued with lower budgets and even lower-grade actors and crews). Directed by Victor Garcia (from a script he also co-wrote), this mess of a film is DOA, with lame-brained acting, penny-pinching special effects, and a horrid plot that is essentially a lazy re-imagining of the original film. This is a slap-in-the-face to fans of the series, who have stuck by it even as the later sequels got worse and worse following the surprisingly strong second film. (Which is one of the rare horror sequels that had any thought to it, and is arguably almost as good as the original, despite obvious differences in tone and scope.) Beginning with the third film, the series took a nose-dive, although one or two entries, notably the fifth film, were watchable and enjoyable. This one, however, is the worst of the bunch.

Two spoiled young men, Nico and Steven, vanished sometime ago during a wretched trip to Mexico where they partook in prostitutes and copious partying. After murdering a prostitute, and after being given the mysterious puzzle box by a vagrant, Nico solved it, summoning "Pinhead" (played by a new actor... more on that later), whom dragged him to hell. Steven brings Nico back from hell via sacrifices, and later shows up to a house where he and Nico's family are having dinner.

At the house, Emma, Steven's sister, finds the box, and eventually the families begin to experiences strange and bizarre things over the film's anemic 75-minute running time, before a series of lame-brained twists that I won't spoil ends the film in an abrupt and very anti-climactic climax.

First the acting. I haven't really seen any of the actors in this film before (which I'm guessing is due to the almost non-existent budget preventing us from getting any name-actors), so I don't have anything to compare them to. But the acting was uniformly foul. All emotions by all parties seem forced, and our two leads (Jay Gillespie and Nick Eversman) are about as believable in their performances as a sheep wearing a dollar-store werewolf mask trying to blend into a pack of wolves. They simply cannot act.

Technically, the film is a mess. Garcia's shot-choices are bland, boring, and scream "inexperienced film-school student", and the lighting is atrocious. I was shocked to learn the cinematographer was David Armstrong, whom proved himself to be a capable DP on numerous other films, including six of the seven "Saw" films. Here, all of the lighting and shots seem hastily thrown together, and you could tell Mr. Armstrong didn't have enough time or motivation to work with. I study film and video production at college, and I've seen student-films shot on standard-def camcorders that look better than this from a technical standpoint.

The effects are also lousy. The cenobites looks soul-lessly designed, and their costumes looks like cheap rental-store robes. Pinhead's new design doesn't work and has too much shadow-work around his needles and creases/cuts, making him look a bit goofier than the eerie paper-white look of past films. Gore effects are phoned-in, with cheap, obvious prosthetics. The few CG-type effects are hilariously cheap looking. The set-design is bland and uninspired as well. Especially in the Hell scenes, which haven't been updated since the original film. Hell's still just a mass of swinging chains and pillars, which worked in the original film due to some excellent shots by Barker and the fact we hadn't seen anything like it before, but looks silly and cheap nowadays.

And onto the biggest complaint most people have... and a very justifiable complaint it is. Doug Bradley, whom portrayed Pinhead in all eight previous films skipped out on this one. He wasn't pleased by the script or the next-to-nothing paycheck, so he bailed. Our new Pinhead is portrayed by Stephen Smith Collins, with voice-over work by Fred Tatasciore. And good-lord, is the performance(s) bad!

I already mentioned the new makeup for the character's head didn't work as well as in previous films. But I could forgive that if the performances for the role were good. They aren't. First of all, Collins, who does the on-screen acting just doesn't look the part. He looks more like a light-weight professional wrestler with his head-shape. And his body language doesn't have any of the poetry or art of Bradley. He performs the role as though he had no rehearsals or prep-time, and is timidly being told what to do by the director off-screen. He seems in over his head. And Tatasciore's voice-over work is laughable. Gone is the booming voice of past films, which was dripping with darkness and emotion. Now, Pinhead sounds kinda like Don LaFontaine (the man known for providing voice-over work as the narrator of just about every movie trailer before his untimely death) trying to whisper with a bad Eurpoeon accent while suffering a sore-throat. It's just... awful.

This film is undoubtedly a career-killer for most involved, and it may just kill the franchise. It's beyond awful, and I give it a 1 out of 10, not just for being a bad film, but for being a tarnish on the classic original's legacy. Avoid this, I saw it for free on Netflix, and I still feel like the studio owes me a refund!

This was terrible. I just spoke to Doug Bradley when he was at Crypticon who had been offered the script. He said it was the worst piece of crap that he'd ever read. So he passed.

His exact words were that when he had spoken to Weinstein Entertainment about it and how terrible it was. They said "We don't give a crap at how terrible this movie will be. We need one more in the can to secure the franchise for the reboot".

Needless to say, because if his ridicule of the whole idea, the reboot of Hellraiser was not offered to Doug Bradley, which is too bad.

It is also rumored that it will be PG13. This movie will fail even worse that this one did.

FYI, straight from Doug's mouth, Clive Barker is NOT in support of this remake anymore. This franchise is officially dead now.

Thumbs down.

None of the films have been as good as the first three in this series. This one is no different.

Most of the acting, especially by the lead antagonist, Nick Eversman, is terrible. The effects and gore are nothing more than copies of scenes from the other movies with nothing new added to make it any more interesting.

I love the original Pinhead character, played by Doug Bradley in all of the other films. Stephan Smith Collins who portrays Pinhead in this sequel tries to recreate him but manages doing a poor man's imitation, instead of bringing anything new to the screen.

To future writers of any more sequels: STOP! Either come up with a new lead so we don't miss Bradley's performance so much or reboot the series from the start and try to come up with something new. Maybe consult with Clive Barker to see where he would go with it. Or better yet, put together some real money and have him write it instead.

Every review of this movie has ripped it to shreds. Some reviews were fair, however. I'm one of these people who looks deeper into what he sees before him rather than the surface. While it is true that this film is by no means a masterpiece, it certainly isn't the biggest cinematic monstrosity of all time ("Children of the Living Dead" owns that title).

First off: Doug Bradley's absence. I'm a huge Doug Bradley/Pinhead fan, and there will never be anyone to play Pinhead better, but you have to look at what the new guy was up against. Very short shooting schedule and immediate fan ridicule pretty much doomed this poor guy. Overall, I felt he did a decent job with what he was given.

Second: special effects. Come on people, it's a direct-to-DVD movie. Are we looking for 'Star Wars' visuals here? Honestly, I felt the effects here were a bit better than they should have been.

Seriously, if you're a fan of this series, leave high expectations at the door and just give it an honest chance. You never know, you might end up liking it.