VALUTAZIONE IMDb
6,4/10
59.166
LA TUA VALUTAZIONE
Dopo la morte della sua famiglia, Kirsty viene ricoverata in una clinica psichiatrica il cui direttore, ossessionato dall’occulto, rievoca Julia dal mondo dei morti e libera di nuovo i Cenob... Leggi tuttoDopo la morte della sua famiglia, Kirsty viene ricoverata in una clinica psichiatrica il cui direttore, ossessionato dall’occulto, rievoca Julia dal mondo dei morti e libera di nuovo i Cenobiti.Dopo la morte della sua famiglia, Kirsty viene ricoverata in una clinica psichiatrica il cui direttore, ossessionato dall’occulto, rievoca Julia dal mondo dei morti e libera di nuovo i Cenobiti.
- Premi
- 1 vittoria e 6 candidature totali
Angus MacInnes
- Ronson
- (as Angus McInnes)
Recensioni in evidenza
I enjoyed the original "Hellraiser" movie and have been watching all the movies in the franchise as they have been released. Though I have to say that with each passing new movie that the franchise spawned, the quality of the storyline and ideas just grew weaker and weaker. However, the 1988 "Hellbound: Hellraiser II" is almost as good as the original movie.
The storyline in "Hellbound: Hellraiser II", as written by Peter Atkins, picks up after the events of the 1987 "Hellraiser" movie, and it is a good continuation of the storyline. There is a good continuity between the 1987 movie and this 1988 sequel, and that works very well in favor of the movie.
It was nice to see cast members from the original movie, such as Ashley Laurence, Clare Higgins and Sean Chapman return to reprise their characters from the first movie. Just as it was great to see the Cenobites return to the screen as well; that being Doug Bradley, Simon Bamford, Barbie Wilde and Nicholas Vince. I am not sure if all of those playing the Cenobites were from the first movie, though.
Visually then "Hellbound: Hellraiser II" is good. Sure, the movie is showing signs of being 34 years old already, but the effects are still adequate today and keep the movie as being watchable.
I enjoyed "Hellbound: Hellraiser II" and have seen it about five times or so, since it was originally released.
My rating of "Hellbound: Hellraiser II", from director Tony Randel, lands on a six out of ten stars.
The storyline in "Hellbound: Hellraiser II", as written by Peter Atkins, picks up after the events of the 1987 "Hellraiser" movie, and it is a good continuation of the storyline. There is a good continuity between the 1987 movie and this 1988 sequel, and that works very well in favor of the movie.
It was nice to see cast members from the original movie, such as Ashley Laurence, Clare Higgins and Sean Chapman return to reprise their characters from the first movie. Just as it was great to see the Cenobites return to the screen as well; that being Doug Bradley, Simon Bamford, Barbie Wilde and Nicholas Vince. I am not sure if all of those playing the Cenobites were from the first movie, though.
Visually then "Hellbound: Hellraiser II" is good. Sure, the movie is showing signs of being 34 years old already, but the effects are still adequate today and keep the movie as being watchable.
I enjoyed "Hellbound: Hellraiser II" and have seen it about five times or so, since it was originally released.
My rating of "Hellbound: Hellraiser II", from director Tony Randel, lands on a six out of ten stars.
Maybe it wasn't the best time for me to watch this, as I had a boil near my elbow and an expanding infection around it. That probably enhanced this movie's ability to make you feel queasy and light-headed.
I remember being fascinated by VHS covers as a kid at video stores. Horror especially got my attention. Hellbound seems to satisfy some of those morbid curiosities I'm sure we all carry to some degree. It doesn't have a rich or interesting story or characters, but it's imaginative in other ways.
There are all kinds of messed up images and concepts. It's weird that we watch horror movies in the first place. Why do we want to be scared, disgusted or horrified? I guess there has to be some sense of humour, morality or commentary on human nature for it to be properly enjoyable. But Hellbound seems to be more of a pure horror movie. I think that's why Ebert hated it and its predecessor. They're too depressing and pointless, even if the special effects are good and it establishes an effective mood.
It would be better if it explored the parallels between pleasure and pain more, which are only slightly alluded to. That seems to be a common theme in horror movies in general. It also could have showed us more about the origin and motivation of the Cenobites. And the doctor and girl's past could have been fleshed out more.
Apparently, it shares the record (with Titanic) for the most times two characters call out to each-other. I didn't notice so maybe that's a good thing. I was probably distracted by the disturbing and other-worldly visuals, wondering where it was going.
I think the original is probably better, but as horror sequels go, Hellbound is decent. I enjoyed the creative imagery. But it's not exactly upbeat or deep.
I remember being fascinated by VHS covers as a kid at video stores. Horror especially got my attention. Hellbound seems to satisfy some of those morbid curiosities I'm sure we all carry to some degree. It doesn't have a rich or interesting story or characters, but it's imaginative in other ways.
There are all kinds of messed up images and concepts. It's weird that we watch horror movies in the first place. Why do we want to be scared, disgusted or horrified? I guess there has to be some sense of humour, morality or commentary on human nature for it to be properly enjoyable. But Hellbound seems to be more of a pure horror movie. I think that's why Ebert hated it and its predecessor. They're too depressing and pointless, even if the special effects are good and it establishes an effective mood.
It would be better if it explored the parallels between pleasure and pain more, which are only slightly alluded to. That seems to be a common theme in horror movies in general. It also could have showed us more about the origin and motivation of the Cenobites. And the doctor and girl's past could have been fleshed out more.
Apparently, it shares the record (with Titanic) for the most times two characters call out to each-other. I didn't notice so maybe that's a good thing. I was probably distracted by the disturbing and other-worldly visuals, wondering where it was going.
I think the original is probably better, but as horror sequels go, Hellbound is decent. I enjoyed the creative imagery. But it's not exactly upbeat or deep.
Even if the story's weak, bringing back the surviving (or not surviving) cast members of the original, can make a sequel better. Everyone thinks crazy old Kirsty Cotton is making up stories of demons from hell (which happened to be her attic), but we all know better, don't we? She's now in a mental institution with a girl with a penchant for solving puzzles, under the guidance of a sadistic doctor with a penchant for a skinless Julia. Part of the story is just a re-hash of the first with different characters in similar situations. This time around we go to hell and find that it's like an Escher painting with a giant "Lament" diamond spinning in the sky. Not as good as the first film, but pretty close--a bit gorier and disturbing (but after "Hellraiser", I was expecting this) The acting is similar to the first film, but the special effects are a bit more elaborate this time around as the budget was bigger due to the success of it's predecessor.
After the strange events of the first movie,Kirsty is sent to a Institution for the Mentally Sick, commanded by the mysterious Dr. Channard,a crazed psychologist who is willing to open the doors of hell by manipulating the Puzzle Box.In doing so,Channard brings Kirsty's perverse stepmother Julia back to life,and consequently he provokes the rage of the dreadful cenobites,the cruel and evil creatures that give pleasure and pain in the same measure.Hellbound Hellraiser 2 is an extremely well-done film,thanks to the generous budget given to newcomer filmmaker Tony Randel and a first-rate production.The special effects are simply terrific (specially considering the time in which the movie was done,1988) and they create a bombastic,scary visual.I never saw a movie with such an incredible scenery and imagery,except maybe for Dark City.Clive Barker's vision of hell is brought to life with mastery through the work of Randel and Director of Photography Robin Vidgeon. The plot sustains the tension and keeps you on the edge of your seat from start to finish,though the first half hour of Hellbound: Hellraiser II is a little bit slow and descriptive (but never boring); a great portion of the action and the terror is concentrated in the last minutes. The last thirty ones are a realistic and gutsy "tour de force" through fear,violence and suffering.This is definitively a masterpiece, but not for the squeamish.Hellbound: Hellraiser II is rated R for extreme violence and sex scenes,it runs 99 minutes(uncut version released by Anchor Bay).It stars Clare Higgins as Julia, Ashley Laurence as Kirsty, Imogen Boorman as Tiffany,William Hope as Kyle McRae and Kenneth Cranham as Dr. Channard.If you like this movie, you might also enjoy Phenomena and Suspiria.
This is just as good as the first one. The movie went in a fast pace. In a way I liked that. The scenes of hell were really neat looking. One of the best I've seen yet. I'm not going to say who, but a new Cenobites is in the movie, but he's not in there too long. You find out a little more about Pinhead in this one, but if you really want to know his history watch the third one. Anyway I liked this one. It is different than the first one.
I recommend this movie to anyone who liked the first one and likes a really good horror movie.
I recommend this movie to anyone who liked the first one and likes a really good horror movie.
Lo sapevi?
- QuizClive Barker had developed elaborate back-stories for the Cenobites in the first film, though their origins were never explored. In this film, he wanted to make sure that, at the very least, the audience understood that the Cenobites were once human, and that their own vices lead to their becoming demons. This element was meant to underline the story of Frank (Oliver Smith) and Julia (Clare Higgins) and their corruption by lust, with the latter intended to become the ultimate villain of the series, but Pinhead proved much more popular with audiences, and thus became the center point in further sequels.
- Blooper(at around 1h 2 mins) When Kirsty is in the maze, she runs into a brick wall which is obviously fabric.
- Versioni alternativeThe UK cinema release was identical to the U.S R-rated version which removed around 2 minutes of graphic violence including various scenes of blood spurts, more explicit footage of the creations of Pinhead and the Channard cenobite, and nearly a minute from the resurrection of Julia. The 1990 UK video version then lost a further 7 secs of BBFC cuts with edits made to shots of the bloody Julia embracing the madman on the mattress and a brief shot of a bound topless woman, though confusingly the 1999 video release was cut further with an extra minute of sound edits replacing some of the previous cuts. The full unrated version was passed uncut by the BBFC in 2004.
- ConnessioniEdited from Hellraiser (1987)
I più visti
Accedi per valutare e creare un elenco di titoli salvati per ottenere consigli personalizzati
Dettagli
- Data di uscita
- Paese di origine
- Lingua
- Celebre anche come
- Hellbound Hellraiser II - Prigionieri dell'inferno
- Luoghi delle riprese
- Pine Ridge House, Iver Heath, Buckinghamshire, Inghilterra, Regno Unito(Dr. Channard's house exteriors)
- Aziende produttrici
- Vedi altri crediti dell’azienda su IMDbPro
Botteghino
- Budget
- 3.000.000 £ (previsto)
- Lordo Stati Uniti e Canada
- 12.090.735 USD
- Fine settimana di apertura Stati Uniti e Canada
- 3.185.511 USD
- 26 dic 1988
- Lordo in tutto il mondo
- 12.090.735 USD
- Tempo di esecuzione
- 1h 37min(97 min)
- Mix di suoni
- Proporzioni
- 1.85 : 1
Contribuisci a questa pagina
Suggerisci una modifica o aggiungi i contenuti mancanti