Hellraiser - Renascido do Inferno

When I was first watching this movie I was thinking "why is this so popular" but then out of no where I found my self absolutely loving it.

It has such a magnetic quality to it. The story is different from most horror movies. It has lore and a whole world. The acting isn't good but it has such an 80's charm. The whole thing does.

The special effects...they are all practical. It looks so good. It must have took hours to get some of them looks perfect!

I can understand now why this movie has such a large following. It is just unique and has such allure.

Adapted by Clive Barker from his own story "The Hellbound Heart" this has long been a favorite among horror-film devotees. Clive Barker is an outstanding writer. In terms of literary style light years ahead of Stephen King. His awesomely unhinged imagination is given free rein in this tale of the darker side of the human psyche.

Frank Cotton (Sean Chapman) is as immoral and perverted a scumbag as you could hope to find in the English speaking world. Ever alert to the potential for some new thrill (sexual or otherwise) Frank comes by a small carved wooden cube that just happens to be (in the right hands) a gateway to Hell. Not your normal run of the mill pit of hot sulphur fumes presided over by a horned Lucifer wielding his time-honored pitchfork, but a most unpleasant parallel dimension, home of the wickedly inventive Pinhead and his cenobite cohorts. As the series worked its way onwards, Pinhead (Bradley) became a retro cult hero much like Freddy Kreuger and was given increased screen-time!

Frank ends up paying the ultimate price in his search for new pleasures and to his everlasting discomfort, inevitably discovers the real meaning of the film's tag-line "He'll tear your soul apart." This leaves Frank's ex well and truly home-alone and she takes up with his wimpy brother Larry, crawlingly played by Andrew Robinson.

Things might have worked out for Julia (Higgins) and daughter Kirsty (Ashley Laurence) had not Larry cut his hand badly and the blood run beneath the floorboards where Frank's decimated but undead corpse responds dramatically well to the corpuscled cocktail! Frank's gory resurrection is actually one of the film's highlights, aided and abetted as it is by a superb musical score from Christopher Young!

Frank of course is a little miffed over Julia's dalliance with his brother and persuades her to bring him an assembly line of fresh meat to ensure his complexion is brought up to scratch. The demise of the first victim especially is quite shocking horror and on its own would have earned the film its "R" certificate.

Without giving anything else away, it is left to daughter Kirsty to combat both Frank, her socially distasteful step-mother and Pinhead. It is the ultimate learning curve you might say. One hell of a lot goes wrong before it starts getting any better. Frank's second whirl on the block is distinctly gruesome. Kirsty who under normal circumstances would be left a gibbering idiot, survives to take on the sequel and a further appearance by her awesomely repulsive stepmother!

You want horror? you want originality? you like blood on tap? you need HELLRAISER!

For all the above though, Barker's CANDYMAN was still better!

This is certainly Clive Barker's Masterpiece. His 1987 film, "Hellraiser" is a really good example of how a late 80's horror film can work.

Nearing the 90's, horror films started to go down hill. In 1991 and 1996, we got two really good thriller horrors, being "SCREAM" and "Silence of the Lambs". This film however, was the last of it's kind to give us some good late 80's slasher craze which was still born and still very fresh with horror freaks.

I won't go into the plot because I believe everyone should have seen Hellraiser by now, if not, well GO SEE IT! All I can say is that the concepts of the box is terrific. A new way to kill a slashing demon is always a terrific and creative concept and it works really well in this one. I also love the soundtrack suite which is haunting beautiful and dramatic in parts. The actors are superb and their characters are believable.

Doug Bradley as Pinhead is the best and he knows how to give us a creepy killer which cannot be stopped. I dunno why in "Revelations" they got a different actor to play him. Doug is Pinhead, end of story.

I also like the way the death scenes and plot are shown. The director takes it a little step at a time while as most directors just go full on with the violence and exploit everything. Clive actually took his time to tell the story and that's what made most of the ending sequences and starting deaths so intense. It all left us to the core suspense.

Also, the 1987 film is the only Hellraiser film I have really liked. I've also seen part 3, 4 and 6. 3 was OK, 4 was dodgy and 6 sucked. The thing about the first film was that it had a dramatic fantasy to it, while being realistic, people were dying for real. The other Hellraiser films I have seen since then haven't really had the same impact but instead really try to rehash and be as shocking, doesn't work at all!?

My verdict on this 87 classic is a 7.5/10.

P.S: I just hope they can get this right in the remake next year.

I have seen Hellraiser many, many times; but my most recent viewing of the film was different to the rest. It was different because this was the first time that I've seen the film since reading Clive Barker's novel "The Hellbound Heart". The novel both enhanced my enjoyment for the film, and exposed some of its flaws. With the book, Barker really allows the reader to get inside the character's head, which ensures that the horror is more shocking. His descriptions are also a lot more macabre than what is shown in the film, and the way that certain things in the book are missed out/abridged shows some of the wasted opportunities of the story. This isn't really a criticism of the film, but rather of books being turned into movies on the whole. People often say that the book is better than the movie; and in this case it's true! Even so, Hellraiser is an absolute classic horror film, and easily one of the best of the eighties; not to mention all time. The plot simply follows Frank Cotton. Frank is a man in search of unknown pleasures, and in order to achieve that he buys a mysterious music box. This box does give out pleasure; but it's inflicted by a band of demons, known as 'Cenobytes' - and their idea of pleasure differs from Frank's! The story picks up when Frank's brother and his girlfriend, Julia, move into the house where Frank was taken...

The main reason Hellraiser stands out among horror films is because of its themes. Barker weaves shades of love, eroticism and, of course, pain and pleasure into his tale of demons and scarred flesh - and this really makes the film. We can care for the characters and what happens to them because of what Barker puts between them, and it's always evident that this film is head and shoulders above the rest of the schlock-horror sub-genre. The special effects, particularly on the screen time surrounding Frank, are simply stunning and show how real effects beat all this CGI rubbish hands down, while also showing that a low budget can be overcome. The film is never gratuitous with its gore or effects either, and everything in this film is there because it has to be. This is what annoys me about non-horror fans - films like this are dismissed by them because they're "too gory" or "stupid" - but Hellraiser breaks the mould because it's a truly original story and the way that Barker implements a macabre love story amidst a plethora of shocking horror is extremely skilfully handled, and more than challenges many of the so-called 'A-class' films.

A writer directing his own work tends to ensure that it will get proper treatment, and this is mostly true here. Some things have been changed from the book for no apparent reason (mostly with the characters of Larry and Kristy), but the only thing that really annoyed me was the ending. I suppose it's due to the time that it was made, but the ending feels tacked on to me. Barker's ending in the book was perfectly judged - just open enough to hint at more, while closing the story enough so that the reader is satisfied. Here, we have a schlock finale that is entertaining, but pulls away from the closed atmosphere that Barker has spent the film creating. This film differs from most other eighties horror films because of the fact that the actors are a talented bunch. You come to expect bad acting from this sort of film - but Hellraiser has none of it! The entire cast shine, with Clare Higgins making the biggest impression as the evil Julia. This was Clive Barker's directorial debut, and at times, it's clear that this is the case; but Barker makes the best of his locations, and while his camera sometimes feels enclosed; it fuses with the tragic music brilliantly, and all this helps the film to create that fabulous atmosphere so convincingly.

Overall, I have pointed out a couple of flaws here; but I really can't bring myself to give this masterpiece any less than full marks. The originality on display throughout Hellraiser is astounding, as is the atmosphere and the performances pulled out of the actors, along with the fact that this film has entertained me many times and is still as good today as the first time I saw it. All of this ensures that Hellraiser will be an endearing favourite of mine for the rest of my life. If you consider yourself a fan of horror and haven't seen this; shame on you. Make sure you read the book, too!

In a decade of cheap, exploitive slashers, we finally get this one. Relief.

Instead of some maniac ripped from Halloween, we get a simple wooden box. Simple, or so Frank thought.

What results is a cinematic masterpiece, a great mix of gore and violence, as well as a great musical score and some nice drama. The acting is fine, but there are imperfections. One common complaint: The characters are not pleasant enough we can latch onto them. Maybe that's because these seem more realistic than the characters we CAN latch onto. Just a thought, don't jump on this.

What really gets me, though, is the people calling it down, saying it's not quality entertainment. Come on guys, if it was SUPPOSED to be Shakespeare, it would not advertise as being able to "tear your soul apart."

The presence of the cenobites was originally intended not to carry the story but to emphasize it. As usual, the sequaes ignored it. Hey, merchandizing.

This is the only one of the series that depends on the story more than the demons. We hardly ever see the infamous Pinhead at all.

all in all, this was a fun movie. No Shakespeare, but it's not supposed to be. Just dramatic, gory, groundbreaking horror, delivered to us excellently by Mr. Barker.