How it Should Have Went (in my opinion)
-
Archived from the IMDb Discussion Forums — Hellraiser III: Hell on Earth
corndog-65708 — 10 years ago(November 28, 2015 02:15 AM)
They should have just ended it as a trilogy with Kirsty as the protagonist once again, or if she only wanted to do up to the sequel then they could have left it at that as well, because the sequel had a pretty solid ending with the Cenobites realizing that they were once human and then they changed back. Don't get me wrong, it's cool that the have a whole franchise going on like the other horror/slasher classics, but it would have been cool just as a trilogy too. And personally, having seen the third one without Kirsty just didn't feel the same. I guess of course they did it to milk the Hellraiser movies and get a lot of money.
-
Jabbapop — 10 years ago(December 04, 2015 08:16 PM)
I don't understand why Kirsty should be the anchor for the series. The cenobites are pretty darn cool and inherently have such a wide range to explore, they're sensual explorers! I enjoyed three in a hokey fun kind of way all of the themes and "ideas" were so latent, heck, the human pinhead reads Joey the subtext from cue cards for goodness sakes! I get what you're saying though with horror franchises there's kind of a playbook that states that the higher the number entry in the series, the more campy and goofy things get and the less genuinely scary things are. But I mean, that's human nature, no? The more exposed to something we are, we get desensitized to it? You can't really be scared by the same thing over and over again, no?
Anyway, in terms of "prospective trajectories," having only watched the first three thus far, I've always imagined a more "probing" entry in the hellraiser series, which delves into the more troublesome aspects of the ideas while maintaining the visceral body horror kind of Cronenberg-esque with heavier mytho-spiritual elements.