|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
#1
10-08-2008, 06:03 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Pinhead - villain or dark hero?
So I just finished watching Hellraiser I & II (Hellbound), which in my opinion are the only two good ones in the entire franchise. And coincidentally, both films have Pinhead and his minions coming to the rescue of Ashley Laurence's character, sort of like a unsung hero, while someone else played the chief villain's ball. But Hellraiser III and the other films in the series have Pinhead as main villain, not to mention a totally convoluted plotline in every subsequent sequel, and I am thinking that it might be the reason why the rest of the sequels sucked as compared to I & II. :rolleyes:
Thoughts, dawgs? 
|
|
#2
10-08-2008, 06:08 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
the reason most of the sequels are bad is the reason most franchises are horrible after the 1st film or 2.
1) over exposure. the 'creatures' are more interesting when they are still a mystery 2) poor writing. sequels are usually made to make $$$ not because someone was inspired with a great new story to tell. they quickly run out of ideas 3) poor direction. once the initial filmmaker gains fame - he/she moves on and they give the sequels to up and comers.. people with little or no experience. 4) the origional cast is long gone by now. everyone you liked - except for the one person (usually the villian) they are trying to hang the franchise on has buggered off. i believe these rules apply to every series that have run to #4 or more.
__________________
You make stupid look smart.
|
|
#3
10-08-2008, 01:36 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
__________________
|
|
#4
10-08-2008, 04:05 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
|
|
#5
10-08-2008, 04:33 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
he's like Dirty Harry .. he IS the film.
__________________
You make stupid look smart.
|
|
#6
10-09-2008, 10:01 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Pinhead is neither hero nor villain. He simply is. His role is to simply facilitate an individual's deepest desire, which is to experience the pain that is hell. The villain of Hellraisers 1 and 2 are the ones who either attempt to escape the nature of hell by any means necessary, or to embrace hell, again, by any means necessary.
And I might disagree with the rest of the franchise sucking. I actually enjoyed parts 5 and 6. They went back to the original concept of the Cenobites existing outside of the reality of he who opens the box. The opener creates his own hell and suffers the pain of it alone. Deader was pretty weak, as was Hellworld. The crappy thing about hellworld is that it pulled the F13p5 bullshit where Pinhead wasn't really Pinhead. How lame is that?! Part 3 was a bit out of character for Pinhead. In that one, he implicitly decided to try to 'take over the world' or some bullshit. The next one was the same, but added the 'In Space' aspect, which was obviously successful for the Leprechaun and Jason... ;) In summary, Pinhead is neither good nor bad... He just is.
__________________
No tears, please. It's a waste of good suffering. -Pinhead
|
|
#7
10-09-2008, 10:50 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I would argue that he is evil, but that he is passivley evil. Freddy is actively evil, he goes looking for trouble; pinhead is content to sit and wait for someone to bring evil upon themselves. However, he isnt an animal, he is a concious being that knows what he is doing is immoral, despite the fact that they technically asked for it. The fact that he is ambivelant about the fact that many of the people didnt know what they were getting into suggests evil; letting a child drink Drano "so that they'll learn better" is an act of malice, so the same goes here.
He also always seems to wind up getting innocent third parties involved and doesnt care about collatoral damage, which is also evil. So, is he the villain, technically, you are correct, he isnt, he merely reacts to the actual villain. But, he is a "bad guy".
|
|
#8
10-09-2008, 12:32 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
 |
|
|
