Hellraiser: Revelations (2011) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
96 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
Why does Pinhead look constipated on the DVD cover?
Smells_Like_Cheese19 March 2012
Warning: Spoilers
To think now that there is 9 Hellraiser films is just incredible, but even sad to think how downhill it went with the series. For some odd reason, the Hellraiser series was never as popular as other horror franchises like Friday the 13th or Nightmare on Elm Street. Maybe because most of the sequels were direct to video, who knows? However, despite the downfall of the more recent sequels, we wanted more Pinhead. The later sequels took a different turn where the scripts were written and Pinhead was added in later sometimes not making it feel like a Hellraiser film at all. Then comes along Gary J. Tunnicliffe who has a vision of bringing Hellraiser back to the basics, open the box and Pinhead is coming to get you and make your life Hell. Not a bad idea, however excluding Clive Barker and Doug Bradley is where the film just went totally wrong. With a very lousy budget and short time to make the film, Hellraiser makes Ed Wood look like Steven Spielberg. After all, look at the cover of the DVD, it looks like Pinhead is constipated.

Best friends Steven and Nico travel to Mexico. They film themselves engaging in several days worth of drunken partying until one night they are attacked in their room by a man with pins driven into his skull. The boys disappear, and the Mexican authorities ultimately turn over their belongings to their parents, including a videotape made by Steven that apparently documents their final moments. A year later, Steven's parents Ross and Sarah, and sister, Emma gather for dinner with Nico's parents, Peter and Kate. Emma finds a gold and black puzzle box visible in the final moments of the video. Playing with it causes Steven to materialize out of thin air, covered in blood that does not appear to be his own. The families prepare to rush him to the hospital, only to discover that all of the vehicles have disappeared from the driveway. Attempting to dial 911, they discover that the land lines and cell phones are receiving interference and no outgoing calls can be made. Steven tells the families that he has escaped "The Cenobites," and what he and Nico went through.

The problems with the film are major: the actors are either too over the top or had too much botox as the under acting was out of control. I found it hilarious that Niko's mom is "so distraught" over Niko's disappearance that she clearly found the time to get a good plastic surgeon and looks like a super model when she's asked to come to the house to discuss her son's possible death. Why was the sister dressed so sexy too? Not to mention I think her role was just to sit and look pouty and sexy, pout, sex, pout, sex…nice stretch there. None of the characters were likable at all. Poor Pinhead, once upon a time one of the most feared villains of the horror genre. A man who took the ultimate pleasure in torturing others and making your life Hell now stands there making constipated looks with jacked up make up and a duck face while talking in a voice that sounds like he should be reading "A Tale of Two Cities" to me. His voice was so dull and lifeless, how could you ever take this guy seriously? From what I heard, Doug Bradley turned down the role as he would've been paid enough money to have a new fridge, well good to know what little dignity he had after the last few dumb sequels. But much kudos to Clive Barker, as he said "this is no child of mine" along with some words I wish I could say on IMDb but can't, but trust me it's good. The story wasn't that bad, it was the rushed pace and bad characters that really did this movie in. Please leave the Hellraiser series alone, let it rest in peace.

33 out of 35 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Thank Goodness Doug Bradley bailed- this is a career-killing and possibly even a franchise-killing mess...
MaximumMadness28 April 2012
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!
38 out of 41 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Prequel to the next suck
tsmundahl8 November 2011
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.
67 out of 79 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
This was it? Seriously?...
paul_haakonsen19 December 2011
Having grown up with horror movies and been exposed to the numerous big horror franchises, I am no stranger to the "Hellraiser" movies, and must admit that I have been watching them ever since the first one came out. However, I am sad to say that since the third movie or so, the franchise has been on a steady declining spiral, and the stories have progressively strayed from the original idea.

This ninth movie was a bit of a surprise to me, as I came upon it by sheer luck. I hadn't even heard about it, and honestly, I thought they had finally put the franchise to rest after a number of disappointing movies. But I was wrong.

So I sat down to watch this movie, and I must admit that I was appalled to see that Doug Bradley wasn't in the role as Pinhead. That was an insult to us fans of the movies (or fans of the first handful of proper "Hellraiser" movies, at least). But still, I gave it a go.

That being said, I have got to be blunt honest. Doug Bradley was (and always will be) Pinhead. Stephan Smith Collins is a really bad substitute. I am not saying that he is a bad actor, as I am not familiar with his work outside this one movie, but he didn't have that diabolic charm and wit that Bradley brought to the Pinhead character. Nor did he have that iconic voice that we all have come to love (or fear, whichever you prefer). So the Pinhead portrayed in "Hellraiser: Revelations" was a mere cheap imitation of the original Pinhead.

As for the story in "Hellraiser: Revelations", one thing only has to be said: "are you kidding?" The story in this ninth installment was a rude insult and a downright copy of the storyline from the first movie. Sure the setting was changed and small adjustments made, but the overall storyline and plot was the exact same thing. Which leads me to ponder on whether or not this movie was necessary? Wouldn't it had been better to just let the franchise lie dormant? Surely this wasn't the best they could come up with. And also, just why did Doug Bradley pass on this? Leaves you with something to think about, doesn't it? And leaves you with a somewhat vile aftertaste in your mouth.

"Hellraiser: Revelations" dragged on forever, just retelling the story that we were introduced to in the first "Hellraiser" movie, so it was basically just pointless repetition. A way to introduce the franchise to new viewers? I don't know, but for us who have followed the growth and decline of the franchise, it was a rude slap on the face.

The movie leaves little room for the characters to develop and grow, despite the actors/actresses doing their best with their given parts. You just never really buy into the characters, and they are lacking depth and credibility.

Having seen every single "Hellraiser" movie since the very first, this one is without a doubt the most boring, pointless and far-strayed from the original plot. It is worth a watch if you want to see it just to have watched all of the movies, but that is about it. There is nothing new here; everything is just a re-write of old material. It is like brewing coffee on an old and already used coffee filter. It was horrible.

One of the things "Hellraiser: Revelations" had working for it, was the effects. There weren't a lot of special effects, though whatever little they did use worked out well enough. Personally, I could have used a lot more of the traditional wicked torture and torment that is associated with the Cenobytes and the "Hellraiser" series.

I have seen "Hellraiser: Revelations" now, and I can honestly say, despite being a "Hellraiser" fan, that I will not be making a second return to this movie ever!
34 out of 39 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
complete waste of time and an embarrassment to the hellraiser series
Ocrisia27 October 2012
Warning: Spoilers
I'm only giving this movie a 1 because you can't give it a zero. This is the worst sequel to a horror movie I've ever seen, and I have watched a LOT of garbage horror. I actually just read another review on this movie, and it reminded me how badly I was disappointed by it so I came on here, hoping that other people won't waste their time, and also hoping if no one actually goes out to rent this than the idiots who produced will regret their decision to make it. They were apparently going to lose their rights to the movie so they threw together a piece of crap with $300,000 and in 11 days. The acting is horrible-they took the blood going into the floor from the first movie and used that to make it kind of resemble a hellraiser movie, but it happens in some room where the main character is screwing a hooker and can hear the dead guy in the floor in his head saying "kill her, kill her." he does, with the puzzlebox (why the puzzlebox? i don't get it) then when the dead guy rises (from under the mattress, i guess they saved some $ on special effects that way) he narrates what's happening "the blood is bringing me back! bring more!" the characters narrate what's happening around them almost the entire movies. and when one of the men's faces gets cut off, his friend brings him inside and asks for towels. for his missing face. Oh, and the guy playing pinhead is no Doug Bradley. he does a terrible job. maybe it's not his fault, but if the guy who played pinhead in EVERY movie, even the direct to video silly ones, won't act in this one, that should tell you something. worst movie ever. no plot, just a bunch of talking and some face blood. don't waste your time.
14 out of 15 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
This Pain Is Legendary even in Hell
PinWeill3 November 2011
Warning: Spoilers
This movie is worse than. HELLWORLD. PINHEAD IS LAUGHABLE Female Chatter is a disgrace. If you are a Hellraiser fan i suggest you watch it because it makes absolutely no sense. If you escape the box why would you want to go back? Why does he think they will make a deal with him? Nothing makes any sense in this even the ending. I would watch Hellworld 24/7 before i ever think about watching this thing again. BTW Hellworld use to be the worst one of the series until this one came out. Pinhead ha ha dude i'd fart on you if i ever saw you. Pinhead looks like hes taking a dump while talking. WHY is he so FAT?????????? Why do all the cenobites Look so young? why Pinhead constructing a cenobites thats the engineers job. Why did the dad kill that one kid when they said they were going to torture him forever????? Why did pinhead take the wife?? The husband cheated on her so he really doesn't care... The one person he did care about he doesn't take even thou she really wants to stay. MAN nothing in the movie is goo. I've seen youtube videos that were better.Why didn't you just use one of their scripts? We deserve answers i own all the movies and nothing was ever as bad as this.
14 out of 15 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Out of many bad sequels...the worst.
moustasch118 October 2011
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.
55 out of 70 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Apple pie without apples is a fail apple pie
papat71320 January 2013
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.
15 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Pure Horror to watch...in a bad way
demetrius113 November 2011
The worst movie in the hellraser franchise without question. I thought some of the previous movie attempts were quite bad, but this one gets the prize! The basic plot is not the worst ever filmed, but there is nothing original, and simply walks in the path of the hellraser "mythology" without adding anything new. The acting is average, sometimes bad, and the direction simply gets the job done.

The reason that this movie is worst than the rest, is the fact that Doug Bradley refused the part of Pinhead, so it went to someone it shouldn't have. Stephan Smith Collins, the new Pinhead, is simply terrible for this part. It is not only the fact that the tone of his voice is NOT Pinhead "material", but his facial structure does not sit well with the make up, and the result is a fat looking Pinhead. I suppose they eat quite well in Hell these days, so he gained a few pounds (lol).

I have to mention that they did fine work in the make up department. However, make up alone is not enough to support an entire movie. It is a surprise that this movie event went out on DVD the way it is. It is a waste of time to watch in my opinion. I suggest that any Hellraser fans still out there, read the new comic book by Clive Barker from now on, instead of watching these terrible movies...
34 out of 44 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
You're Better Served Driving Nails Into Your Head
rocky_lifter6917 October 2012
Warning: Spoilers
As a fan of the Hellraiser franchise, I refuse to accept this as a part of the series. As bad as the last few installments were, none sunk this far below the bottom of the barrel. Instead of actually reviewing this terrible piece of crap, here are some random thoughts and musings that crossed my mind while watching it: *It is quite odd how many white people populate these Mexican bars.

*Pinhead now lives inside the walls of this family's house?

*Despite her brother and boyfriend disappearing, the girl is extremely disturbed that her obvious d-bag boyfriend was banging a whore while in Mexico.

*Did Pinhead become a car thief since his last movie?

*I love how the wife was momentarily shocked at the prospect of there being a gun in the house.

*Did the film makers believe two lame Pinhead imitators would distract from how bad this movie is?

*Is it impossible for modern horror movies to have any remotely likable characters? I would cheer the Cenobites, if they weren't pale shadows of the original characters.

*Pinhead didn't kill the wimpy boy down in Mexico because…?

*Just out of curiosity, how common are Asian hookers in Mexico?

*That red headed kid is so brutally not intimidating, even with a shotgun in his hand.

*This movie can somehow warp time and space, as its 75 minute run time feels like two long hours. (Written at the 45 minute mark).

*Oh, a subplot about cheating amongst the parents. That's exactly what I thought the other Hellraiser movies were lacking.

*Considering the roots of this franchise and how grisly it could be, this one is easily outdone by any of the Saw movies.

*Uh, is that supposed to be a cliffhanger ending?

Why this "film" ever saw the light of day is a mystery. I understand it was only made to retain the franchise rights but that doesn't mean it needed to be released to the general public. I give this "movie" 1 star, simply because it makes me appreciate the original even more than I already did.
10 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
black_sun00117 October 2011
Warning: Spoilers
This had so much potential. A decent plot, great make up and special effects, and a solid twist ending were all tossed aside with how terrible the acting was.

It was very reminiscent of the first Hellraiser, even going as far as quoting it several times and reenacting several scenes. My biggest concern was Doug Bradley not playing Pinhead; however, Stephan Smith Collins was overall bearable even if he was just mimicking Doug Bradley's performance.

Despite all the potential, not a single actor/actress from the main cast gave a solid, consistent performance.
29 out of 38 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
So unspeakably bad that even Doug Bradley turned it down
tomgillespie200212 April 2017
There was once, way back, a little horror movie called Hellraiser. From the mind of English writer Clive Barker, the movie took place within a dark world in which the Lament Configuration existed: a puzzle-box fascinating to anyone with an affection for mind games, and irresistible to those looking to push the boundaries of earthly pleasures. It also opened a gateway to Hell, in which a gang of sadistic demons named the Cenobites roamed in search of thrill- seeking fools to prey upon. It is now an established horror classic, and naturally spawned sequels, each declining in quality as the movies were farted out by a Dimension Films keen to keep hold of the rights to a franchise they could someday reboot. A matter of weeks before the rights expired, Dimension, now owned by the Weinstein Company, rushed production on the ninth entry in the series. The result, dubbed Revelations, was such cinematic cancer that Barker took to Twitter page to distance himself from the tripe.

Steven (Nick Eversman) and Nico (Jay Gillespie) are two young horndogs who escape their middle-class family for the seediness of Mexico, where they hope to guzzle tequila, f**k prostitutes, and generally act like annoying a**eholes. A year later, the boys haven't been heard from, and their two families gather for dinner and drinks. Steven's mother Sarah (Devon Sorvari), via a private detective, has obtained her son's video camera, which shows Nico opening the Lament Configuration and being approached by Pinhead (Stephan Smith Collins) and his cronies. We flash back and forth in time between Steven being forced to lure victims for his friend in order to regenerate his body and skin, and the family's utter shock at Steven's sudden re-appearance and increasingly bizarre behaviour.

Series regular and all-round horror icon Doug Bradley turned the movie down. Despite having to straight-face his way through Rick Bota's torturous sequels - which were already taking enough of a dump on Barker's mythology - he took one look at the script and walked away. Newcomer Collins already faced an impossible task of filling such iconic shoes, but with little to do other than rattle a few chains and donning some terrible make-up, he comes across like a chubby kid in cosplay making his own movie at home. The acting is unspeakably bad, with Eversman in particular failing to convince as an actual human person. Director Victor Garcia doesn't seem interested in even half-a****g a set-piece, with the majority of time spent with Steven's cardboard parents fretting over their blood-spattered emo child. There was only one thing in mind when this celluloid sneeze was bungled together: money. A vision that was once so fresh and shocking now represents a studio at its greedy worst, disrespecting the artist who created it all and the fans who love him for it.
8 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
terrible absolutely terrible
iamsamjj13 June 2012
Warning: Spoilers
After only watching the first three films in the Hellraiser series this one was the worst that I've seen. It is like giving all the die hard Hellraiser fans the middle finger.

Watching it was made me sick. I understood the storyline a little bit, but what made me mad the most about the movie was Pinhead wasn't the same actor who acted in the previous eight films.

It was a different Pinhead which made it feel like a different movie to me. I highly recommend not watching this film even if your life depended on it. If you want to watch any Hellraiser watch all of them if you want but do not watch this one. It is a waste of time.
8 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
One of the Worst Films I Have Had the Misfortune of Seeing
gavin694228 October 2012
In this ninth installment of the Hellraiser franchise, two friends discover a puzzle box in Mexico, which opens a gateway to Hell.

I hardly even want to write a review about this crock of rubbish, because others already have and have done a better job.

Dread Central wrote, "Not only does this entry make all the other sequels seem great in comparison, you could easily confuse this for some Hellraiser mockbuster from the folks at The Asylum." This is spot-on, as they have stolen everything good from the first two films -- Pinhead, the mattress rebirth, the homeless man -- and made them into pale comparisons.

No one has been harsher than Scott Weinberg, who called the film a "contractually-mandated piece of intentional garbage that exists for no other reason than pure, simple greed... This is amateur hour stuff all the way, and it'd be almost endearingly, stupidly enjoyable if this witless cinematic refuse wasn't dancing on the grave of a true classic of the genre." Ouch!

But seriously, what is with the chubby Pinhead who has somehow lost his British accent? The only way this even makes sense is by assuming it just happens to be another demon that imitates the look.
10 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Why not?
Lamented_Sorrow_131323 October 2011
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.
50 out of 77 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
dave-m-sewell21 November 2011
This was the worst film in the series by far. I understand it was rushed out but the script seems to have been written by a 10 year old.

The characters were cardboard cut-outs. Actually I think I would have had more of an emotional connection to cardboard than the cast.

The storyline and I use the term in the loosest possible sense was so jumbled it was nigh on impossible to keep track of what was happening and when it was happening.

I am so glad Doug Bradley refused to appear in the film as he would have shone so brightly among the others the screen would have just been a white light.

So Revelations. Well if the word is translated as Apocalypse I think I was a valid title.

Don't bother to see this film unless you enjoy staring at wet paint.
7 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
All You Need To Know About Hellraiser Revelations!!
xecutionrecords27 October 2011
Having Watched this on the bounce after 'Howling reborn' this movie seemed much better than it actually was. Having re-watched it after exorcising the Quite nauseating howling turkey, it now occurs to me that this film is about as enjoyable as drinking your own urine whilst being buggered by a fat sweaty homeless man who hasn't showered his whole life. There is absolutely no point in discussing the plot as it's quite obvious that the scriptwriter has done a william burroughs cut up technique with the first 3 movies and re-hashed the same lines in different order. The casting exec has chosen a lead actor that has a distinct inability to read a line without looking like he's standing on the stage like a six year old at a nativity play. The rest of the cast do lots of head scratching and quite literally look like they don't know what the hell kind of movie they have signed up for. Pinhead looks like a constipated Grandad who is trying so hard at sounding like Doug Bradley that the concentration is making his pins fall out. It's like a group of 15 year old fanboys have got together and thought if you repeat the words 'Flesh', 'Pain', 'Pleasure' over and over again, you've got yourself a hellraiser film. Are their any redeeming qualities? Actually their isn't. And if your one of these people who reads all the reviews and thinks 'i'd like to make up my own mind', this is one of those times you should listen to your conscience, No good will come of it, the world will be a better place for you not watching it, trust me, please!
7 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Terrible Fate of the Classic Clive Baker's Horror Story
claudio_carvalho17 January 2014
The best friends Steven Craven (Nick Eversman) and Nico Bradley (Jay Gillespie) travel to Mexico to have fun. They meet a vagrant (Daniel Buran) in a bar that gives a puzzle box to Nico. When he opens the device, he finds that it is a key to hell. Nico brings Pinhead (Stephan Smith Collins) that inflicts pain to him and Steven and the youngsters vanish.

Later, in Los Angeles, Dr. Ross Craven (Steven Brand), his wife Sarah (Devon Sorvari) and their daughter Emma (Tracey Fairaway) receive Peter (Sebastien Roberts) and Kate Bradley(Sanny Van Heteren) to have dinner. Both families miss Steven and Nico and they hired a private detective to seek them out, but he only finds Nico's backpack. When Emma snoops around the backpack, she finds the puzzle box and out of the blue, Steven returns covered of blood. But soon they discover that it is not Steven's soul that is inside his body.

"Hellraiser: Revelations" is a very bad sequel, actually the ninth movie of this franchise. It shows the terrible fate of the classic Clive Baker's horror story "Hellraiser" (1987) and its great sequel "Hellbound: Hellraiser II" (1988).

"Hellraiser: Revelations" has a messy screenplay that does not show anything new. Indeed, Doug Bradley has probably given up of performing Pinhead and Stephan Smith Collins is very weak in this role. The worst thing is that the conclusion gives the sensation that the author intends to make another sequel that should be released straight to garbage instead of to video. My vote is three.

Title (Brazil): "Hellraiser: Revelações" ("Hellraiser: Revelations")
12 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
searching-9148429 January 2016
About the only good thing I can say about this one is that it was, at least, written to be a "Hellraiser" movie. The problem is, it's a crappie one. A really shitty one. Apparently the only reason this movie was made (and in a matter of a few weeks at that) was for Dimension films to meet a contractual guideline. Reportedly unhappy with the quality of the production franchise linchpin Doug "Pinhead" Bradley IMDb refused to participate.

It starts out as a half-ass-ed found footage movie and slides right into a half-ass-ed trapped in a cabin movie. The new cenobites (especially Pinhead) look terrible and they all seem to inhabit a studio apartment rather than a hell limited only by the darkest imagination. The cheap video quality neuters any atmosphere and the terrible script is supported by equally terrible actors.
5 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Despite Bradley's Absence, "Revelations" a Revelation
BartlebyScrivner23 October 2011
It's not often I feel compelled to write IMDb reviews. Many times I've wanted to hop onto the site after having seen a movie to share my likes or dislikes about it, but for the most part this desire quickly fades and instead I just end up writing about a select few movies: Those for which I felt an extreme passion or extreme hatred. Usually the latter; in the case of Hellraiser: Revelations, the former.

Without saying too much on the plot-- the word count won't permit me-- this is the first Hellraiser since the fourth to be intended as a Hellraiser film (and not a hasty rewrite of an unrelated horror script) and the first since "Hellbound" to treat the Cenobites and their backstory the way Barker wrote them. Gone are the global-domination seeking, demonic Hellspawn that made a twisted mockery of the series; back are the sexually amorphous, amoral hedonists that made the characters interesting and frightening to begin with. Make no mistake-- the Pinhead here is a far inferior version of the previous entries', and Doug Bradley's presence is sorely missed; he brought a certain charisma to the character this is difficult to articulate, let alone replicate, and his absence from the movie is in fact its most glaring flaw. The return to true "Hellraiser" form, though, should please fans of Barker's originals: The characters who fall into the path of the box are not intrepid reporters but shallow, narcissistic perverts. Missing from many of the sequels was the idea that the box-- and by extension, the Cenobites-- sought prey for a reason, and that the fates that befell them were simply amplifications of what would have become of them in everyday life.

This all said, the movie is not completely devoid of flaws beyond Bradley's absence. The production had a notoriously short shooting schedule, and it shows in the super abbreviated running-time and its resultant pacing. The further the movie goes on, the more rapid and sloppy the pacing becomes, to the point that the climax of the movie rapidly falls apart, as characters start displaying traits that were only hinted at before and which needed more development for their actions to be taken seriously. It's a disappointment that such a strong feature fell apart so quickly, and in so glaring a way. Yet even this butchered pacing isn't the movie's biggest flaw.

Normally I shy away from addressing other reviews; however, because of the direct-to-video nature of most of the Hellraiser franchise, and the close-knit community created as a result, it's difficult to separate a review of one of the entries in the franchise from the fan reaction. In this case, the absence of Doug Bradley and his relative silence on the script, coupled with Clive Barker's vehement distancing of himself from the project, has led to near universal disdain for the film. Note that I haven't included anything about the movie itself; and here is where the biggest flaw of "Revelations" lies. Before the DVDs were even pressed, "Revelations" was doomed not because of its inherent value but because fans had decided already that this was going to be the worst Hellraiser ever (a difficult undertaking, considering that the last four entries were unrelated horror stories hastily doctored to include Pinhead, and three of which-- Hellseeker, Deader, and Hellworld-- were abysmal). And thus the prophecy was fulfilled; I've yet to read a review of the film that takes it seriously as anything other than a Hellraiser movie without Doug Bradley. The acting is criticized, when it was on par with the amateur theater quality of the previous entries; the cinematography is called "cheap" though it's the first entry since "Bloodline" that doesn't look like a made-for-TV movie; and... well, that's about all I've seen anyone have to say about this, so far, beyond "Where's Doug Bradley?" That's the biggest reason I came here to write this review. An honest attempt at a decent Hellraiser deserves an honest, decent review, and hopefully that's what I've done here. So if you're just looking for a Barker-approved entry featuring Doug Bradley, yes, this will disappoint you. If you're willing to look past that and return to the world of "The Hellbound Heart," this very well may become one of your favorite Hellraisers.
37 out of 75 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
You can make a good film, you can make a bad film, but...
mentalcritic11 December 2015
Warning: Spoilers
...heaven help you if you make a *boring* film. I used to say that constantly when I was younger and full of pep and had just taken a walk into the DVD-Video format that refuses to go away in spite of looking like a dirty dish with a crack in it compared to actual (that is, not "upsampled") HD.

I started writing this "review" as a kind of response to a very surface-scratching and short attempt to defend this film. Because after they once again told us to forgive the film based on how little they had to work with, that is what comes to mind. The film is utterly boring.

It is also well worth noting that this film exists for one reason, and only one reason: to prevent the rights to this moribund franchise from reverting back into the hands of Clive Barker. It is one thing if one makes a bad film with honest intentions. For example, Ed Wood's intentions ranged from pleading for acceptance of transvestites (in the 1950s, I might add) to stopping the nuclear arms race before we ended up without a planet to live on. That his delivery of such messages through cinema was comically inept is beside the point, because although the message gets lost in the unintentional comedy, simply knowing that that was partly what he intended is enough to see he had more in mind than just money. Not the makers of Hellraiser Revelations. All they cared about was money, and it shows.

Stories generally go through a lot of rewriting before they are presented to an audience. Generally, when an author looks at his first draft, he sees mistake after mistake leaping out at him, crying for correction. Characters he was in love with during the first draft might seem like complete nonces whilst rereading, and are thus modified during the subsequent drafts. Actions undertaken by characters that got the basic plot from A to B in the first draft might make zero sense on rereading, and thus the author will rewrite the sequence of events to make more sense. Why am I describing these parts of the writing process? Because it is plainly evident that precisely none of that happened with this script.

The story as it unfolds in this film goes something like two spoiled brats go on a road trip to Mexico looking for booze, sex, and good times. The things that go wrong eventually lead them to sit in a bar where a bum who looks strangely like the bum in the original film offers them the box. Astute readers will note that this is quite a difference from the original, where one brother actively seeks out the box in a South-East Asian market because he is bored and jaded with all the thrills and spills the world can offer him. Dialogue is given in which one brat explains for the audience that he does not want to spend the rest of his life in what I inferred from this speech was a hicksville village (the film itself is not too clear about where they actually live). Although it was not great at doing this, the original gave the audience plenty to imply that one brother was a boring, tepid personality and the other a wild, outgoing man. In Revelations, almost everything is told to the audience rather than demonstrated. That can work with good actors, but the actors here mostly look like they would find it difficult to read out a battle scene from The Phantom Blooper in a way that stimulates interest.

Hellraiser Revelations is only useful for two things. One, to demonstrate there is no low to which the Weinsteins will not sink in order to keep a property, no matter how far they have run that property's value into the ground. Two, as a teaching tool at film schools. One film school teacher quoted in the Plan 9 Companion says one useful teaching tool is to show a student an example when film is not being done well and make them take notes of what is not being done well. Hellraiser Revelations offers a goldmine of material for a class like that.
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Not as bad as they say...
metalblessingradio28 April 2012
After reading other reviews I went into this expecting an absolutely abysmal film. While its certainly not on par with the early Hellraiser movies I feel it is far better than any of the more recent efforts, as they do for the most part attempt to stay close the roots of the original films.

Obviously the first thing you will notice is the lack of Doug Bradley as Pinhead. I know he has a chubbier face and deep down we all hate to see someone else as Pinhead but heres some advice for if you watch it...

You will get more out of this movie if you stop yourself from comparing the new actor to Doug Bradley. As another review noted, I think the new Pinhead did a great job considering what he had to work with and the script he was given.

I was glad this wasn't another run of the mill detective story with Pinhead thrown in at the last minute like some of the previous ones have been (Inferno, Hellseeker.) Its not going to be your new favorite Hellraiser but if you give it a chance you might be surprised.
16 out of 31 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Like with pizza, even a bad 'Pinhead' film is good horror.
Hellmant1 November 2011
'HELLRAISER: REVELATIONS': Two and a Half Stars (Out of Five)

This ninth chapter in the popular horror franchise was made on a budget of just $300,000, filmed in just three weeks and rushed into and out of production in order to save the studio, The Weinstein Company, from losing it's rights to the material. Due to the hastiness of the production long time star Doug Bradley decided not to return as 'Pinhead' and the resulting film is undoubtedly the weakest and most disappointing of the series. It's still interesting to a certain extent though, like all chapters in the mythology, and offers at least something to satisfy fans' bizarre fascination. It was directed by Victor Garcia and written by Gary J. Tunnicliffe. Actor Stephan Smith Collins steps into the notorious role of 'Pinhead'.

The film is the first based on an original script since the fourth installment and borrows greatly from Clive Barker's novella 'The Hellbound Heart'. It tells the story of two young men, Steven Craven (Nick Eversman) and Nico Bradley (Jay Gillespie), who run away from home to Mexico to party for several days until one accidentally kills a prostitute. While deciding what to do about the mess they've gotten themselves into a vagrant (Daniel Buran) approaches them in a bar and tells them he knows about their predicament. He gives them the infamous puzzle box which they later open and then go missing. The story flashes back and forth in time to the boys' families as they attempt to piece together what happened to the missing youths. They too open the puzzle box and must face Pinhead and his cenobites as well.

The acting, writing and directing are all weak but because of the subject matter the film is still interesting and somewhat horrifying. It would be pretty hard to really mess up Barker's original concept; putting 'Pinhead' and the cenobites into anything is always going to make for a compelling story. There has been a lot of press about the fact that the film is advertised as 'from the mind of Clive Barker' and Barker says this is untrue, (pretty profanely). So he obviously doesn't think too much of the film and with good reason. It was rushed through production and doesn't do true justice to his original vision at all. Like with pizza though, even a bad 'Pinhead' film is good horror. If you're a fan of the series you could still at least be somewhat amused (I was).

Watch our review show 'MOVIE TALK' at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AgaAYiwY0g0
12 out of 22 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
This beats "Hellworld" by miles!
MrBigDub26 October 2011
This is my first review so please bear with me. I am a recent fan of the Hellraiser series and Hellraiser 3: Hell on Earth is my personal favorite.

I purchased this movie, Hellraiser: Revelations, yesterday and I got to say; I'm not certain why everybody is bashing this one. This is NOT the worst Hellraiser sequel ("Hellworld" still retains that title). Victor Garcia has booted Rick Bota out of the director's chair and gave us a flick that, fortunately, is much closer to the first two movies (and probably with less than half the money) than "Hellworld".

The number one criticism seems to be Doug Bradley's absence. I do agree on this point. Mr. Bradley turned down this role because he knew he couldn't keep up with the two-week schedule. It's true, his presence would have improved the film immensely. Stephan Smith Collins and Fred Tatasciore do a decent job but, there is no substitute for Bradley. I find it interesting though, that they had to dub in another voice for Pinhead. Does Stephan Collins' voice really sound that bad?

Never the less, "Revelations" is a great sequel is it's own right. I like this one a lot more than the previous sequel. Clive Barker has distanced himself from this one despite the fact it's "Hellworld" not "Revelations" he should be concerned about. If you are watching the series in order; after "Deader" you might want to skip "Hellworld" and go straight to "Revelations". This is a much better movie. Doug Bradley may be sorely missed but, Rick Bota certainly isn't. I give this review 7 out of 10. One negative star for Doug Bradley's absence and two negative stars for Collins and Tatasciore giving us a not-as-effective Pinhead.
16 out of 33 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
worst of the series yet
charlie_mershon119 October 2011
The acting is terrible, the Pinhead character appears as an obese Unoriginal take on Bradley's original. Clive Barker should have this film banned for the damage it will do to the already declining series since Inferno. The special effects are unoriginal, the special effects are poor, and the cast is a hodgepodge of no bodies and unoriginal ideas.

I feel this is by far the worst of the series and I feel as others who have written reviews do, that they should either scrap the series and attempt to save face, or throw more money at it and have Clive Barker come back and redeem the series that I grew up with.
6 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews

Recently Viewed