Kyle: A question: is it too much flesh or not enough flesh?
Mary: Wow, this is a big thing to start off with, isn’t it? For me, this Hellraiser has too much flesh, because I personally prefer the latex and leather of the original. That said, I think the way the flesh was stripped off of some of the cenobites was honestly very creative. I’d never have thought to use skin as a stylish hood.
But maybe we should back up before diving into such a question.
As you might have guessed, friend of the pod Kyle is joining me to talk about Hellraiser (2022), the latest installment of the Hellraiser franchise. It’s been years since we’ve gotten a Hellraiser movie, and even longer since we’ve gotten a good one. I know that we’ve both been eagerly anticipating this release, so I’m pumped to finally get to discuss it with you. Or, well, discuss it more. We did talk about it when we watched it! What stood out to you most about this film? What were you most excited to see?
(Some spoilers for the Hellraiser series to follow)
Kyle: Debatable that this is one of the first good ones in a while. I mean, Pinhead haunting an online game is a recipe for success if you ask me.
I was, unsurprisingly, most excited about the cenobites and how they'd be reimagined for this movie. Their lore has always been interesting to me, and I'm glad to see that it was a bit more fleshed out here.
Fleshed out. Get it?
Mary: I think I was most excited to see Jamie Clayton as the Priest, or Pinhead, or whatever we want to call them.
Kyle: The shadow of Doug Bradley looms large, but I think Jamie did a great job spreading her chains—with Bradley's blessing no less!
For many reasons, I love that Jamie Clayton was cast in this role. I fell in love with her in Sens8 and was so pleased to see her cast as Pinhead. I think she did a great job at showing the power and constraint of the Hell Priest from the original novella and the first few movies.
Mary: Aaaabsolutely. I knew Clayton was in Sens8, but I could never fully get into that show. That said, she’s gorgeous and makes a beautiful version of the character. I think with a character as iconic as Pinhead, newcomers to the role have to make their own mark instead of relying on Bradley’s performance as a guide. Clayton definitely did that, and I think that she’s playing a quieter, more reflective Pinhead. There are times in the film when I can really see the wheels turning in her head as she considers the situation.
Kyle: Yes! And, to me, that's always what set Pinhead apart from the other monsters of the 80s: the level of placidity and calculation. I think that Michael and Jason achieve this only on the surface because they don't talk, Freddie has too much to say, and Chuckie… is a murder doll.
I'm reminded of that scene where Riley, following the rules that Pinhead set out, stabs the Chatterer with the configuration, and with a slight pause and a smirk, Pinhead calls the chains to destroy their fellow cenobite. There's almost a sense of glee in watching Riley play the game.
Mary: Look, if you get stabbed, you gotta get the chains. It’s just the rules.
This brings up the topic I’ve been wrestling with the most about this movie and how it fits in the series: choice. Previously, it seems that solving the puzzle box calls the Cenobites, but it doesn’t guarantee that they’ll actually do anything to the puzzle solver. I recently rewatched Hellraiser: Hellbound and when Tiffany figures out the box, Pinhead very pointedly says, “It’s not hands that call us, but desire.” They spare Tiffany because she didn’t know about the cenobites or intend to call them. Instead, they come for Dr. Channard, who had forced Tiffany to solve the box (or tricked her? Idk). My point is, choice and intent are very important. You’ve got to want to join the explorers of the boundaries of sensation.
In the new adaptation, it seems that getting stabbed with the puzzle box marks you for death, whether you know what it is or want to go on that journey. Several people are stabbed intentionally by others, or accidentally trigger the box. They don’t really have a choice in the matter, but they end up dead anyway. Does this film abandon choice and change the canon? Or is this something that’s in line with other films?
I’m not entirely sure that made sense, but here we are!
Kyle: This is a good point and not one that I’ve thought of before. In the first few films, there was a larger focus on intent (or maybe desire?) in regards to solving the box, but that seems to have been thrown out the window for this one. It’s not really a choice that I like but one that in some ways makes sense with my idea of lawful evil aligned cenobites. Rules are rules and all that.
I think it also shows that they take their business seriously in this film, which is why I think Pinhead’s letting Riley skirt the rules is interesting. I’m reminded of Hellraiser III: Hell on Earth where Pinhead takes on a much more sinister role as [spoiler redacted].
All that to say, I think it’s more in line with the depiction of the cenobites in the novella and the first film but not so much moving forward. Though we’d have to cross reference the sacred texts, The Scarlet Gospels and the Hellraiser comic series, to be sure.
Mary: Let’s talk about the madman behind it all: Roland Voight.
Kyle: You mean Dr. Luka Kovač, star of ER, played by Goran Višnjić? Yes, please.
He was admittedly not my favorite character because he’s barely a character, but I think he served a very important role in terms of plot development. He’s the Frank of this movie without the blessing of “Come to daddy.” I definitely liked the “apparatus” that was embedded in his spine chest. Specifically, I liked how pretty the item was, especially in contrast with its purpose—spindling his nerves? The Configuration itself is a beautiful device in all its forms, and the house that Voight built as a prison seems to follow a similar design. It’s an interesting contrast with all the gore and the cenobites with their too much/not enough flesh paradox.
Mary: You’re right that he’s barely a character, but we always seem to need some sort of conniving jerk to move things along, and he’s it here. It’s interesting to me that Voight isn’t like, entirely put off by the horrors he’s faced at the hands of the cenobites, and he’s down to accept more gifts from them if it helps him out.
Do you know about how a cenobite is made? We get a peek at it here, but dang, what even. Seems bad all around! I know that in Hellbound Dr. Channard has a brief stint as a cenobite, and Pinhead was obviously human at one point (they all were, I guess), but it was interesting to see a new cenobite get made here—especially since he so intentionally wanted to join that club.
Not this!
Kyle: He definitely knew what he was getting into whereas a lot of previous characters in the series were hapless victims of the box or manipulated into opening it. Many characters stumble or are tricked into opening the box while others do it to have all those new experiences without fully realizing how many chains or teeth will be involved in those experiences. Voight knows what he wants out of the Configuration and knows how to get it. At least, I think he gets what he wants?
Which is to be a cenobite? Seems like a bad prize to me, but I think Voight and I have different values. In the 1992 masterpiece Hellraiser III: Hell on Earth (and I think in the next film, too), there are actually a few people who get turned into cenobites, but these are usually punishments by Pinhead on innocent people (i.e. people who didn’t solve the puzzle box). Like you said, this is the first time that someone seems to really want to be a cenobite.
Strange enough to say, the scene where Voight was transformed was beautiful and angelic, though also very alien. Leviathan, the floating lozenge of evil, feels very much like a Great Old One, so I think the alien and angelic can happily sit together there. The creation of the other cenobites felt much more gruesome, so this is another change this film makes to the lore, but I’m a fan of it.
Mary: Oh definitely! It feels like we’re supposed to get the vibe that the cenobites have a completely different perception of what is good and beautiful. To them, the transformation process is probably lovely, since it explores the boundaries of sensation or whatever. There’s one cenobite from the comics—who’s maybe just called the Sculptor—who creates other cenobites as art pieces. It’s definitely an experience that requires a lot of careful flesh placement.
Do you think this movie is hopeful that there will be sequels? Obviously, we are always hopeful, but it seems like the film is looking forward, too.
Kyle: They spent too much money on that transformation sequence not to have it lead into a new movie. I’m definitely biased because I don’t think there can be too many Hellraiser movies, but I would love to see the lore continue to be developed and explored while also seeing how this generation of cenobites helps the world plumb the depths of pain and pleasure.
Mary: That’s a good point. Voight’s transformation hints that there’s more on the way, and I think reviews have been pretty good for a Hellraiser joint? The series has seen some low lows. I’m thinking specifically of the movies that Dimension Films made to keep the rights to the franchise, both of which were made in a short amount of time with a nothing budget. I’m hopeful that this—and the HBO series that’s allegedly on the way—revives the franchise a bit.
Hellraiser is always going to have a place in horror, and it’s definitely influenced things that have come after it. What do you think makes the series so appealing? Why do we—both personally and as a society—keep coming back to it?
Kyle: For me, the series is deeply nostalgic. It’s one of the first horror films that I saw that, even as a youth, really dropped my jaw. I also really like Barker’s other works, so these movies are important to me because they were one of my first introductions to horror.
More broadly, I think that these movies are a safe window for people to see bad things through: there’s gratuitous violence and gore, selfishness and pride, and sexual deviancy and taboo. But, since these things are all promoted by the evil cenobites, viewers can see these things without actually taking part in them. And, then the box is solved—the evil defeated.
Mary: I think that’s a great way to look at it. The cenobites aren’t necessarily evil, maybe, but they’re definitely not of this world in a cool, sexy, horrifying way. The series—and I guess Barker more broadly—touches on so many aspects of kink culture, but never jumps so far in as to make viewers SUPER uncomfortable. Or maybe I’m just broken from watching so many Hellraiser movies.
I also think that the series deals with the warring forces of desire and obligation, knowing what you should do, but still being curious about things that seem taboo. If you completely give into those temptations, you’re doomed to be a cenobite (and it’s not a fun time), but if you resist—or just dabble a little—you can live to see another day.