That wasn't the real Pinhead in this
-
Archived from the IMDb Discussion Forums — Hellraiser III: Hell on Earth
MisterBabadook — 12 years ago(August 13, 2013 04:24 PM)
If you want the true Pinhead go and watch the 1st and 2nd films. They tried too hard to make him like someone like Freddy Krueger in this one. In the first 2 films he was a very calm and menacing figure who would even make deals with Kirsty and let her go. In this he just went around on a killing spree for no reason killing anyone he came across and laughing like Freddy after every kill.
Wasn't it he only killed those who opened the box looking for pain and pleasure? I mean he let Tiffany go in Hellbound after she opened the box because she wasn't the one who desired it. In this film he's nothing more than a Freddy/Jason figure jut killing anyone, his mystique and presence is completely gone in this film.
Also his voice was too regular in this, it didn't have that godly demonic tone it had in the previous films.
When Gotham is ashes you have my permission to die. -Bane -
HellboundHero — 12 years ago(August 14, 2013 03:15 AM)
The difference was explained though. What made Pinhead so restrained and ordered in the first two movies was Elliot. Here, it's Elliot's evil made flesh. It's actually not dissimilar to the old school trope where a character is split into two people who each represent a side of their personality. Think Star Trek's "The Enemy Within" and how Kirk's aggressive, passionate half acted. The way I look at it is Elliot is the human spirit untainted by flesh, while Pinhead is the sum of his human desire, which left unchecked is destructive.
-
jorgito2001 — 11 years ago(September 30, 2014 05:19 AM)
I agree with the OP in that the villains were usually the HUMANS, not Pinhead himself (which was more of an evil moderatorlol). Here he was full on "Freddy'd" out
At least they tried to explain that with the split of Pinhead's humanity.Im gonna punch you in the cooter, I swear to God!
-
Forgotten_Hero — 11 years ago(October 27, 2014 12:27 PM)
In some respects, Pinhead lost some of that calm and eerie aura about him. His speech wasn't quite as refined and they didn't have that white glow effect. He would have never said "stinking" as an adjective in the first two films.
On the other hand, I feel like the film gave Pinhead back his strength. The second film essentially presented us with a watered down, morally conflicted Pinhead who lost a fight to a doctor-turned-cenobite. That left such a bad taste in my mouth that it took me two years to get around to watching the third film.
Overall, the first film is still the best, but I like this one a lot better than the second film. -
BHt88 — 9 years ago(May 04, 2016 01:15 AM)
yup it wasn't "pinhead" they killed the character (as freddy Krueger in NOES 2)
THIS is not pinhead
BHT RISES myspace.com/blackheart60 -
headstar — 6 years ago(January 24, 2020 01:52 AM)
Nobody ever said Pinhead is good or even neutral. It's obvious he was a full fledged bad guy waiting to come out, considering he's a demon from a chaotic dimension. It was the split from Elliot Spencer's soul in part 2 that created the fully evil Pinhead.
Part 3 technically still had the humans as bad guys plot. The film had JP Monroe, though he ended up being Pinhead's lackey.