This nikka is a legend.
Kind of wild when you type in Clive Barker's name. He looks drastically different in every photo. I'm assuming this photo was taken in the 90s? Either way, this dude is a legend. To get where his mind has been creatively, one must let go of all ego to be prepared to be labeled "weird". You have to have the type of thoughts that would get you disowned from society and even from your friends and family. The type of imagination that could make a man go insane. I think of Clive Barker now when I think of someone who lives for the love of the art and creation. His unique style to his monsters, and approach to horror in general, leaves me speechless. I'm not saying the horror game is lacking right now, but it's lacking in the Clive Barker teritorry-- if that makes any sense. Obviously there can only be one but there should be more trend setters rather than trend followers in our genre.
I brought up a few pages ago how I thought it was weird that he doesn't get the love that he deserves. Someone here mentioned that it might be because he's British and not American so we don't praise him on the same level as King. At first I agreed but my perspective changed. I'm taking a course for creative writing development where writers learn what we can do with our careers. It's come to my knowledge that the publishing industry boom, and the only reason why it has any legs left, comes from works of two authors-- JK Rowling and Stephen King. Of course Harry Potter is the reason for Rowling, but everything King writes is an automatic hit by the common author's standards. King is bigger than the horror genre because he's important to literature in general, plus everything that man writes becomes a movie. It absolutely makes sense now.
Would it be cool if Barker was on a bigger platform of appreciation? Sure. But to be honest, he has a strong cult following. He's also recognized as an all-time GOAT in the horror community. What more can you need you know? I started reading his Book of Blood short story collection. I'm about 3 stories in so far and one of them is the Midnight Meat Train. I know that's a movie as well which is crazy to think how a lot of his stories are movies too. I haven't watched the film version but the novel version is fukking wild.
I digress. Let me get to the movies I've recently watched from him.
Hellraiser (1987)
Hellraiser II (1988)
Hellraiser III (1992)
Now I didn't do any behind the scenes research to find out why the series falls off after two, then drastically becomes a laughing stock after three, but from a story structure standpoint I can tell why. First the obvious answer-- the plots just fukking sucks after two. But Hellraiser eventually suffers from what all horror movie franchises suffer from. The films feed off the monsters' popularity. It's always good to have a character that you can make a lot of money from. But when that happens the movie suffers from selecting a cast nobody gives a fukk about. Micheal Myers needs his Laurie, Freddie Kruger needs his Nancy, and Ghostface needs his Sydney. This is why I believe the Friday the 13th series suffers the most by regulating into a series so bad it's good for horror fans teritorry. You never give a fukk about any of the cast Jason deals with but rather you watch to see them all die. The Hellraiser cast was excellent, especially the Kristy and Julia.
What really makes the first film is the family drama. Julia's affair with Frank on some bonny and clyde thrown in a horror blender-- then mix it with the husband and brother, Larry, who is indeed corny but actually a great dude personally, and then throw in the step mother and daughter ugly dynamic in. We have a great recipe for a shyt ton of conflict. It's clear that Julia and Frank are the antagonists (especially Julia for the franchise biggest villain); and not the cenobites. Pinhead and his gang aren't actually bad guys at all in the first two films. It's not their fault humans keep summoning them when they're just minding their business. Once you realize this and then realize that they're the background noise while the mainstory is the family issues then you realize how fukking great the delivery is.
Part 2 works well based on the creativity and once again the characters. The idea of taking the viewer inside the world of where the Cenobites live is a fan's dream come true. Such an interesting concept to explore the universe inside the puzzle. I mean if there was more time given they could have went deeper with monsters and what else is there. But for the limited time they had they did enough to give the fans what we all wanted. Character wise Kirsty is one hell of a protagonist that I feel doesn't get the proper flowers she derseves amongst all the legendary protagonist in horror films. Also, character wise I know Julia is the ultimate villain for the series to the point they wanted her to be their "Freddy Kruger" until she rejected the idea, but honestly in part 2 I don't think she's the star of the film. Dr. Channard is the better antagonist and helps make part 2 for what it was. His motivation of curiosity which probably comes with the habit of being a doctor leads him into resurrecting Julia, becoming a cenobite himself, and not only does he kill a majority of the people in his own hospital but he takes down Pinhead's entire crew. His cenobite was scary as fukk disregarding the fact he had a penis on his head. (The cenobites designs are examples of Clive Barker monsters having their own unique style).
I know they had hoped to ride the series through Julia. I say the series suffered more when Kirsty left. You can always replace the human villains as long as Pinhead is apart of the catalyst. But there was no replacing Kristy. Halloween is like the only series where everyone somewhat puts a secondary main character in Jamie on a popularity level with Laurie, but even then it's not the same. I say all that to say this though. Hellraiser honestly should have only been a trilogy with Kirsty still in the movie with a completely different written up story that we actually got in three. Part three is just okay and not even because of the story or characters (both sucked in my opinion). It was just cool to see Pinhead destroy shyt. Also, this film felt 90ish if that can make any sense to you as well. I will let the film slide for what it is. But I'm standing on the idea this series should have been a trilogy with the focus being on Kirsty.
Lords of Illusions (1995)
This is one of those films where I feel that you only enjoy it if you're a big fan of the director/writer, and if you appreciate horror. I enjoyed this film for was it was but I had to keep in mind at the context of when this film came out. The beginning was sort of corny with cheesy and horrible acting but after a while I got used to this story's rules of how things worked. The movie came out in 1995 so a lot of the films ideas are watered down with the PS1 graphic-esqe style. This film could actually be 1000 times better in today's setting with the advanced animation with an updated and polished script. I really like the cast selection for this movie. Everyone's roles were believable. I liked Phillip Swann as a character the most even though he was a simp in the second half of the story. Also, it's weird af how his lover was the little girl chained up in the beginning. The actual main character for Lords of Illusions left me indifferent. I guess he was there to save Dorothea from all that evil cult shyt. Other than that he did nothing personally for me. Nix was a great and scary villain. Was this one of the earlier films in horror to actually use cults as a topic for the genre? Seems like a recurring theme we see at least once a year now. Enjoyable film.
Do not call your own kids that
