TheRetroCritic

Clive Barker's cult franchise was always going to aim higher and higher. After all, this was a crazy-ass concept with endless possibilities and a lot of potential for creative, far-out developments. The first Hellraiser took place mostly inside this one house but the claustrophobic aspect of the story worked really well. Its sequel, Hellraiser II: Hellbound , followed a slow build-up with some neat sequences taking place inside the demon Box itself. It was a great way to expand that world and I personally couldn't wait to see more of that in the second sequel. So what's all this shit?! You've got Pinhead and co stuck inside some pillar statue, some boring douchebags with problems we really couldn't give two shits about and a first half so dull I felt like putting on the awesome Phantasm quadrilogy instead to balance things out. Granted the first couple of scenes are fun and the second half picks up promptly but it never becomes good: only sillier, more ridi

  Underrated second sequel to Psycho with Anthony Perkins doing a better job than in the previous film, and not only in front of the camera. His directing is obviously filled with Hitchcockian influence and as clunky as it can be, overall he does pretty well. Of course, there are silly moments here and there and it can get kinda messy but it is enjoyable nonetheless. I must warn you though, Psycho III is a very different monster to its predecessors. Psycho II took its flawed character seriously and told his unlikely story in a compassionate way. Sure the ending was silly but for the most part, Psycho II did ok to stay focused. Psycho III however, is classic slasher flick fare: Norman is back to his old tricks and there's no bullshitting around! This third instalment is often seen as the lesser of the Psycho sequels, and wrongly so. For one thing it's infinitely more entertaining than Psycho II and Perkins clearly has a ball going nuts once again and directing