Hellraiser: Demons to some, angels, to others …

21st February, 2009.

Yep, I know it’s another old movie.

But one that’s interesting to watch, I always think …

And you’ve probably worked out that a Saturday night movie is getting to be something of a habit, by now, with Hellraiser being a bit of a special request from an old friend.

Honestly, Adrian, I’d’ve baked a cake, if I’d known …

Either way, myself, Adrian, and Allison were all in for this one.

I’ve tied the IMDb page into the title, as usual, but to summarise, it’s the story of what happens when Larry Cotton (Andrew Robinson – Garak, from Star Trek: Deep Space 9) and his wife, Julia (Clare Higgins – recently on stage as Jocasta, in the National’s production of Oedipus) move into the unused family home in England. With unexpected results, as Larry brother, Frank, is … around …

Well, I’ll try not to say too much, except to say that an entirely theoretically H.P Lovecraft title, The Horrible Thing In The Attic got a mention.

Now, I’ll admit to liking this one.

And, although it’s showing its age*, it’s worth watching as I personally think its got things to offer.

First off?   Is a simple question: what exactly do we call Hell?

Pinhead – one of the more striking characters in the film and an iconic figure to horror fans – the apparent leader of the Cenobites pursuing Larry’s brother, Frank, says of them that they are “ … demons to some, angels to others.”

Ambiguous?

Certainly.

But the Cenobites are summoned by Frank at the start of the film and offer him experiences “… beyond limits.”

The way the film seems to set up the back-story implies that one has to call the Cenobites; the opening scenes show Frank buying the puzzle box used for this purpose.

Which, to me, begs a simple question.

Can hell be hell if you have gone there willingly?

Indeed, are looking forward to the trip?

There’s probably a lot to be said there, on that; probably Googling for it would be an idea, it occurs to me that many philosophers, theologians and psychologists – certainly a lot of people more educated or eloquent than me – have written a lot, about punishment and the extent of personal responsibility.

But it does show, I think, that there are times that we must accept responsibility for things we have done.

Trying to get away from the choices we make, in the way that Frank tries escaping the Cenobites is something that could back-fire.

Julia, incidentally, seems much more accepting of what happens and of the consequences of her actions.

However, it’s where we have innocence on our side, or ignorance – I have Larry’s daughter, Kirsty, in mind, here – that we find a different situation.

The scene I’m thinking of, here, is where Kirsty opens the box. She knows only that it’s got something to do with her situation, but not what, and wishes to find out.

And is introduced to the Cenobites chasing Frank.

Now her position is different, it seems to me: she is, effectively, an innocent in events.

And as such, it seems to me that she is granted some degree of leeway by Pinhead, and the other Cenobites: they seem to realise they are dealing with someone who’s called them accidentally, and are prepared to negotiate for something they want.

Which is the crux of the movie, it seems. Not just personal choice, but knowledge of what the choice means, for oneself and others.

Someone I knew once explained three words of importance to those on the fetish/BDSM scene: Safe, Sane, Consensual.

They also emphasised that, while these were important, so was knowledge of the lifestyle: knowledge of what was going on was and is important for truly informed consent.

Otherwise things could go bad, rather than be enjoyable.

I’ll leave it there, for now; it is getting late.

* Reminds me, you can read about the remake, here.