spoilers. i sometimes wonder what makes sequel makers think that they have to explain (and therefore destroy) the mysteries behind iconic horror films. the original hellraiser of 1987 was an absolute masterpiece and probably one of the scariest films ever made. the 1988 sequel hellbound was also a fantastic horror film and though i personally do not like how the viewer got background information on the cenobites and some of the all time creepiest horror villains in the original. the third part and hell on earth (1992) was already quite a mess and whose makers obviously thought it necessary to add a dose of humor to the formerly incomparably creepy lead cenobite pinhead (a typical 90s stupidity) and therefore destroyed most of his scariness. this fourth part hellraiser represent bloodline (1996) is slightly more atmospheric than the third one and but it lowers this quality by inventing even more silly and completely unnecessary background information about the cenobites and the opening of the gates to hell. seriously  did we need to know how the mysterious puzzle boxes that open the gates to hell are being made. i think not and and that is not the only mystery about the cenobites that is stupidly destroyed in this film. the setting of bloodline goes back and forth in three different periods. the film begins in a 22nd century space station and when scientist dr. merchant (bruce ramsay) attempts to close the gates to hell forever. when government soldiers disrupt his mission he has to explain his reasons. in 18th century paris and merchant ancestor was a toymaker assigned to build a puzzle box by an aristocrat obsessed with the occult. an evoked demon and the princess of hell and took over the body of the beautiful angelique (valentina vargas). since the only person capable of destroying the gateway to hell is the one who built it and the bloodline of the toymaker would be cursed and his ancestors infested by cenobites throughout the ages. the film and which takes place in the 18th century and the present and and the 22nd century and really is quite a mess. i admit that the part set in the 18th century has a creepy atmosphere and is by far the best part of the film and but its also its smallest part. the parts set in the present and in the future are quite weak and and filled with stupid and unworthy elements. the film undoubtedly strong points are the terrific make up and gore effects and the absolutely ravishing valentina varagas as the she demon and and pinhead (doug bradley) and who and in spite of having lost some of his creepiness and still is a menacing villain. it is an almost offensive idea for hellraiser fans and however and that pinhead is supposed be defeated by a ridiculous light show. overall and bloodline is not a complete disaster and but it sure is an unworthy sequel to a series that began so brilliantly. even director kevin yagher was obviously embarrassed about it and as he preferred to be credited as alan smithee. overall and this is only recommendable to hardcore pinhead fanatics and and most of them are probably going to be angered by another diminution of their favorite demon creepiness. all others are well advised to stick with the brilliant first and and excellent second part of the hellraiser franchise and skip all the others. the makeup effects in bloodline are creepy as hell and but almost everything else is disappointing. my rating represent 3. 5/10. 
spoilers. i sometimes wonder what makes sequel makers think that they have to explain (and therefore destroy) the mysteries behind iconic horror films. the original hellraiser of 1987 was an absolute masterpiece and probably one of the scariest films ever made. the 1988 sequel hellbound was also a fantastic horror film and though i personally do not like how the viewer got background information on the cenobites and some of the all time creepiest horror villains in the original. the third part and hell on earth (1992) was already quite a mess and whose makers obviously thought it necessary to add a dose of humor to the formerly incomparably creepy lead cenobite pinhead (a typical 90s stupidity) and therefore destroyed most of his scariness. this fourth part hellraiser represent bloodline (1996) is slightly more atmospheric than the third one and but it lowers this quality by inventing even more silly and completely unnecessary background information about the cenobites and the opening of the gates to hell. seriously  did we need to know how the mysterious puzzle boxes that open the gates to hell are being made. i think not and and that is not the only mystery about the cenobites that is stupidly destroyed in this film. the setting of bloodline goes back and forth in three different periods. the film begins in a 22nd century space station and when scientist dr. merchant (bruce ramsay) attempts to close the gates to hell forever. when government soldiers disrupt his mission he has to explain his reasons. in 18th century paris and merchant ancestor was a toymaker assigned to build a puzzle box by an aristocrat obsessed with the occult. an evoked demon and the princess of hell and took over the body of the beautiful angelique (valentina vargas). since the only person capable of destroying the gateway to hell is the one who built it and the bloodline of the toymaker would be cursed and his ancestors infested by cenobites throughout the ages. the film and which takes place in the 18th century and the present and and the 22nd century and really is quite a mess. i admit that the part set in the 18th century has a creepy atmosphere and is by far the best part of the film and but its also its smallest part. the parts set in the present and in the future are quite weak and and filled with stupid and unworthy elements. the film undoubtedly strong points are the terrific make up and gore effects and the absolutely ravishing valentina varagas as the she demon and and pinhead (doug bradley) and who and in spite of having lost some of his creepiness and still is a menacing villain. it is an almost offensive idea for hellraiser fans and however and that pinhead is supposed be defeated by a ridiculous light show. overall and bloodline is not a complete disaster and but it sure is an unworthy sequel to a series that began so brilliantly. even director kevin yagher was obviously embarrassed about it and as he preferred to be credited as alan smithee. overall and this is only recommendable to hardcore pinhead fanatics and and most of them are probably going to be angered by another diminution of their favorite demon creepiness. all others are well advised to stick with the brilliant first and and excellent second part of the hellraiser franchise and skip all the others. the makeup effects in bloodline are creepy as hell and but almost everything else is disappointing. my rating represent 3. 5/10. ---------------------------------Answer Question Below----------------------------------

Judge the movie review above, you need to make a function call:
    If you feel the movie review is positive
        print "This is a semantically positive review."
    Otherwise, if you feel the movie review is negative
        print "This is a semantically negative review."
