While many fans consider Scott Derrickson's Hellraiser: Inferno to be one of the better sequels, creator Clive Barker doesn't share their view. Barker of course wrote the novella The Hellbound Heart, which he then adapted as writer and director into the 1987 classic Hellraiser. While Barker would never return to the Hellraiser director's chair, he at least had some creative involvement with Hellbound: Hellraiser 2, Hellraiser 3: Hell on Earth, and Hellraiser: Bloodline. Barker has a story credit on Hellbound, and was an executive producer on Hell on Earth and Bloodline.
Probably not coincidentally, when the Hellraiser franchise left theaters and landed in home video purgatory, Barker's creative role in the films ceased. That's probably for the best, as the direct to video sequels are mostly terrible. The clear standout, at least according to most, among the later Hellraiser movies was the fifth installment, 2000's Hellraiser: Inferno, directed and co-written by future Doctor Strange helmer Derrickson. Considering his career since, it makes sense that Derrickson might manage to excel despite the constraints of the direct to video world.
The premise and storytelling format of Hellraiser: Inferno is quite different than the prior films, but at the same time, it's also much closer in tone to the first two Hellraisers than the overly silly Hell on Earth and Bloodline. Despite Inferno's fairly positive reputation though, Barker isn't a fan, and that's putting it mildly.
Why Clive Barker Hated Scott Derrickson's Hellraiser 5 (& How The Director Responded)
In an interview around the time of Hellraiser: Inferno's release, Clive Barker made his unequivocal dislike of the film known, saying the following (via Barker's official website):
"[Hellraiser : Inferno] is terrible. It pains me to say things like that because nobody sets out in the morning to make a bad movie but you know these guys sent me a script and I said if you want me involved ask me let's do a deal and get into business, but I really don't think this works right now (talking about the script). They said we really don't want your opinion on it we are going to make the movie. So they went and made the movie, and it is just an abomination. I want to actively go on record as saying I warn people away from the movie. It's really terrible and it's shockingly bad, and should never have been made.
I really hate the way [Pinhead]'s been treated in this film. I depressed me. It upset me on behalf of Doug, on behalf of myself, on behalf of the people who love these movies. I thought it was disrespectful and I felt as though he'd been tagged on just because they wanted to call it a Hellraiser movie. But it didn't feel like a Hellraiser movie. It felt opportunistic to me."
As one can plainly see, Barker didn't mince his words. He hates Hellraiser: Inferno, thinks it doesn't do justice to the franchise or to the Pinhead character, and wishes it had never been made. While Inferno does generally get ranked as the best of the direct to video sequels, that doesn't mean people think it's perfect by any means, so it's not entirely surprising that Barker doesn't like it. As mentioned, it does differ from the setup of the prior sequels Barker had a hand in, essentially relegating Pinhead to a background role, abandoning all previous plot threads, and failing to explain Pinhead's return after his being killed off in Bloodline. That's explained by the fact that Inferno began life as an unrelated horror script, which Dimension Films then refashioned into a Hellraiser installment. In that light, Barker's issues become much more understandable.
Despite his status as a newcomer to the Hollywood scene at the time - Hellraiser: Inferno was his directorial debut - Scott Derrickson ultimately offered a public statement of his own, responding to Barker's criticisms and defending his movie:
"[Clive's] reaction, I must admit, was not entirely unexpected. The Hellraiser franchise had (in my opinion) travelled too far in one direction and had quite simply run out of steam. The only interesting path to take in creating another sequel seemed to be the path of total reinvention. Of course Clive Barker isn't going to appreciate that. I never expected that he would appreciate seeing the treasured iconography of his brainchild tossed out the window and replaced with a whole new set of rules. But it seems to me that I made a movie that is too good or at least too provocative for him to just simply dismiss, as he obviously dismissed Hellraiser: Bloodline. This movie actually upset him, and I think I know why...
This is, in fact, a very good film. It is philosophically ambitious (unlike Hellraiser II, III, or IV), and it represents a moral framework outside that of the previous Hellraiser films and (apparently) outside that of Clive Barker's personal taste. Quite simply, I subverted Clive Barker's franchise with a point of view that he does not share, and I think that really pisses him off.
I'm honestly not angry about Mr. Barker's comments, and I would even return the gesture of calling him "very nice". However, I do want readers to note that his distaste for the film was not due to it's lack of intrigue or quality, but rather to it's violation of what he deems to be interesting (if not sacred) about the Hellraiser mythology.
So in short, viewers need to watch this picture with an open mind, and remember that Clive Barker has only made one good picture, and perhaps for that reason, he's a little territorial when it comes to the man with the pins in his head."
It's actually pretty impressive that Derrickson had the guts to fire back at Barker like that so early in his own career, but at the same time, Barker's assessment of his film was quite harsh. Derrickson offers an admirable defense of his vision for Hellraiser: Inferno, and why he made the creative choices he did. Interestingly enough, time seems to have cooled Derrickson on Inferno's perceived greatness a bit, and he's since praised Barker's work as an author. While it's unknown if Barker has similarly moved on past his dislike for the fifth Hellraiser film, one can hope.