Hellraiser (1987) - Book vs. Movie: Did They Nail the Terror?

Okay, so I finally watched the OG Hellraiser (1987) and I'm coming straight here because I need to discuss! As a huge Clive Barker fan (and a HUGE fan of The Hellbound Heart novella it's based on), I went in with pretty high expectations. Honestly? I wasn't disappointed, but I also wasn't completely blown away. I think the movie gets the atmosphere perfectly. The dread, the claustrophobia of the house, the whole vibe of pain and pleasure being intertwined... Barker as the director really brought that twisted sensibility to life. But I almost felt like the cenobites, Pinhead especially (who, let's be honest, is iconic) were too much? In the book, they're more… ambiguous, less overtly monstrous. The movie kind of leans into the gore and body horror (which, don't get me wrong, is effective!), but it almost loses some of the psychological creepiness of the source material. What do you guys think? Specifically, the scene where Frank reassembles himself - SO GROSS but visually amazing. However, I felt a lot more sympathy when reading his suffering, than watching the movie and thinking "ew, what a creep!" Did the movie do Frank dirty by making him less of a victim, but more of a manipulative villain? The ending deviated a bit from the book's overall themes, too. Is this better for movie audiences? Or does it sell out the source material? I'm torn. The movie is visually stunning and definitely unsettling, but I kinda miss some of the more subtle, nuanced horror from the book. What scenes do you guys think nailed the adaptation, and which ones fell short?