Hellraiser 2: Is it Just Me, or Does It Go Full Dante's Inferno?

Okay, fellow Gen X'ers and horror hounds, moviebuff_marc here. Just re-watched Hellbound: Hellraiser II, and wow... it's still a trip. The original Hellraiser, that's straight-up Clive Barker gold, right? But the sequel really kicks things into another gear. It's like Barker read Dante's Inferno and said, "Hold my beer." Am I the only one getting those vibes? Specifically, the whole exploration of Leviathan and the labyrinthine cenobite world – talk about descending into the depths of depravity! And the way they turned Dr. Channard into a literal monster? Forget Pinhead for a sec, Channard was next-level disturbing, even more so than Julia in the first one. The special effects, cheesy as they might be now, were groundbreaking back in the day. They just don't make practical effects like they used to. But here's my question: did any of you find it a little... rushed, maybe? Like they tried to cram too much hellish imagery into one film? It felt like the first one was more focused and terrifying, but the second one was ambitious as hell. A little TOO ambitious, perhaps? I also always thought the score wasn't quite as iconic, even though it's still great. Anyway, let's hear your thoughts. Is Hellraiser II a worthy sequel that expands the mythology, or a case of diminishing returns? What character scared you the most (besides Pinhead, obvi)? And does anyone else see the Dante influence, or am I just overthinking it? Let's discuss!