Hellraiser III: A Hot Mess... But Is It A Guilty Pleasure?

Okay, so I'm working my way through Barker's filmography (and the Hellraiser series as a whole, obviously) and... Hellraiser III: Hell on Earth. Hoo boy. It's... something. Definitely a step down from the first two, which, let's be honest, is a pretty common sentiment. I've been trying NOT to compare every movie to the originals, but it's hard, alright? I find myself more focused on the later works, especially the directors of these films as that's part of my personal project. I mean, Pinhead running rampant in a nightclub? A reporter trying to stop him? It just felt so... generic compared to the gothic horror of the first two. And the new Cenobites? The CD Head? The Camerahead? Seriously? They just felt so forced and cartoonish. Not nearly as unsettling or thematically resonant as Chatterer or Butterball. But, I can't lie, there are parts I kinda dug? The dream sequences were pretty cool, and Terry Farrell as Joey was solid, I was entertained. So, guilty pleasure territory? I will say that Doug Bradley brings it as Pinhead, as usual. He really commits to the role, even when the material is... questionable. And it's interesting to see him play the 'good' Elliot Spencer seperated from the 'evil' Pinhead. That whole concept was actually fairly original. So, my question is this: am I alone in thinking this movie is a goofy, flawed, but oddly entertaining entry in the Hellraiser franchise? And does anyone know why the director decided to play with the new cenobite designs? I'm genuinely curious about the creative decisions behind this one, because it feels like such a departure from the original vision.