Split Second (1992) Poster

(1992)

User Reviews

Review this title
138 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
6/10
A cheesy monster serial killer B movie starring Rutger Hauer? I'm all the way in.
oneguyrambling28 December 2011
Split Second is hardly essential film-making, but it is a prime example of how to make a low budget film more entertaining than it has a right to be. Put another way, if there is a calculation that divides a budget by entertainment value, Split Second might not lead the way, but it is a damn sight ahead of many so-called 'blockbusters' in value for money.

But still you can't ignore the fact that this film runs on the smell of an oily rag, it's evident from the first frame all the way to the reveal of the shonky 'beast' near the end, a creature that elicits more chuckles than screams.

In 2008 the global pollution problems created rising water levels, which left London largely underwater, stricken with a huge ongoing vermin problem, and created an almost endless night.

Or perhaps you missed it… (I love it when the 'movie future' becomes the past.) Rutger Hauer plays Stone, a hard nosed, grizzled veteran who works alone and ignores everything in the rule book. He is a hard drinkin' loose cannon who does things his way, and has done ever since his partner and best friend was killed by a notorious and as yet on the loose serial killer.

Well imagine our surprise when said killer reappears on the scene, literally ripping hearts from bodies and taking bites from his victims. Reluctantly allowed on the case only due to his previous experience with the killer, Stone is aghast (p*ssed might be more accurate but is a worse scrabble term) when he is saddled with a younger partner named Durkin who is everything he is not: a straight-laced, clean living logical thinker who not only follows the book but practically lives by it.

As the gnawed on bodies of the innocent pile up and Stone and Durkin nearly cross paths with the unseen killer many times it grows more evident that this case is perhaps more personal for both Stone and the pursued, with the lines between hunter and hunted becoming increasingly blurred. The last straw comes when a human heart is express posted to Stone – with a large bite already taken from it.

This is a fairly standard set up for many sci-fi flavoured films, the thing that differentiates Split Second is the humour. While hardly Beverly Hills Cop or Red Heat this film is laced with lashings of black humour of the driest kind, much of it from Durkin, who it would be fair to say is hardly the comedic type but still manages many of the best lines, his rant about finding 'big f*cking guns' after first contact with their prey still elicits a chuckle and his progressive hardening up as the film progresses is quite humorous.

The rest of the film is to be frank amateurish, when revealed the killer and most of his previous actions make no sense whatsoever. How a 10 foot tall long fanged alien/monster can lurk in nightclub corners unseen, manage to package and address a human heart to the right recipient and also write notes for his pursuers is beyond me.

Equally confusing is the presence of Kim Cattrall as a sex-object. As someone who has had the misfortune of seeing 12 minutes of Sex and the City any possibility of attraction is long since dead, despite the fact that when this was made she is in her so-called 'prime'. But here she is the dead partner's ex-wife, who is there to be occasionally nude and vulnerable… There is some mystical supernatural crap designed to justify – or distract us from – the situation, but misguided symbolism or not Split Second is less about the logic and more about the fun in watching Rutger Hauer play a bitter and violent cop as he chases some sort of monster.

Obviously cheap and filled with blood and a few laughs, Split Second provides a stronger budget : entertainment ratio than a thousand Transformers or Harry Potters ever could. It still isn't amazing but you could do a lot worse.

Final Rating – 6 / 10. Split Second might not even be around any more – I bought it many years ago on VHS and dragged that out the other night – but if you even pretend that you are a Rutger Hauer devotee you owe it to yourself to check it out.
30 out of 34 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
enjoyable fluff
revcosmo19 December 2005
If you don't like B-movies, then you should stop reading this review right now, and drop any interest in Split Second.

If you do DO like B-movies, check this one out, because it is a quintessential cult flick. Great hammy acting by Rutger Hauer and some of the supporting cast. (Note that great hammy acting is considerably different than great acting). The director actually did pretty well, establishing the post-apocalyptic mood with reasonable skill. The effects are godawful, but neat, just as it should be in this kind of movie. Lots of great one liners, especially from Hauer.

All in all, if you enjoy those good-because-they're-bad sci-fi flicks, this is a mighty enjoyable one. If you're looking for meaningful cinema... ummm.. well what are you doing looking up a movie about an alien serial killer?
57 out of 68 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Get yourself some bigger guns and enjoy this early 90s cheese classic.
Hey_Sweden12 January 2021
Rutger Hauer plays one big walking cliche in this amusingly, knowingly routine B flick that does have a sense of humour about itself. Hauer plays a surly, slovenly detective named Harley Stone in London in the "future" year of 2008. Global warming has resulted in the city being partially submerged in water. Stone stalks through this unusual setting in search of the serial killer who slaughtered his partner once upon a time. This particular killer loves to taunt Stone, and has a penchant for EATING the hearts of their victims. What Stone learns is that the psycho might be something other than human.

Excellent urban-Hell production design and moody cinematography are assets of this deliberately drab-looking cop vs. killer programmer with a true grungy aesthetic. Some people may feel that projects like this were way beneath Mr. Hauer, but the truth is that he always remains fun to watch, and he's clearly having a good time as this tormented protagonist. Kim Cattrall, on first glance, seems under-utilized as his love interest, but then she *does* get to help out during the final assault on our inhuman villain. Hauer has good odd-couple chemistry with Alastair Duncan as the eager-beaver new partner with book smarts regarding serial killers. Duncan is very amusing, and fun to watch himself. The supporting cast includes a couple of familiar faces: Alun Armstrong, American character actor Michael J. Pollard (popping up briefly to do his typical shtick as a rat catcher), Pete Postlethwaite, Ian Dury, and Tony Steedman.

The movie further benefits from its relentless and seemingly impossible-to-kill murderer, as well as a pretty good pace that results in a trim run time of just over an hour and a half. Its dialogue may sometimes be silly, but it's good that screenwriter Gary Scott Thompson (future creator of the "Fast and the Furious" franchise) and director Tony Maylam ("The Riddle of the Sands", "The Burning") refuse to ever take any of this too seriously. Viewers will also love the over the top gore and Stephen Norringtons' design of the monster (bearing more than a passing resemblance to a Xenomorph from the "Alien" franchise).

A good, mindless way to kill 91 minutes.

Seven out of 10.
13 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
How many cuts of Split Second are there?
hawk23-211 June 2008
I got a copy of the movie I recorded from the TV, and a DVD release. I was sorry to find out that the movie on DVD lack some crucial scenes that cripples the atmosphere. For example, there's no scene when Stone asks the girl on the steps of the residential house if she saw the monster. Just after the scene when Stone starts firing and get all the cops on himself here goes the scene in the men's bathroom. No ambulance, no nightmares, the scene, when Durkin sees Stone's scars and gets curious, is cut. So is the scene with Durkin's wife when he and Stone just drop in to warn her. Is there a theater cut on DVD? And is there a director's cut then for TV?
18 out of 21 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Good But Never Rises Above Its Straight to Video Status
no-skyline12 July 2005
Split Second is great at what it does delivering fast paced action filled b-movie sci-fi / noir. The acting is actually quite good, the plot interesting and well constructed and the action sequences just about deliver the goods on what was no doubt a tight budget.

Rutger Hauer does OK as the tough guy cop Harley Stone without ever really excelling, congratulations should go to Neil Duncan who brought humour to the movie as the irrepressible Detective Dick Durkin, Kim Cattral makes a pre sex in the city film appearance and does OK with the limited scope she's given.

It's an entertaining bit if sci-fi fluff the influences are obvious Blade Runner, Predator and Alien instantly spring to mind It never scales the heights of those films to transcend it's genre and as such is unlikely to appeal to anyone who doesn't go for this kind of B-movie style entertainment. However it does provide a good hour and a half of solid entertainment in an interesting environment, the rain lashed semi flooded London is an interesting premise and is explored as much as budget allows.

If you want good plot, fine acting and very big guns wrapped in a nice bit of trashy sci-fi then this could be the one for you. 7/10
36 out of 54 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
great b-movie fare
cthomas1234515 July 2003
For a serious horror movie, look elsewhere. For a b-movie that's right up there with Army of Darkness for amusement value and quotable lines, watch Split Second.

Stone and Durkin are the Gritty Cop and Sidekick who hunt down a mystery killer who taunts them at every step. It has supernatural strength and speed. They have guns. Big F***ing Guns.

Definitely worth renting, and buying too if this is the kind of movie you like.
15 out of 21 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Marvelous character development
vinnielt15 June 2007
Dick Durkin (Neil Duncan) is the reason to watch 'Split Second'. Dick's plenty competent as the newly assigned partner of Harley Stone (Rutger Hauer) as the beginning unfolds, but he clearly questions whether Harley is fully sane.

However, as his character evolves along with the evidence of the case he's on, and especially in the moments immediately after the conversion of his partnership with Harley, the presentation of 'Dick' by Duncan is pure fun just to watch.

Decent action, decent suspense, plus a portion of horror and sci-fi. But watch it for Dick Durkin.
29 out of 45 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Has potential, but suffers from bad script, worse acting.
Rrrazorback15 April 2005
Warning: Spoilers
I watched this film years ago, when I was about 10. Hey I loved it, blood, breasts, monsters. All the elements of great movies.

I watched it again last night...and I was both impressed and appalled.

Visually the film has some great moments...though everything does seem overly dark and overly blue...which might begin to irritate some. More on the visuals later though, because where this film really fails, is the script...Good grief...it's awful. The film tries to carry a heavy mood throughout...this is disturbed by unbelievable moments of comedy relief which just do not seem to fit...and most of it derives from the "hard as nails, seen it all cop bouncing off the fresh faced but versatile rookie college kid." Not only that...but the characters reactions to otherwise disturbing and serious developments is unintentionally funny and otherwise unbelievable. With continual comments about the lead cops sanity...which do not seem to reflect his ability to have full access to the cop stations arsenal of ultra-destructive weaponry. Even after he bumps into his boss and informs him he is chasing a supernatural entity with a fully automatic shotgun...the scene spirals down into comedy. It just does not fit.

The acting is pretty shameful in most parts as well...with lines coming off stiff and heavy (though with a script like that...) Good points? A nice opening sequence...moody cyberpunk atmosphere of a futuristic London work quite well. The mould of the killers teeth was a shocking moment...which gets downplayed unfortunately...the killer itself has a really cool costume and normally provides an intimidating presence...(strong enough to run through brick walls!) But...he/it also has some inexplicable moments of stupidity...and acts without logic...how he committed the first murder with such ease in a public place, yet struggles with the rest is still beyond me.

All in all, a pretty mindless film which is just interesting enough on a visual level so as not to be a complete bomb.
14 out of 30 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Fun movie
megoobee24 March 2005
Yes, it's another futuristic doom and gloom type story and yes, the story is a little thin but it's fun regardless. I don't know if they meant for it to be a comedy but it's hilarious. Keep an eye and ear out for the one liners that are randomly tossed around during the course of the movie. You can't help but feel for the poor police chief. They didn't give him much to work with but he plays his role great. The way pre "Sex and the City" Kim Cattrall's acting is pretty bad but for this movie, passable. If you are looking for mindless entertainment and don't mind profanity, this is your type of movie. There is mild nudity and a lot of ketchup (ie: fake blood) splashed about so you might want to keep the little ones away from this one.
30 out of 47 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Awesomely stupid, incredibly inept, a complete waste of time
Erewhon1 September 2001
Yet another movie that wastes the abilities of Rutger Hauer, SPLIT SECOND also wastes the time of anyone foolish enough to watch it. Incredibly derivative, it crams together elements without any idea why they worked in the movies they were lifted from. The Monster is supposedly The Devil itself, but looks like the Alien. Shotguns have laser sights! London is supposedly flooded, but aerial views show not a drop of water. Lumbering, oafish and cursed with some of the worst dialog ever written, this is as close to a complete disaster as a movie can get.
19 out of 44 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Split Second, all it takes to like this film.
spanky_boz25 January 2004
This is one of those films you see on ITV at 2.20am Thursday morning. Its consigned to forever be overlooked, stepped on and pushed away. But it's also a b-movie of extraordinary magnitude. A mix of horror, action, breasts(Kim Cattral's, not Rutger Hauer's!) and witty one liners. It never seeks to be better than it is, and in doing so is all the better for it.

With a name like Dick Durkin in the credits, you know you're in for a treat. True, the ending crumbles somewhat(kinda like monty python + holy grail i thought), but the rest of the film is low budget gold. The use of London is great, and the supporting characters such as Cattral and Pete Postlethwaite lend some gravitas to the movie also.

Its a fun way to spend a few hours if you dont have the company of a good women.

Any film where a police officer can call a guard dog a 'dickhead' has to worth it's weight in platinum....

Remember....if you're gonna watch it, be sure to get some BIGGER F**KING GUNS!!!!!!!
102 out of 126 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
B-Movie Gem
alpha12815 February 2003
Warning: Spoilers
Split Second is a movie that can be described as "Blade Runner meets Predator meets Lethal Weapon". While not as good as these three films, it is as much fun as any of them.

[WARNING - MINOR SPOILERS]

Set in the partially flooded London of 2008, this film pits future cop Harley Stone (Rutger Hauer) against an intelligent monster. The monster, who wounded Stone and killed his partner three years earlier, is back and killing again. The unbalanced ("lives on anxiety, coffee, and chocolate") Stone is teamed up with straight-laced serial killer expert, Dick Durkin. The resulting clash of policing styles produces a lot of the movie's humor. Contains one of the greatest lines in the history of cinema, "Where the f--- is my coffee?"

[END SPOILERS]

Although the movie didn't have a big budget, it overcomes that with great acting, suspenseful direction, witty dialogue, and good use of London locations.

Hauer's performance gives Stone some complexity, while the screenplay provides the character with a minimal, but nonetheless effective, backstory. Hauer is tough-as-nails when needed, but displays convincing tenderness in his scenes with love interest Kim Cattrall. As an aside, I find it amusing that Stone's apartment is a mess with pigeons living in it, while the gun cabinet is the only thing that's neat and tidy.

Neil Duncan is a perfect foil for Stone as the highly educated (post graduate at Edinburgh, and then Oxford) criminologist, Dick Durkin.

At first Durkin thinks Stone is nuts, while Stone thinks little of Durkin's brains-over-brawn approach. But over the course of the film the two develop a respect for each other.

There are some problems with the film. The villain's origins and motivations are never really explained, and the ending is a bit weak.

But all in all, the film succeeds in delivering 90 minutes of rewatchable entertainment.
7 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
IMDB Average Score For This FIlm Is A Joke
damianphelps19 January 2022
I love Rutger Hauer, he has made some classic movies but this is not one of them.

It only has a couple of redeeming moments that prevent the film from scoring a 1.

Only hardcore fans should watch this and only when they are feeling nostalgic.
9 out of 20 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
How can anyone NOT like this movie?
mazelmuda29 November 2004
Warning: Spoilers
It was a great movie. The ambiance was brilliant, the film was well-shot, the characters were cheesy and over-the-top,

the monster ripped out hearts...

Basically, this movie was what Predator 2 WANTED to be. And failed.

The monster was scary looking. Its death was appropriate.

The symbols carved into people's chests were freaky. EVERYTHING was awesome.

But don't watch this movie if you don't like cheese. This movie has no shame about going way, way over the top.

Towards the end, it starts to resemble Big Trouble in Little China. Which is, as we all know, a good thing.
60 out of 80 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Very enjoyable action horror
last_cheese1 July 2013
Warning: Spoilers
I didn't know what to really expect with this movie, I'm not a massive Rutger Hauer fan, but I've seen a few of his works and have enjoyed all of them I have seen. The plot sounded familiar (however, as it turns out, it was very different than what I thought), so I expected to see a run-of-the-mill action horror movie. I was surprised though, I found myself enjoying it more than I had expected.

In the future (2008), global warming has caused rising sea levels and flooding of the cities. Harley is a psychic detective on the hunt for some one (or something) that had killed his last partner. He is lead to a club where a girl gets her heart ripped out. The police chief has Harley work with Dick Durkin, a more "by the books" detective, and the two are lead into an apartment type area where another murder has taken place. The killer left behind a memento, Harley's last partner's gun. They find a clue on the ceiling, a Scorpio astral sign. This leads them to looking about the occult and the astrology. They continue tracking down the killer, who strikes every new moon when the tide rises. DNA tests reveal that the thing has the DNA of all its victims, as well as Harley's. Dick believes that the thing captures the DNA and soul of its victims, similar to how primitive tribes believes they gained courage from eating the hearts of their victims. As they continue tracking it down, they find a body with a similar sign carved into its body as in the beginning. They use this as a map to track the thing down into the sewers where it dwells. As the two make their way through the sewers they come face to face with the creature. A Xenomorph-esque type creature that prowls under the water. Harley blasts at it with a big gun that resembles a minigun, and Dick uses a big explosive to blow away the subway the creature is in. However, it is still alive, so Harley grabs a bunch of electrical wires, and they shock the water. It still isn't dead! Harley and the thing grapple and wrestle for a moment, and then Harley rips it's heart out. The three (Harley's old partner's widow was being held hostage) ride off at the end.

This movie was pretty enjoyable, I liked the plot and thought the occult and astrology elements as well as the creature stealing the DNA of its victims was a nice touch and pretty fresh for this type of movie. The special effects were well done, but weren't as abundant as I expected. The sound effects, especially for that minigun thing were very cheesy and laughable. The creature was pretty generic, but effective nonetheless. There were a lot of clichés in this, and some of them were laughably bad, however, that didn't really take away anything from this movie. Rutger Hauer stole the show here, his character, Harley, was an enjoyable tough guy, and some of his witty retorts were genuinely funny. Alastair Duncan was enjoyable as Dick Durkin, it was great seeing him at the end go to a cold, hard killer, who handled his own when face to face with the thing. Overall, a pretty enjoyable experience, warrants repeated viewings, would recommend to any '80s action or horror fan.
5 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Excellent B-Movie that entertains every time you want it!
lordbowler15 November 2015
Warning: Spoilers
As a movie, it's about a 7 in my mind. Better than most of its type, but not as good as films like Alien, and Predator, which are among the best.

That being said, for pure entertainment, this is a 10! If you enjoy humorous characters battling ridiculous situations, you will enjoy this film. As another reviewer said, this is what Predator 2 wanted to be, but failed at.

Rutger Hauer is what really makes this film work, with his dead-pan delivery and sarcastic comments! The supporting cast is full of great actors that you'll recognize! Plenty of eye-candy in Kim Catrall, that does not distract from the story.

The story and environment is very well done. As with Alien, the killer is rarely seen in the film until the climax. The suspense builds throughout the film as the viewer begins to wonder "is the killer even human?".

Like some of the best movies in its sub-category, ala John Carpenter's classics like The Thing, Escape From NY, and Big Trouble in Little China, this movie excels in great characters that you love giving great sarcastic dialog and the best one-liners! One-liners on par with Carpenter's best! Even the all too brief character of "The Rat Catcher", played excellently by Michael J. Pollard, who you will recognize, is played so well that you feel bad when he is killed later. This is why this movie endures. It's ironic that the only victim that you feel for is the throw-away character of "The Rat Catcher"! The character just comes alive as a nice guy and you feel sad when he's killed.

I've seen this film at least ten times since the 90's and every time I enjoy it.

Hauer has done many B-Movies that are classic because of his character in them: Ladyhawke, Blind Fury, Wedlock, Wanted: Dead or Alive, and this, are a few. These are not considered his best work (maybe with the exception of Ladyhawke), but they are enjoyable re-watchable films that you want to revisit time and time again.

So, seek out this film and enjoy it for what it is, a fun movie that will entertain you for 90 minutes! You'll be quoting this movie for much longer than that! "Police... Dickhead"
4 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
An underrated B-movie
bowmanblue30 August 2015
I'm going to say now that I enjoyed 'Split Second.' Partly because, as I alluded to in the title, it's an underrated B-movie, but also because I saw it as a child and I am looking at it with a deep sense of nostalgia. It's probably not as good as I say it is! Back in 1992 pretty much all B-movies/monster-munching fun was set in America, so the sight of London flooded in 2008 (hey – it was a long time in the future when I first saw this!) was quite a novelty, let alone a beastie who runs around ripping people's hearts out and leaving them for the police, or at least one particular police officer – Rutger Hauer. He got attacked by the killer a while back and, even since then, has been experiencing visions and is psychically-connected to it.

Now, the monster is in London and Rutger – while totally hooked on coffee, chocolate and pretty much anything else that's bad for you (except alcohol – he quit that!) teams up with squeaky-clean copper called 'Dick Durkin' (*snigger*). Therefore you kind of have a 'buddy cop' movie with the end of the world at stake.

You may notice my slight titter of laughter at the character name 'Dick Durkin.' I don't feel too immature for that reaction, as the film is kind of tongue-in-cheek and knows that it's hardly on a par with Shakespeare. It's a B-movie. Therefore, don't expect much in the way of a budget. And, when I say 'budget' I basically mean the monster itself. You don't really see it all the way through, so if that bothers you this might not be your cup of tea (or coffee in Rutger's case). Plus the other downside is the script itself. It really does let the whole thing down. The atmosphere is great – dark and foreboding and the characters are fun, making the film good. It's only some of the lines which sound as if they've been written by a work experience kid that let the whole thing down. That and the lack of visual sight of the monster, obviously.

If you've see Split Second before then you'll probably be happy to give it another go. If you haven't and you're into B-movies, then make sure you're in a forgiving mood and don't expect too much in the way of special effects and you mind just find it an undiscovered little gem.
5 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
A Cross Between Blade Runner and Waterworld, But Bad
gavin694225 September 2007
In the future, global warming has caused ocean levels to rise. This makes London a particular wet place during high tide. Harley Stone (Rutger Hauer) is a detective living off of caffeine, nicotine and chocolate. He does things his own way -- violently (not unlike Stallone's "Cobra"). So what happens when the man or beast responsible for killing his partner returns to kill again, and Stone sense some sort of psychic connection?

The most important thing to know about this film is that it's not as cool as it sounds. Big man with a gun in a dystopian English future, fighting a man-beast that can rip hearts from chests. Sounds good. But it's actually rather lame. Hauer can't act or deliver lines worth a darn. The monster makes little or no sense. And the weirdest thing is that after the opening makes a big point of establishing the effects of global warming, I don't think the rising waters really played any part in the film.

Kim Cattrall's character (Michelle, Stone's girlfriend) is very odd and very out of place. She seems to just be in this movie so there can be a woman in the shower at some point. So, if you're looking for Cattrall's breasts, this is your film. Other than that, her role doesn't really have a place and there's something dreadfully wrong with her hair. Sure, this was filmed in 1992 and hair was different, but this hair is just bad.

I liked the detective who accompanies Stone (I think his name is Dick Durbin, or something). He was weak but funny in a very subtle way. The most memorable part of the film for me has Durbin getting blown out of a window by gunfire. I don't know why, but this just really sunk in for me. It was pretty intense, and yet somehow pretty funny.

If you like "Blade Runner", "Waterworld" and "Predator" (all of which are great movies) and want to see one that's not half as good and really cheesy, check out "Split Second". I still haven't figured out why it's called that, but I can tell you all your expectations are going to be missed. Unless, of course, your standards for quality film are even lower than mine.
6 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
You people make me laugh
The nerve of some of you. "I was expecting a Hollywood masterpiece" WHAT?? It's a Rutger Hauer movie you mindless spawns of ignorance! For what it was, It was a damn good film. Anyone with a brain knows before buying it, renting it, that it it ain't Oscar material folks. It's a low budget sci-fi that happens to be pretty damn good. I thought the alien was good, and not cheesy or hokie looking, the idea of the flooding and constant raining was pretty clever, and the time frame was believable to me. Lighten up losers. This "B flick" blows away a lot of "A flicks" see "War Of The Worlds". Yes, different strokes for different folks, but those of you who thought this flick was a waste of time, should't be renting sci-fi videos but probably should be sticking to your typical mainstream cinema, you know the stuff you think is so "movie genius", like Broke back Mountain.
109 out of 142 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
An enjoyable sci-fi B movie.
bannonanthony31 May 2005
Warning: Spoilers
I got this film on videotape with another Rutger Hauer picture, WEDLOCK. I enjoyed both films greatly but I really recommend this one. The vision of a future London where pollution and flooding run rampant is very good and Hauer gives his usual great performance as coffee addicted cop Harley Stone. Neil Duncan is pretty good as his nerdy sidekick Durkin.

The killer monster itself may be a man in a suit creature but the final battle between the heroes and it is very exciting. The supernatural element added seemed a little clumsy, but then again nothing's perfect. SPLIT SECOND is a great movie for late night viewing, especially if you're a Rutger Hauer fan like me.
6 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Pretty bad
ctomvelu18 September 2012
Warning: Spoilers
Good God Almighty. The things Rutger Hauer does to make a buck. In this Blade Runner-ish dystopian thriller, he plays a cop with lovely hair on the trail of a bloodthirsty serial killer that may nor may not be human. Hauer has a new partner, a prissy but game sort who provides the comic relief, and a loyal girlfriend, played by the fetching Kim Cattral. She has an R-rated shower sequence, guys! The film makes little sense, and it gets boring rather quickly. "We need bigger guns" is spoken, a line we have often heard before. If you find yourself awake at 3 a.m. and can't get back to sleep, you might want to catch this. The gore isn't quite as bad as you might think, and the action scenes are basically Hauer and his partner shooting their guns willy nilly.
5 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
A well done action/horror film.
Peach-25 July 1999
Split Second was a blast to watch. This movie has all the great elements of action and horror, with a bit of the absurd to border on a cult film. Rutger Hauer is very good in this kind of film. The film is tight and there aren't alot of wasted frames. I enjoyed the characteristics of Hauer's Stone character. Watching Rutger Hauer take on a monster and scarf down some chocolate donuts was very cool. The monster itself was a very imaginitive creation and I liked that it attacked so quickly. Split Second is a great film for a rainy day or a late night feature.
64 out of 85 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
We had lunch.....
FlashCallahan3 September 2013
Warning: Spoilers
In a futuristic London (2008), the rising sea levels mean that large areas are under feet of water.

Hauer plays a rugged S and M cop who lost his partner to some strange rubbery creature.

Now the creature is back and its after him, the bloke from Taggert, and Kim Cattralls hairdresser from Star Trek 6.

In the nineties, Hauer starred in many Science Fiction movies that had little release on the big screen, but had a very long shelf life on the VHS market. This, Wedlock, and Salute Of The Jugger spring to mind.

This is something a little different. Set way in the future, five years ago to be precise at the time of the review, London is waterlogged, and the clubs are more vibrant than ever.

Hauer spends most of his day throwing coffee cups into the backseat of his car, slamming the inspectors office door, and walking into Kim Cattrall in the shower.

He also has flashbacks of Foster, his partner falling into a big puddle. Narrative is not a primary goal of the film.

What you get is ninety or so minutes of him and Duncan wisecracking, walking around sewers, finding people with Their hearts missing. In a strange masochist way, its enjoyable, but never as good as when I first saw it back in the summer of 1992.

It ups the ante in the final act, and the revaluation of the creature is some sort of cheap British hybrid of Alien and the Predator.

Its a cult movie of the highest order, the credits hold a 'and Michael J Pollard as The Ratcatcher' which would get any bad movie aficionado salivating, but he end product is just a little bland.

Worth watching, but will leave you looking around your house for damp patches.

But its the best film ever made featuring Hauer having a rubber hand stroke his face.
4 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Cliched, stereotype-ridden junk.
g-hbe13 November 2022
We lasted about 25 minutes before we turned it off. What a collection of comic-book tough-guys (Hauer) and world-weary coppers (Armstrong). The acting was absolutely terrible, almost as if they were reading their lines straight off the page. As for the appearance and direction of the film, it reminded me of a cross between an 80's pop video and and one of those 'Comic Strip Presents' productions such as 'The Bullshitters'. I did entertain the thought that this film may be a spoof of stuff like The Professionals and that the bad acting was deliberate, but somehow I don't think so - it was too bad even for that.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Entertaining, but feels like it could have been so much more!
AverageJoesDriveInPodcast22 October 2018
This is one of those weird movies from the early 90's that both very much feels like it should have had a theater run and also gone direct to video. Think movies like Cyborg & No Escape. The production value is decent, but it doesn't feel quite as epic as it should. Like they had this grand plan but didn't quite have the money to make their vision happen. So, they worked with what they had and managed to pull off a really good looking film.

While this isn't what I would call a great film it manages to be highly entertaining. It's a bit unbalanced, but the films weird quirks actually work in its favor. You get to know the characters, their idiosyncrasies, and go on an adventure as they hunt down a mysterious serial killer. In a lot of ways, this feels like something that might have been adapted from a comic book. Even the character names feel like they were taken out of a comic.

It's a pretty middle of the road film in all aspects. Not to action-heavy, not too gory, not too funny, but it has a little of all those things. The acting is okay, albeit over the top at times. In the end, it all comes together and manages to be rather entertaining. I think I would pick this one up if I ever came across it for cheap. If you like a film that's about as mixed genre as you get. This is one to check out. It's an easy viewing, one you can just sit back, enjoy, and not have to think a lot about.

My Rating: 5.5/10
3 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed