Split (1989) User Reviews

Interesting sort of cyberpunk adventure

[Barbecue · 7/10 · 6 June 1999]

In a very-near-future world, a corrupt government monitors everyone constantly with computers and surveillance. One man has managed to evade assimilation, and operates outside the system, fighting to preserve his freedom. An engaging and imaginative story and some very interesting editing and camera work. There are some confusing and slow parts, but all in all, an excellent example of what a small crew with brains and talent can do on a shoestring budget.

Living Off the Grid

[sol- · 7/10 · 5 February 2017]

Not the M. Night Shyamalan thriller, this earlier film of the same title revolves around a man living 'off the grid' in a society in which the government keeps tabs on what everyone does through purchases made, routines and habits. To evade authorities, our protagonist has to constantly change appearance and never interact with the same people for too long - something that leads to him living an existence a la Denis Lavant in 'Holy Motors'. Innovatively shot and edited, the film is film is as engaging visually as it is intellectually with the lead's head framed in neon signs, shots from inside wine glasses and an offbeat opening in which he appears to turn around and talk to the camera before it is revealed that he is conversing with a brick wall! The plot is sometimes hard to decipher, especially in term's of the government's motives and a quest for immortality subplot, but the pure weirdness of it all renders the film compelling from start to finish. More vexing in any case are the wild changes in tone throughout. At times, the film is borderline comical as our protagonist snorts sugar, talks with over-the-top fake accents and converses with an avant-garde artist, while at other times, the tone is deathly serious with a genuine sense of danger and unease in the air. Like it or not though, this is certainly one of the most unique and strangest films ever made and while certainly elements might be off-putting for some, at its best, the film ranks alongside the finest paranoia thrillers out there as the main character finds him pursued by mysterious forces for which few others believe even exist.

good movie

[furb3030 · 5/10 · 28 November 2005]

I saw this movie once a long time ago, just once, and I didn't know where it had come from, and I looked for about six years to find it, and I finally found it here at IMDb.com! Just the whole concept of the movie is great, I believe it's got something to do with a race of bioengineered beings, keeping tabs on us and our planet, but there is one person who keeps out of being assimilated into conformity. And the way that he does it,to keep himself from being tracked and located, is what keeps the movie entertaining. I don't remember exactly how it ended, but I remember, it finished with a great climax, and a good twist.

raw yet engaging

[gerry-7 · 19 July 2001]

When I first started watching this movie I thought it was a student film. It certainly has a raw quality to it in the camera work, the filmstock, and the acting/directing. But as I continued to watch I was intrigued by the story. Its basically The Matrix idea done on a students budget. But don't dismiss it! The computer work in the movie is particularly inventive. Keeping in mind that this movie was shot in 1988/89, the use of computers is intelligent yet trippy. The acting takes some getting used to. It's not slick and natural. It's more forced, but it ends up adding to the plot of the film. I have to say that the ideas used in this film are quite clever and would recommend a viewing to anyone intertested in 1984-esque themes.

Very hard to follow.

[tarbosh22000 · 2/10 · 25 April 2012]

We're not sure if it's in the future or not, but at some point in time, two men against a black background control everyone on earth (or possibly San Francisco, again, not sure), with computers. A man named Starker (Dwight) has managed to escape their "filing system". Starker continually changes identities to try and avoid the master controllers, and meets some wacky people along the way, such as "The Artist" (Flynn), and Susan (Bechtel). Also, apparently, there's a man with silver body paint who is the boss of the two men with the computers (?) - it's all very confusing, but that's just the weird world of Split.

Split is filled with ideas - almost too many for its 85 minute running time. While we appreciated a lot of the ideas - the ones we could comprehend, anyway - and the fact that it's sci-fi but has nothing to do with space or spaceships, this movie is far too disjointed and incoherent for most audiences to enjoy. Again, there are some movies out there with NO ideas, and those movies really suck, so at least there was a lot of effort put forth here. But it was mainly intellectual effort. If some time had been spent on making a barely-cohesive movie and some of the wildness was just put in some kind of order, Split might appeal to more people.

At least this is real sci-fi, as opposed to the crud on the "Syfy" network. And simply because of the student film-like enthusiasm, we want to give this movie the benefit of the doubt. But it's just so confusing. And forget character development, that's out the window. There are plenty of cool camera tricks and such, but that does not a movie make. It's more a collection of scenes and effects, like director Chris Shaw wanted to show off every trick he learned in film school and worried he only had this one chance to do so, so he crammed 'em all in, all other considerations be damned. Thus, this movie is literally all over the place.

It's also very much an art movie, and what probably happened is, sci-fi fans and art movie fans don't necessarily want to see the same things. This movie probably can't appeal to both crowds, so it "split" the difference and pleased no one. Plus it has a very Overdrawn At the Memory Bank (1985) feel. On movie marquee alert, we see a theater is playing Poltergeist III (1988), and the movie starts with a musical cue very much like Billy Squier's "The Stroke". It's all very hard to follow, but that was most likely the intention.

Once again we give props to AIP for putting this out. They went out on a limb here, knowing this...challenging...movie might not appeal to everyone and is pretty "out there". Why they thought putting Silver Body Paint Man on the box cover front and center would draw in the video store patrons, we're not entirely sure. We wanted to like this movie more, and we did like some parts of it, but more than likely it will give you a "split"ting headache.

For more action insanity, please visit: www.comeuppancereviews.com

A Classic, Low-budget, Big Brother Romp w/ Original Plot

[zerogirl42 · 10/10 · 12 December 2006]

I went to this film having no idea what to expect. I actually took a date to it in the theaters when it first came out. We both thoroughly enjoyed it and it helped to have someone to discuss it with after seeing it.

I only recommend seeing this film if you appreciate non-mainstream movies. It's not as disjointed as Liquid Sky or as fanciful as Forbidden Zone. The original plot is very easy to follow. There's A LOT of subtle humor.

Here's a quick summary of the plot if you are completely lost: A big-brother type government keeps tabs on everyone in society. Suddenly a new person appears and there's no data on him (he appears insane). He may or may not be the second-coming of Christ. The over-cautious government goes into a frenzy to find him and discover his true motives. The ruler is also obsessed with immortality.

Some scenes are frantic while others are completely low-key. We follow the lead character as he encounters all different kinds of people in society.

I didn't need my consciousness altered to enjoy the film, but I know that some of my friends felt that helped.

Split was also filmed around Santa Cruz and San Francisco.

People high on drugs should not make movies

[realvedmak · 1/10 · 7 February 2014]

Guy is 'on to things' so he shows it by living like a bum, eating out of garbage, and behaving like a raving lunatic.

Somebody reviewed this crap as 'ahead of its time'. another as 'matrix on budget'. I can assure you its neither. Its what happens when people get high, think they are creating and instead they are making fools of themselves.

What this movie feels like is exactly what it is. A waste of time.

To force a 10 line review for this type of garbage is also stupid.

If you really enjoy feeling persecuted, dining out of garbage cans, wearing stupidly ineffective disguises, listening to endless, pointless conversations reminiscent of what intoxicated film students converse about ... then this might be a film for you.

If however you have any taste or sense stay away from this steaming pile of poop.

Fast, funny and mad as cheese independent science fiction jolter

[Bloodwank · 8/10 · 23 January 2011]

Sleek, fired up and mad as cheese, Split is exactly the sort of science fiction that I can really dig. A paranoid streak of a film, its hero is a rambling paranoid derelict by the name of Starker pursued by sinister forces as he careens through a run down cityscape of sad, buttoned up and lonely people, it basks in low budget grit, arch dialogue and offbeat humour. Some scenes blaze with energy, some are low key, all are propelled by actors acting as hard as they can. The writing and acting is reminiscent of films like Liquid Sky albeit not as crazy, naturalism is avoided in favour of manic expressions and a kind of forced but honest speechifying, it works well here where otherwise it might be noting more than a mark of ineptitude because in this film every character is moving, thinking, living as fast as they can, even extras delivering scant lines have a barely contained force to them and its a joy to behold. Timothy Dwight is a hoot as Starker, convincingly unhinged and compelling, while as a waitress drawn into his lunacy Joan Bechtel is rather fine, a sympathetic figure cowed by fear and doubt but basically decent, repelled by Starker's madness but not against helping him when push comes to shove. Amusement is provided for a spell by John Flynn as a goofball artist who becomes privy to Starker's scheme (and confronts a rather ace bit of throwaway weirdness), while the main villain is played by the films writer/director/visuals designer Chris Shaw. He doesn't come off quite as well as the aforementioned stars, bringing a performance of more straightforward over the top villainy, but he still capably entertains in the role. His direction is raw and speedy, perfectly suited to the material, while the writing works well, often amusing and insightful too as it skewers variously soulless modern living, individuality, artistic pretension and the surveillance society. Effects work in the film is primitive, a fair amount of basic computer generated imagery is used, visualisations of surveillance technology and some mathematical stuff, fractals and the like, with one rather fun practical set up for the villains lair. I can't really recommend this one to most, as its bound to be offputting and even for folk like me it has some flaws, at times the editing is overcooked and though sly and a lot of fun it never reaches the heights of twisted profundity or just plain bracing madness that lurk in its potential. But for folk who irresistibly groove to this sort of no budget weirdness its well worth looking up. 8/10 from me.

Ahead of its time

[lucky_dice_mgt · 9/10 · 17 October 2007]

This is the type of film that may need to be viewed several times to capture all of its beauty and intelligence { just like Curse of Frankenstein from 1957} . If you don't like odd, non-mainstream films, steer clear of this masterpiece. For me, the artwork alone in this film is worth the purchase price of the videocassete. The storyline is a bit fantastic but seems to becoming reality in our world today. For being produced in the 1980s, this film is proving to be a prophetic vision of whats to come with Big government and Big brother wanting to control and monitor us.

There are many slow sections and the dialog can be quite hard to catch in many scenes { thats why I've watched it 6 times now} but if you can digest it all, it may prove to be well worth your time.

The film is basically about a world where people have evolved into robotic machines that have lost their individualism . They are only concerned about accumulating and procreating. The hero of the film has not succumb to this sickness and has not been " tagged" and monitored by big brother. His mission is to release a secret drug into the water supply which will change the way the human robots think and allow individulaism to once again be a part of humanity.

Yes, its very low budget, but for its time the computer effects and sound effects are very unique and the paintings are utterly fascinating. If you have an open mind, this film should impress and its prophetic visions are chilling.

A brilliant piece of low budget science fiction.

[phantomhillbilly · 8/10 · 27 July 2004]

Ten years before "The Matrix" and hot on the heals of "They Live" came this brilliant piece of low budget science fiction film making. If you like bizarre, unconventional, intellectually challenging, David Lynch meets John Carpenter style movie-making you'll love "Split". There are moments of true genius in the framing and cinematography. Look closely at a sequence shot through wine glasses in an art opening party and right after that a scene involving cue cards. The plot involves a man named Starker who lives outside of society who wants to wake us up from the dream. Similar to "They Live", "1984" and "The Matrix", it is based on the premise that we are all constantly monitored by shadowy Big Brother type government agents that know everything about us and have invisible robot probes constantly patrolling the city. This is all revealed pretty early on in the plot. POSSIBLE SPOILER: Starker has invented a drug that when placed in the water supply will wake everyone up from the illusion of reality. Along with the cinematography and the ingenious ways the director makes do with his shoestring budget, the other highlights of this film are the monologues. I challenge anyone to not be rewinding, memorizing and quoting the classic quotes from this movie for years to come.

Tender Situation

[gtbarabas · 10/10 · 19 March 2006]

If you Listen to Ween (The Pod, God/Satan), then you know what's going on with "Split" I found that watching the film under the influence of LSD helped to deal with Audio/Video tracers from fantastic editing job. The plot was only important from second to second. The acid helped to interact with the sounds, subliminal and general pace of this masterpiece. Don't bother writing about something out of your comprehension's reach...There just isn't enough of these great independent attempts at expression at it's most raw , amateur level. I dare anyone to make a movie that can equally Mess with my head and change the way I look at visual arts and the world's reality. Not to mention the many realities that haven't yet been explored by this humans mind. I love the vision of Chris Shaw. I also appreciate the texturing terroristic film "The Begotten" by E. Elias Merhige.

A cult classic available now on Amazon

[bopintea · 10/10 · 12 March 2012]

In 1989, Split, a psychedelic social satire, premiered at the Telluride Film Festival, inspiring groups of filmgoers to spontaneously don robes in imitation of those worn by devotees of the sweet-and-low-snorting prophet-hero in Split. When the film opened in U.S and European art-house theaters, reviewers' reactions diverged wildly from fresh, stimulating and brilliant, to crude, loud, and pompous, with almost none in between. Since then, better-known films have siphoned from Split's prodigious display of imagination. However, Split itself has lived on only through the trading of extremely rare, worn VHS copies among a miniscule cult of devotees...

I was an extra!

[kimric-35262 · 9/10 · 20 December 2022]

I worked on this film a bit and did not know it even got made since the working title was "Starker" if I remember right. Saw it only about 10 years ago. It is better than I thought it would be since I only had a vague idea what the film was about. A lot of this film was shot in Santa Cruz. Really a slice of the 80's underground mindset.

I am visible as the spaceman watching Starker argue in the gallery. I and several friends appear in this scene since we were recruited from a costume party that was held about a month before at the Catalyst. You can also see singer Max Strom in the crowd. Most of the folks are wearing their own costumes.

Starker is wearing my prescription glasses.

low budget postmodern sci fi trash...that's a good thing?

[anwarnamtut · 12 May 2003]

Split was one of the more original films I have ever seen, though I am not entirely sure if that is good. I do know that I thought at the time this movie would be come a midnight/cult movie due to its weirdness. The plot was out-there/semi-comprehensible, but the narrative (if you can call it that) unfolded in a very interesting manner. I have been unable to find this on video again, the original store I rented it at having long since folded. This unavailability I think has added to the fondness I have associated with this production. Who knows, perhaps it would be horrible upon modern viewing. I do remember the plot to be Matrix-like in a number of ways, as well as akin to the Philip Jose Farmer penned Dayworld novels.

Film that goes nowhere, very very slowly.

[robalex-1 · 2 February 2002]

I don't see how anyone could claim to have deduced the plot of this monstrosity. The film begins with a disheveled man wandering around town with chicklets for teeth. He glances at the camera often so you won't forget. He goes to a diner and talks funny for a while. Then he wanders off to a trash can where he pulls a new costume out of a trash bag. Having ditched the chicklets, one assumes the movie can only get better. Unfortunately you find out that those little pieces of gum impaired the character's ability to speak. Without them he rambles endlessly about some sort of big brother complex he has. It doesn't fit anywhere into the chicklets plot they had been following earlier. Then they eventually cut to the antagonist who we know is a villain because of the gray face paint on one side of his face. Our hero walks around dressed up as a cleaning lady and then is somehow pulled out of a puddle of water by the cyborg. After this my memory is blank. This movie is very much like death, and you'll agree if you survive it.

Idiot Movie

[raym041169 · 7 November 2009]

The movie is idiotic and is obviously geared towards persons who are into using drugs. The part at the end where he has some kind of petry dish that he is trying to put in the water - and then, the LSD-like effects over the film with the echoing of "Things are changing?" Is it some type of twisted, drug-using radical 'fantasy'? of the main character possibly putting a psychotropic or hallucinogenic drug in the water supply of that city in the movie? It's mad, in fact, maddening. Throw this movie in the trash where it belongs with the drugs the makers used while making it.

FYI: LSD was synthesized in 1937 by a Swiss chemist. The monster Hitler, in the monster's bunker, actually used a multitude of psychotropic drugs, possibly including LSD.