Was That Film Really That Bad??? Split Second (1992)

I don't know about you, but when I see a DVD released under a "cult" label, it always makes me think that this was originally a box office bomb (or just ignored upon release) and they're trying to entice you into buying the DVD because they need to make their money back and so it has "cult" status. Fortunately for Split Second, this didn't work for me as I recall watching this at a mate's house probably around 1993 and thinking it was really cool. As a considerable amount of time has passed, the question must be asked, was that film really that bad???

Cool title, no idea what it means about the film.

Set in the (then) far future of 2008 (how quaint!), global warming has started to take its toll and London is a partially flooded mess... The story follows hard-boiled cop Harley Stone (Rutger Hauer) as he tracks down the serial killer who murdered his partner (a barely visible Steven Hartley) three years prior. As he's a bit of a loner and a loose cannon (hey, aren't they all), his boss, Thrasher (seriously!!!, played by local lad Alun Armstrong), pairs him up with intellectual rookie cop Dick Durkin (again, seriously, not making this up, and he's played by Alastair Duncan). As it turns out, it's not a serial killer, it's a monster and darkened, wet shenanigans ensue. 

There is a remarkably decent supporting cast. Joining Armstrong is Ian Dury as a blink and you'll miss him nightclub owner, and the tremendous Pete Postlethwaite as an arsey police colleague. For some reason, we also get a cameo from Michael J Pollard for about a minute and a half total screen time as well. Finally, a youthful Kim Cattrall plays Michelle McLaine, the widow of Stone's partner but who also having an affair with Stone. Messy. Still, she adds something different to the faux-testosterone bromance that develops between Stone and Durkin, and seems to be reusing the same hair style/wig from her stint as Lt. Valeris in Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country. 

"Two pairs of gravity boots." Damn it! Wrong film!

This is not an original story and, to be fair, although simplistic, it feels like everyone is giving it their all. True, these people are walking stereotypes but they fit together well. At 90 minutes, you wouldn't expect a great deal of character development although Stone's redemption plays hits the right notes but subtlety is lacking as Durkin evolves from a pencil necked geek to cigar chomping gun nut.

Dick Durkin in the 21st and 2/25th's Century!

I can't really continue without commenting upon the film's budget. At $7m in 1991 prices, this is not a micro-budget indie but it does suffer from a lack of money. Lighting choices make scenes either too bright, too soft or both, and that blatantly shows the nature of the plastic prop guns the extra's use. Even the main cast's firearms look a little too... make believe, and that detracts from the grittiness the director is aiming for. As for the gunfire, the director seems to have settled on the idea that every gunshot should create sparks, no matter what is hit... very 1980's Dr Who... Similarly, the police station set could, with the cages taken out, be taken straight from an episode of Prime Suspect, and the nightclub scenes look like the long-forgotten ITV game show Scavengers. Other sets also look suitably cheap and there is a wobbly wall when Durkin gets smacked in the face. Sensibly, they keep the creature out of shot until near the very end, which is to its benefit. Incidentally, the creature work was completed by Stephen Norrington, who would later move to bigger and better things, directing Wesley Snipes in Blade and, allegedly, get to the fisticuff stage with Sean Connery in The League Of Extraordinary Gentlemen. 

Would you buy butter or beer off this guy if he knocked on your door?

Despite it's dark tone, this film does go a little silly at times: Stone placing his leather coat over a body at a murder scene, the leather trousers they force Hauer to wear that really do nothing for him, Stone's addition to coffee, sugar and cigars means that he should be just a short stair climb away from a heart attack, the blood on the ceiling that handily only drips when the plot demands it, and that really daft demonic map carved into Durkin's chest that he seemingly shrugs off after a brief wobble. Yeah, probably best not to think too much about the plot. And that tease at the end? Stupid and undermining to pretty much everything that has happened over the last hour or so.

You don't see this until the end, which was probably a good idea.

Anyhoo, as a mis-matched buddy cop movie, Split Second has its charms and the night time filming of Durkin driving around the centre of London is effective enough, certainly to the point where you can get away with it being a quaintly unchanged 2008 London - though they did stretch the budget to have a mini-hovercraft in it so I'll give it some slack there. 

That pigeon got a BAFTA nod, you know...

Where slack shouldn't be given, nor any asked for, are the performances of the central trio. Hauer, Cattrall and Duncan are all 100% invested in the film and that fact alone, makes Split Second a very watchable film. Sure, Duncan over-eggs it once he gets his balls under control, but Hauer knows exactly what he is aiming for and nails an OTT interpretation of a loose-cannon cop. It's a likeable performance and a bit different from what he is usually remembered for. The film's score should also be appreciated for delivering what it needs to onscreen and hitting that just bombastic enough style to work for the film. 

Split Second, then, is a low budget genre mix-up that survives on charm and endeavour. Where I think this might have worked better is as a two part TV movie, giving the cast and characters more time to breathe as well as develop certain aspects of the story more fully. As it is, this is another perfect Friday night beers and pizza movie (though that was not how I originally watched it... drinking at 16... never... ). Give it a go if you can find it on DVD, my copy was only a fiver from Tesco's so it's definitely out there, and it does meet the criteria for "cult" status in my eyes. Just one question remains though: What the hell does the title have to do with the actual film???