Splinter

Splinter attempts to claim some kind of genre authenticity specifically because they couldn't get together a decent budget or conceive of anything outside well worn horror archetypes. I intend for this review to be a warning of the movie's poor quality, so I'm just going to cut to the chase and lay down some bullet points. The plot borrows heavily from John Carpenter's The Thing. Nothing wrong with having influences (especially when you're stealing from the best) but the other ideas in this are so weak and lacking that I frequently wondered why someone would bother to write a script if all they can achieve is to copy the key ideas of a better one and then try to b.s their way through the rest of it. I feel as if I should be saying 'the budget is so low, it's practically set at a gas station'. But no. The movie is actually set at a gas station. Which gives you some idea of how narrow the story's scope is. Infective monster splinters sounds like an excuse for some neat fx make-up but the actual results are pretty pathetic, looking pretty much like whatever generic zombie effect you care to imagine but with a few spines thrown in. I wasn't expecting much but even so, the quality of the acting isn't far about * and the stillborn attempts at tension and drama were stillborn. As if all this wasn't bad enough the quality of the film is really low, it has this nasty yellow-ish hue to it that makes everything look even cheaper. In summary I hated it. It's entirely possible that Splinter was made for horror b-movie horror enthusiasts who are going to revel in all of the elements that I've listed, but honestly can't think of a single positive thing to say about it. Not long after seeing this I watched a Korean horror called G.P. 506 which also revolved around an infective virus that overcomes its hosts. It wasn't a masterpiece by any means but it had just enough spark and innovation to make the concept work. Not that much, but enough. G.P 506 left me feeling that I'd seen something more interesting than it probably had any right to be considered. Splinter left me feeling as if I had wasted 90 minutes of my life. Both were flawed, but one made an effort which put it head and shoulders above the other.

I rate this negative -10/10, this is what we call group presentation in school, there are only 6 cast, and the one that makes me livid is the camera man, the whole movie is poor and the camera man is making it poorer, shake10x, But good job how you edit the parasite.

Splinter-360P

Splinter-720P

Splinter-480P

Shame really as it's not too bad a film. I would of rated higher had it not be for the ridiculously shaky camera work which spoilt the whole thing.

Likable characters (even the bad guy, in the end) and an intense plot add up to some good entertainment for me. I did have to pause it a few times and take a break because it was so in-your-face intense. Some folks did not like the shaky-cam effects, and normally, I would be right in there with them. If overused, it is nauseating and irritating to the extreme! In this movie, I think it was used effectively to show the chaotic, happened-in-a-nanosecond experience that occurs in real life violent events. Unfortunately, I've personally experienced some of these in my life, and can testify that they look just like that when you are experiencing them. Give it a watch if you are a horror fan. I don't think you will be disappointed, but YMMV. :-) Much appreciation to the IMDb website crew for the recommendation, because I would not have heard of it or viewed it without that. Thanks!

Most people seem to have scored 7 for this movie and I go along with that. Its not a great horror movie but it does indeed have its moments of suspense and I am divided whether its more suitable for cinema or DVD. Yes this is a budget production but don't knock it. It certainly reminds me of the more recent (and shockingy titled) 'Legion' which I recall also centred around an isolated gas station or restaurant (or something like that). Plenty of blood and gore in this movie and horror fans I doubt will be disappointed. I pull up short again on the title of the film and the nature of the monster. Back to other comments of 'The Thing'. The ending as most horror movies seem to do, leave the story open for a sequel but I doubt there is any true mileage for that. the acting is certainly good, so again i would say, don't have too high expectations and enjoy the movie for what it is.

The main thing that turned me off about this movie was just how it felt the compulsive need to frantically shake the camera and do a million cuts a second whenever the parasite was on screen. Body horror movies kinda lose their impact when you cant visibly see the actual body horror itself. It would be like if a musical movie had all its songs playing in the background over constant obnoxious cartoony sound effects. It kinda negates the purpose when you direct the movie like that. Other than that the movie was pretty decent, it had some good practical effects, good acting preformances, and a good sense of tension. It could probably have been much scarier though if the camera guy wasnt flailing the camera around whenever the parasite was onscreen.

A pretty good film. The horror and gore is quite good..never got this much scared from a hand lol. The acting & premise of the movie is also decent. The only problem with the movie is that the camera was shaking alot whenever some horror was happening on screen(was really wanted to give this a 7) but still I would recommend it you as you never get bored & it has a very good runtime (1hr 22min including credits).