Split Image

Michael O'Keefe ("Caddyshack") plays Danny Stetson, a college student / champion gymnast, and a nice guy from a good family. He falls for new acquaintance Rebecca (Karen Allen, "Raiders of the Lost Ark"), and follows her into Homeland, a religious cult led by the charismatic Neil Kirklander (Peter Fonda, "Race with the Devil"). There he is soon brainwashed into abandoning his former life. His distraught father Kevin (Brian Dennehy, "First Blood") hires a sleazy deprogrammer, Charles Pratt (James Woods, "Videodrome"), and his "operatives" to kidnap Danny and try to make him see the light again. While producer-director Ted Kotcheffs' other 1982 film, the aforementioned "First Blood", is still very well remembered 42 years later, this one has kind of fallen through the cracks. Not that it deserved this fate, as it's pretty good and interesting. Following on the heels of a 1981 Canadian film titled "Ticket to Heaven", it tells a good story that is given some potency by its excellent cast. O'Keefe does an effective job in the lead, Allen is adorable as always, Fonda is amusing and subtly sinister, Dennehy & Elizabeth Ashley ("Happiness") aces as the parents. Woods, in his inimitable style, very much steals the film as Pratt, and his "deprogramming" scenes with O'Keefe have a memorably surreal quality to them, as Pratt works to "break" the impressionable youth. While I myself wasn't terribly convinced by Danny's transformation at the camp, and felt that the "upbeat" finale was too rushed and unsatisfying, overall I quite enjoyed it. Not that it offered any real surprises, nor was the direction ever really inspired, but it hit its buttons pretty well. One asset was the affecting music score by Bill Conti. Familiar faces among the supporting cast include Ronnie Scribner ('Salem's Lot'), Pamela Ludwig ("Over the Edge"), John Dukakis ("Jaws 2"), Lee Montgomery ("Burnt Offerings"), Michael Sacks ("Slaughterhouse-Five"), Deborah Rush ("In & Out"), Peter Horton ("Children of the Corn"), Irma P. Hall ("Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil"), and comedian Bill Engvall ("Delta Farce"). If you like discovering movies that have been forgotten over time, then give this one a try. If nothing else, you can't say that it isn't well-acted. Eight out of 10.

Trailer—Split Image

Split Image_720p(480P)

source: Split Image

This is a very good movie and scarily realistic even in 2023! I love that Danny 'Joshua' Stetson starts out as a smarmy cynical young man and his transformation feel quite credible. A few things about the cult are implied but never made really explicit, e.g. How they use hard labour and malnutrition as tools for control. How they use religion as substitute for sex. I wondered if Kirklander was drugging his disciples because Danny 'Joshua' Stetson mentioned that he doesn't shave anymore and no longer has any sex drive, and Rebecca mentioned that she and the other girls no longer get their period. Was this physical transformation induced by drugs or was it a psycho-somatic phenomenon? Other topics were mentioned in passing but not fully explored, e.g. When Charles Pratt mentions that Homelanders are in fact collecting money for charities that don't exist. The theme of duality - foreshadowed earlier in the movie by Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde - continues here by making us ask the question: Who are the 'good' guys? And who are the 'bad' guys? Is Homeland really such a horrible place compared to the materialistic world outside? Is Kirklander really such a bad guy compared to Charles Pratt? The de-programming scenes were the best part of the movie! Especially the scene where the cult attacks the safe house and the aftermath of that; the exchange that Charles Pratt has with Danny 'Joshua' Stetson's family is very powerful & revealing stuff!

It's definitely worth viewing, but does it deserve a second watch. Considering this film is part of the cult genre, it has a straightforward plot. Similar stories typically have a heavy amount of mystery and often spiral into horror by the end. Split Image.......not so much. The first three acts do a fine job of establishing the theme. The simplistic journey we are taken on is not too dissimilar to what we've seen before in these types of plots. I think this honest approach to cultic mind control is very intriguing as it gives the viewer a more accurate glimpse into communal living that is a reality. It was especially familiar to viewers in the early 1980s, after a decade of cults being in the headlines. The reason that the film falls short for me is basically the same reason that it may excel for other viewers. Where others like the toned down evil rhetoric so that we get a more realistic view of nonfictional cult behavior, I sort of feel that the lack of a legitimate threat disconnects me from the conclusion. There's always a possibility for harm to befall the protagonists, but it isn't looming......it isn't creepy......it's not life-threatening. James Woods is the creepiest character in the film(as usual)! Again, this may be the brilliance of the film for many. The film being a study of "control", it's important that the last act leaves no question in the mind of the viewers as who is the final victor. The battleground is the mind and independence of Danny(& Amy). He must defeat any desire to be Joshua, but must also find the "Real" Danny. I think if the last act(last 20 minutes) would have been slightly different, this film could've jumped 2-3 points for me. It could do this without betraying its narrative. As Danny begins to settle back into his former reality, he is surprised to learn that Charles(J. Woods) is trying to convince his parents (E. Ashley & B. Dennehy) to release his story to the public. A family argument ensues after Kevin(Dennehy) asks Charles to leave. Danny's mother is coming down heavy on him. Danny grabs his mother and Dad threatens Danny. There is a heavy atmosphere of hopelessness that begins to change the viewers opinion of the parents......."Maybe Danny would be better off with the cult." I like this scene because it displays that the parents desire to control Danny and it calls into question if they really care about him as much as they think they do. The last scene of the parents are the two of them staring out at the pool mumbling some jibberish......I don't like that. They should have been on site when Danny stood up to Neil(P. Fonda). In fact, Charles(Woods) should have been present as well. This climax would have of improved the film. When Neil slaps Danny it is out of his frustration to control him(Neil basically gave into his carnal image and sinned.) Danny is the victor! He controls himself. He and Amy run away together. It would have been so much better if Danny's parents were left behind also as the two go running and laughing to freedom from those that want to control them. The icing on the cake would be Charles(Woods) and Neil(Fonda) having words that gave us some insight of why Charles hated him so much. Maybe a glimpse into a backstory. Even have a few of the cult followers not reentering the van after witnessing Neil's outburst, Danny's concerned parents, Charles's personal testimony of why Neil is dangerous and the scene of Danny and Amy running happily away. That would have stuck, and could have been so climatic that I might would watch the film a second time.

I just saw this for the first time and it was very striking how similar the cult seemed to the one in Midsommar. Perhaps these depictions are common cult tropes, or perhaps this obscure film had more impact than one would expect. This movie starts off pretty strong but stumbles in the third act in multiple ways. James Woods' character is pretty funny and perhaps it's worth watching the film just to see it. But this character seems to not belong to this movie's really. The deprogramming scenes-- well, they're very interesting, but I'm left wondering how realistically depicted this is. My gut feeling is it's only very slightly based on real deprogrammings. The film is severely marred by the Holywood Ending, where the two main brainwashed kids run away from the cult hand in hand, and conveniently, despite extraordinary earlier efforts by the cult to recapture the boy, suddenly the cult doesn't seem to care. It's a record scratching moment. Also, before that, and by themselves, that boy and girl discuss their old names and lives before joining the cult. This is extremely problematic, because it makes it look like they aren't "brainwashed" at all, and are perfectly aware of what they are doing. And if they are, then they are adults making decisions, and the later capture and deprogramming of the boy is, in fact, kidnapping and torture. It also means he shouldn't have had hallucinations during "deprogramming."

In a nut shell, 'Split Image' from 1982 provides a look at being brought into a fanatical cult and becoming programmed by a master manipulator. That being said, the film addresses our vulnerability and questions our sense of purpose. Our protagonist Danny, played by Michael O' Keefe, is at an impressionable age where his hormones are raging and he's trying to grab the reins of life. All the while, he's a part of an upper middle class family that comfortably lives up to their tier on the social ladder. After he's lured into the cult by Nancy Allen's character, "Rebecca," he begins to submit himself to the verbal persuasions of the cult's leader, Neil, played by the late Peter Fonda. James Woods' character, Charles, is somewhat of a professional deprogrammer of people who have become brainwashed by the cult. Woods is very entertaining in the role, but his character's demeanor is so unrealistically sensational that he's a borderline caricature of a "spell breaker." During the "breaking" process, where Charles is trying to bring Danny back to his senses, he tells the parents that he'll need to find a purpose in life after it's all over. It's at that time that Charles asks Danny's little brother about what he'd like out of life. The boy's response is essentially wrapped in the same affliction as his older brother; he's been proverbially brainwashed by his parents and their view of class and middle class life, and says that he'd like to live in clean air and in a high rise away from everyone, after which he gets up and runs out of the room. That moment essentially sums up one of the main themes of the film: conditioning takes away choice. Ultimately, both Danny and "Rebecca" manage to see through Neil's manipulation and defy the odds of conversion. The romantic notion lies in the message that love conquers all, and no opposing views, money or religion can get in the way of that. This, however, leaves us with a bit of a cliche which was not foreign for films of the time. Regardless, worth taking a look.

Took the gamble of watching this after First Blood (1982) from the same director Ted Kotcheff. Split Image shares the same hallmarks of the former: a slightly cartoonish world and shallow characterizations. O'Keefe performance is amateurish and Woods is laughably over the top. Underwhelming script and lackluster acting makes this movie a pass.

This film comes across more as a made for TV movie than an actual piece of Hollywood cinema. The biggest flaw takes place in the first act with the very lazy telling of the Olympic hopeful gymnast's conversion to a cult. We are expected to believe a pampered spoiled upper middle class athlete training for the Olympics can be brainwashed to join a cult over a 3 day weekend. His home life is happy and comfortable until he hits on a cute cult groupie. It's clear he went to the commune only in the hopes of bedding down the cute chick with issues. After spending the first two days being appropriately appalled at the clear cult activity, somehow on the 3rd day he has drunk the kool-aide. It's a bit silly to think after 3 days of singing Kumbaya around the campfire and abstaining from * is enough to make even the most disenfranchised youth shave his head and change his name. Yet there was no back story to suggest he was even slightly unhappy with his normal life. A bit of real mind control factors are briefly explored. The athlete being initially approached by an attractive girl takes a page from the real practice of "flirty fishing" from the Children of God child molester cult known as The Family. They also briefly touch upon sleep deprivation and starvation (proven mind control techniques) but only in the briefest sense. Everything else that follows is as lazy. The deprogramming is just as over the top and poorly executed as the original conversion. Cults and mind control are a very real thing and this movie does not educate or inform. It's a very cartoonish depiction of a very real thing. This movie was released in 1982. This was an era when the original flower children of the 1960s grew into young urban professionals. It is truly a representation of the boogeyman that the baby boomers (who had now become parents) thought would come in the night to steal the American dream. This movie is best enjoyed only as a cultural snapshot of what parents feared in the halcyon days of Ronald Regan.