MovieChat Forums > Splinter (2009) Discussion > Yet another movie with potential that do...

Yet another movie with potential that doesn't deliver.

posted 11 years ago by Hallucinogen-X
9 replies | jump to latest

SPOILER AHEAD (obviously)

This movie had such huge potential,it got so many things right but unfortunately it got so much wrong too.First let's see what it got right :

An interesting,original monster.The monster was very original and quite believable.The movie didn't bore us with it's origins,it just put us in the character's shoes when they encountered it for the first time.Any stupid explanation would have ruined the movie.

Interesting characters you actually cared for.All four characters were people you actually cared for.I didn't want any of them to die.The criminals were also good hearted people.Maybe a bit cliched but works very well for the movie.

The main couple was great.Even though the guy was a bit nerdy it was great to see him with the hot girl.Finally a movie which shows a real couple.Yes you don't have to be a ripped douchebag to get a hot girl and to all those idiots who think the main couple was stupid and disgusting you can all go *beep* yourself.The guy was really cute,smart and caring.

The movie also didn't portray the geek as a coward and the convict as a hero.Initially i feared that the movie was gonna portray him as a coward and this would put strain on the couple's relationship and she was ultimately gonna end up with the convict but thankfully that did not happen.He was the most intelligent one amongst the group so it made sense that he was the one who came up with good ideas.Other characters also made good choices and were not dumb.

This is one of the few horror movies where the couple actually survives.It's like a breath of fresh air.I am so sick of watching movies where no one survives.I was pretty sure that either the chick or her boyfriend would die but to my surprise they both survived.Such a welcome twist.

The movie's atmosphere was really good.It was scary and believable.It wasn't extremely terrifying but was quite eerie.I applaud the director for getting so much right,even big budget movies don't get these key elements right.

However a few things ruined the movie for me :

The first is the shaky cam.One of the greatest mysteries of our times is why shaky cam exists.I read somewhere that the movie does not use CGI.This is sad because the movie tried to hide the low budget creature effect with shaky cam.I would have preferred cheap CGI to shaky cam.Shaky cam totally ruined any action that the movie had.

The movie is called Splinter yet the whole splinter thing is not the main focus.The only time splinters play an important role is when the convict gets a splinter in his finger while changing the tire.After that point it's simply a creature attacking and consuming any living thing.Splinters hardly play any part.

The movie had to feature the extremely lame "cutting your limb off" scene in an attempt to add some gore.This was really stupid,cringe worthy and unnecessary.The doctor cuts off the guy's hand with a tiny blade which wasn't even long enough to cut the hand all the way through and then he casually breaks the bone.And just a few minutes after this the guy's chilling with a beer,chatting like he just got a frickin injection instead of having his arm broken and cut with a blade.Forget dying of blood loss or sheer agony,he's chilling with a beer and shooting monsters with a shotgun.

Splinter is a good,entertaining movie which is far superior to other B-grade crap which had the potential to be a great movie.I give it a 6/10.

"You only live once, but if you do it right, once is enough."

[–] leonis89 11 years ago

In regards to the amputation scenario I have several issues with your statement.

Yes it is unlikely the man would not be in shock or pass out due to blood loss, but it's not impossible. One example I can think of is a World War 1 pilot named Ferdinand West. West was ordered to fly over enemy territory to establish locations of troops while HQ was making plans for attack, however he came under fire from 7 German fighters. He managed to maneuver the plane so his co-pilot could drive the forces away, then they did their observations and flew back. West had 7 machine gun wounds to his leg, including a shattered femur and lacerated femoral artery. So he twisted his trouser to put pressure on the wounds, flew back, apologized for the poor landing, filed his report and then sought medical attention. To no surprised, the leg was so badly slashed to pieces it couldn't be put back together so it was amputated. If what you say is correct, West should have crashed and died. He died in 1988, aged 92.

Another point, yes you actually can sliced up a body with a stanely knife (or known as a boxcutter). I know this purely on anecdotal evidence and it wasn't a human, it was an animal. My dads side of the family (with a few exceptions on either side) are recreational shooters. They do go hunting and have, (on the odd occasion) used that type of knife to cut, skin and carve the deer, pheasant, rabbit or whatever. It's extremely sharp, very reliable and effective at cutting things up. Hence why they're used by builders, plumbers, electricians etc.

Lastly I disagree it was done JUST to add gore. At the beginning of the film the crook is made out to be the bad guy who's done something horrible. He's portrayed to be a very unlikable character. It's been done so when he gets infected you support the fact he's going to be eaten from the inside out and die. But as the film progresses, you begin to like him. Then it abruptly reminds you he's infected. So they cut off his arm in the hopes he'll live and fulfill his purpose of helping the widow he wronged. Then he dies and it's very sad. That's how they intended it to happen.

[–] Hallucinogen-X 11 years ago

I know it's not IMPOSSIBLE to cut off your limb and survive but it is very rare to survive but the dude is sitting there chilled,drinking a beer and chatting and after a few moments he's running around shooting creatures.It's like he never lost his hand.That is impossible.

We feel connected to the bad guy because it turns out that he's not bad (when he tells them the story about how he plans on giving all his money to that lady) and hence we feel sad when he dies.Cutting off his limb had nothing to do with it.I would feel exactly the same way about him if that scene wasn't included.So why add that scene at all?I think it was there to add some gore to the movie cause if you think about it,the movie hardly has any gore.

"You only live once, but if you do it right, once is enough."

[–] leonis89 11 years ago

You clearly missed my point on amputation. According to you, a man having his arm cut off and (after an UNDETERMINED AMOUNT OF TIME) chit chatting is impossible.....but a man getting his leg practically blown off by aircraft machine guns, then fighting off enemy planes, landing, filing a report and then getting the rest of it amputated prior to the mass production of penicillin is historical fact? The story of West was to show you can keep going even when limbs are horrifically removed.

Seriously? You should get some lessons on history and find out just how versatile some people have been and can be. As I said, getting an amputation and striving through it is unlikely, but NOT impossible because it has HAPPENED BEFORE.

And finally, yes he does start out a bad guy. Good guys don't take innocent people hostage just to evade the police. Nor do bad guys steal trucks while doped up on meth and end up shooting someone. That's the whole point of his character! To make him unlikable, then realise he's seeking redemption for his actions, but you don't find out about his intentions until after he's infected.

If you're the viewer who immediately starts rooting for the drugged up, truck stealing murderer, you've got some serious issues.

[–] Hallucinogen-X 11 years ago

You clearly missed my point on amputation. According to you, a man having his arm cut off and (after an UNDETERMINED AMOUNT OF TIME) chit chatting is impossible.....but a man getting his leg practically blown off by aircraft machine guns, then fighting off enemy planes, landing, filing a report and then getting the rest of it amputated prior to the mass production of penicillin is historical fact? The story of West was to show you can keep going even when limbs are horrifically removed.

Wow.Where do i begin.Okay,the guy you talk about got the bones in his leg broken/shattered and fought enemies and when he got back his leg had to be amputated.You are equating that with cutting off a huge layer of flesh,muscles and nerves with nothing but a rusty old tiny blade.If you see the movie again,you'd see how tiny the blade actually is.And after this having your healthy bone repeatedly smashed by a concrete block.All this in the middle of nowhere with no chance of help and a weird virus spreading through your body.The two scenarios are very different and your example does not change the fact that it is still very unlikely for him to be so cool after the process.

And finally, yes he does start out a bad guy. Good guys don't take innocent people hostage just to evade the police. Nor do bad guys steal trucks while doped up on meth and end up shooting someone. That's the whole point of his character! To make him unlikable, then realise he's seeking redemption for his actions, but you don't find out about his intentions until after he's infected.

If you're the viewer who immediately starts rooting for the drugged up, truck stealing murderer, you've got some serious issues.

Do you even think before typing?That is exactly what i said.He was a bad guy who turned out to be a good guy and that is not because of the amputation.

"You only live once, but if you do it right, once is enough."

[–] leonis89 11 years ago

Now you're just quote mining what I've said. The pilot didn't "just" get his leg broken. I explained what happened to his leg in a previous post which is just as severe as getting an arm amputated, not to mention the pilot was in a much worse situation that required extreme levels of concentration and level headed thinking.

Also, you've just lied.

You say: "does not change the fact that it is still very unlikely for him to be so cool after the process."

You said: "That is impossible."

I was the first one to say it was UNLIKELY but not IMPOSSIBLE. You've changed your statements compared to your first and second posts.

Secondly, I explained what the knife was and it's capabilities. I know it will cut through flesh because I've used to cut up flesh before! Human meat is no more versatile than a deer's.

And lastly, yes it does make out the bad guy to be a good guy. WHICH IS WHAT I SAID IN THE FIRST PLACE BECAUSE YOU THINK THE AMPUTATION WAS JUST FOR GORE.

I'm having to use caps for your lack of ability to read but also not manage to keep to the same point from one post to the next.

[–] Hallucinogen-X 11 years ago

Now you're just quote mining what I've said. The pilot didn't "just" get his leg broken. I explained what happened to his leg in a previous post which is just as severe as getting an arm amputated

Oh really?Let's see what you said :

West had 7 machine gun wounds to his leg, including a shattered femur and lacerated femoral artery. So he twisted his trouser to put pressure on the wounds, flew back, apologized for the poor landing, filed his report and then sought medical attention. To no surprised, the leg was so badly slashed to pieces it couldn't be put back together so it was amputated. If what you say is correct, West should have crashed and died. He died in 1988, aged 92.

He had his femur shattered and he lacerated his femoral artery.That's a lot of agony but he was a trained soldier who didn't care for his life and was focused on defeating the enemy.Also his leg was amputated by doctors in a hospital.There might have been no anesthesia but it's still better than having it amputated by a random guy with a tiny,rusty blade in a gas station in the middle of nowhere.And the soldier might have battled even after shattering his femur but i'm sure he was in agony throughout but the guy in the movie did not have the slightest look of pain on his face.I almost forgot that he has no arm.Not to mention the fact that he just lost the love of his life in front of his eyes by a monster and now the same monster is consuming him.

Also, you've just lied.

You say: "does not change the fact that it is still very unlikely for him to be so cool after the process."

You said: "That is impossible."

I was the first one to say it was UNLIKELY but not IMPOSSIBLE. You've changed your statements compared to your first and second posts.

Oh dear God.Here's what i meant : It is impossible for someone to go through what the con went through and not have any effect afterwards.No pain or any sort of trouble or difficulty or shock.Even if it is not totally impossible it is so unlikely,it can be considered impossible.You have also not made any good arguments as to why it is not impossible.My main point or argument is not that he survived that procedure,it's that he is way too chilled out as though he got an injection.

Secondly, I explained what the knife was and it's capabilities. I know it will cut through flesh because I've used to cut up flesh before! Human meat is no more versatile than a deer's.

If you payed attention,you'd see that the blade is as long as a fingernail.You can't cut deep enough with a knife of that length.

And lastly, yes it does make out the bad guy to be a good guy. WHICH IS WHAT I SAID IN THE FIRST PLACE BECAUSE YOU THINK THE AMPUTATION WAS JUST FOR GORE.

Please enlighten me on how the amputation helped establish his transformation from bad guy to good guy.

"You only live once, but if you do it right, once is enough."

[–] leonis89 11 years ago

He had his femur shattered and he lacerated his femoral artery.That's a lot of agony but he was a trained soldier who didn't care for his life and was focused on defeating the enemy.

And in the following sentence I said it was torn to pieces because bullet wounds, especially ones that are deformed from contact with a fuselage will rip through flesh like stuffing your hands in a giant meat grinder. It was totally shredded and very little was holding it on.

Secondly, a trained solider? This is 1918, their standards aren't exactly brilliant. Both West and the man in the movie are put under a hostile situation.

Also his leg was amputated by doctors in a hospital.

After hours of no treatment whatsoever. Same as the man in the film.

There might have been no anesthesia but it's still better than having it amputated by a random guy with a tiny,rusty blade in a gas station in the middle of nowhere.

Like I said above, he didn't get treatment till hours after the fact. But are you implying a few thousand feet up, hundreds of miles behind enemy lines is not the middle of nowhere?

Why are you so hung up on this "tiny, rusty blade", when I've told you not only exactly what that blade is but also is perfectly capable of doing what you say is not possible considering the fact I've used it before on animals??? Why don't you put some effort in and actually google it? Or better yet, go down to a hardware store and buy one. If it's so ineffective on cutting things you'll have no issue putting it to the test on yourself.

Did I not mention the "tiny blade" is actually a razor blade? It's designed to be extremely sharp because it has to constantly cut through a verity of materials with ease. Hence why they're used heavily.

And the soldier might have battled even after shattering his femur but i'm sure he was in agony throughout but the guy in the movie did not have the slightest look of pain on his face.

Actually in the final report the co-pilot claims that he didn't know West was shot until they actually landed. No signs whatsoever considering that communication had to be done between each crewman to get lined up for shooting and observations.

Secondly, the guy in the movie did show pain. But he also showed that he was losing enormous amounts of energy and was near passing out.

Thirdly there is a cut scene between getting amputated and drinking the beer. You're only guessing the time frames.

I almost forgot that he has no arm.

That's your problem. Not the movie's.

Not to mention the fact that he just lost the love of his life in front of his eyes by a monster and now the same monster is consuming him.

If you watch the movie again, he constantly shows concern after realising the splinters have infected him. He also shows deep remorse over losing his girlfriend, even going outside to try and save her. But hey, it's not like people with mental instability have had a normal relationship with pain. It's not like people with mental health issues purposefully cause harm to themselves with little to no reaction...

..Oh, WAIT A MINUTE!

It is impossible for someone to go through what the con went through and not have any effect afterwards.

Hence why I showed I gave the example. There are plenty out there, but you refuse to look.

No pain or any sort of trouble or difficulty or shock.

So...the screaming wasn't a clue? And as I've stated earlier, the time between one event and the other is not specified. Not to mention he was incredibly weak afterwards.

Even if it is not totally impossible it is so unlikely,it can be considered impossible.

So...I take it Thomas Frank Durrant didn't do anything then? He was on a royal navy wooden motor launch (tiny boat that was for minor duties) and decided to take on a destroyer with a machine gun in plain sight. Shot 16 times from land and the destroyer but refused to surrender, even after the captain of the German destroyer pleaded with him to stop. It wasn't until he eventually passed out that the destroyers crew raided the boat. But it was too late and he eventually bled to death. The captain even recommended to the captured troops that Durrant deserved their victoria cross, which he got.

Now tell me, was he screaming, in shock and in trouble? Was West?

You have also not made any good arguments as to why it is not impossible.

Except for the ones I keep giving that you either dismiss or misunderstand.

My main point or argument is not that he survived that procedure,

I never said it was!

it's that he is way too chilled out as though he got an injection.

Then tell me Mr. Expert, how should have he reacted?

If you payed attention,you'd see that the blade is as long as a fingernail.You can't cut deep enough with a knife of that length.

Actually they're about inch and a half long, depending on the type and how far they can retract outward. But nonetheless, a scalpel used by surgeons are shorter. BUT OMFG HOW DO THEY GO DEEPER???? Here's how; they make a cut, then part the sides to get the blade in deeper.

I seem to be getting the impression you have lived a very sheltered life. But nonetheless, I'm done with you. Getting things in your thick skull is completely pointless even though similar situations have happened, are happening and will continue to happen.

You can post a reply if you want, but I wont be reading it.

[–] Hallucinogen-X 11 years ago

And in the following sentence I said it was torn to pieces because bullet wounds, especially ones that are deformed from contact with a fuselage will rip through flesh like stuffing your hands in a giant meat grinder. It was totally shredded and very little was holding it on.

Like i said,it's a lot of agony.You make it sound like his leg was almost off and the doctors just had to give it a little pull like you were there to witness all this.The guy got his leg *beep* up pretty bad,there's no denying that but the guy in the movie suffered much more.His healthy arm was slowly cut with a small knife and after that his bone was broken by smashing it several times with a concrete block.

Secondly, a trained solider? This is 1918, their standards aren't exactly brilliant. Both West and the man in the movie are put under a hostile situation.

Umm...A soldier is a soldier despite the year and 1918 is not that far back,we're not talking about medieval soldiers.The soldier did not care for his life hence he pushed to complete his mission,he did not expect to live anyways so he didn't care about the pain or the damage.

After hours of no treatment whatsoever. Same as the man in the film.

So in the movie,the man's hand was amputated by doctors in a hospital?As soon as he realized that the virus is spreading very quickly he decided to cut his hand,he didn't exactly wait to get to a hospital.

Like I said above, he didn't get treatment till hours after the fact. But are you implying a few thousand feet up, hundreds of miles behind enemy lines is not the middle of nowhere?

He didn't get his leg amputated behind enemy lines,he broke his leg behind enemy lines.He got his leg amputated by doctors in a hospital.The guy in the movie got his hand amputated in a gas station.

Secondly, the guy in the movie did show pain. But he also showed that he was losing enormous amounts of energy and was near passing out.

The only time he showed pain was during the amputation and he limped a bit after that.Besides that he was totally normal.He was totally active,running around distracting monsters and shooting them.The soldier was driven to complete his mission and he had given up hope that he's survive.Both the characters had totally different motivations.

Thirdly there is a cut scene between getting amputated and drinking the beer. You're only guessing the time frames.

The entirety of the movie takes place in around 4-5 hours.You're the one guessing the time frame is long enough for him to completely recover.You can't exactly recover from an injury like this in an hour.

That's your problem. Not the movie's.

No it's the movie's problem for portraying the scene so unrealistically and basically turning him into Superman.

If you watch the movie again, he constantly shows concern after realising the splinters have infected him. He also shows deep remorse over losing his girlfriend, even going outside to try and save her. But hey, it's not like people with mental instability have had a normal relationship with pain. It's not like people with mental health issues purposefully cause harm to themselves with little to no reaction...

..Oh, WAIT A MINUTE!

Wow you're actually suggesting he harmed himself (i.e. cut off his arm) because he was sad?xD.Congratulations on reaching a new level of stupidity.The point of my line was that he has nothing to live for,his lover is dead,he has nowhere to go,he is infected with a deadly virus.He had no motivation to cut off his own arm.Maybe if his girl was in danger and he was the only one who could save her,his actions could be understood.

Hence why I showed I gave the example. There are plenty out there, but you refuse to look.

You equate breaking a bone to cutting off your own arm in your example.That is the worst example you could use.A more comparable example would be the movie 127 Hours.

So...the screaming wasn't a clue? And as I've stated earlier, the time between one event and the other is not specified. Not to mention he was incredibly weak afterwards.

I meant pain after getting his arm cut off obviously.And yes he was so weak.The poor guy could barely run around shooting monsters with a shotgun.

Then tell me Mr. Expert, how should have he reacted?

Since you lack any common sense allow me to explain how he should have reacted.The best reaction would be dying.The second best reaction would be fainting.Third best reaction would be barely alive.Basically anything except popping open a beer and being like "Yeah.Cut my *beep* arm off.Take that you splinter."

Actually they're about inch and a half long, depending on the type and how far they can retract outward. But nonetheless, a scalpel used by surgeons are shorter.BUT OMFG HOW DO THEY GO DEEPER???? Here's how; they make a cut, then part the sides to get the blade in deeper.

If you see the movie,you'd notice the blade is a retractable one and a very small portion of it comes out.The guy even says "This is it?" which is something he wouldn't say if surgeons used even smaller knives.It is very difficult to cut someone's arm with a blade because a blade is very thin and old and hence not very sharp and the guy's got huge muscles.But anyways that's not the part that bothers me what bothers me is no blood loss or reaction from the character afterwards.

My point is that amputation has become a new thing in horror movies of this generation and it is extremely stupid.You can't simply chop off your arm and be totally cool about it like you got shot.It was disappointing to see an original horror movie use such a cliched scene.My post is not just about that scene,it's about how the movie could have been much better.Enough with the amputation stuff man seriously.

"You only live once, but if you do it right, once is enough."

[–] Rena_Mahone 10 years ago

Totally agree about the potential this movie had. Too bad several things ruined it - I gave it a 6/10, too.

In my opinion,
Good points: great and original creature, nice location, creepy and realistic atmosphere, movie is rarely boring.
Bad points: cheesy and unlikeable characters (I did not care about any of them), mediocre acting, a few absurd scenes (such as the after-amputation you mentioned), retarded shaky cam and subsequent crappy ameteurish feel.

Boycott movies that involve real animal violence! (and their directors too)