does anyone else agree that the creature in this movie was a complete rip-off of venom from spiderman? i was actually enjoying this film then half way through it turned into aload of one liners when it shouldve just stayed dark and brooding and the ending with the mysterious bubbles in the subway was just pointless if you never see what there actually coming from. A complete waste of cellaloid (although rutger was good as he is in everything).
shareI think the humour and one liners is what makes it great. It would just have been a mediocre supernatural B-thriller without it.
Many have said the creature looks like venom. Personally I think it looks more like a alien.
Yes the ending is a bit weird. Not that bad though, imho it's not all bad when everything arent wrapped up at the end.
"I'm selfdestructive baby
But a friendly one" - Spiritual Beggars.
yeah this guy did 2 years ago.
http://imdb.com/title/tt0105459/board/flat/18396958
_____
remakes? re-imagining? redundant
http://diaclonex.dvdaf.com/owned
A complete ripoff? Not even close. First, the creature in Split Second can't change it's appearance. Second, it's not some dude inside an alien suit. The only real similarity to Venom is the teeth.
And the bubbles at the end in the tunnel were supposed to be setting up a sequel. As in, those bubbles are coming from another, still alive creature.
Prof. Farnsworth: Oh. A lesson in not changing history from Mr. I'm-My-Own-Grandpa!