Generally unfavorable reviews - based on 20 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 0 out of 20
  2. Negative: 11 out of 20
  1. 60
    Kay doesn't seem to know the meaning of moderation.
  2. A thuddingly dull remake of the 1971 crime drama starring Michael Caine.
  3. The only fun is in watching Stallone square off against Alan Cumming and Mickey Rourke.
  4. 50
    If the film doesn't touch the original, it doesn't hit rock bottom, either.
  5. It is not a terrible movie, and Stallone has appeared in far worse. It's just that, although diverting, it's too routine for its own good.
  6. The movie around Stallone is fairly dreadful, so overly stylized and poorly written that it's always a struggle to stay oriented.
  7. 41
    McKenna's script is a frayed string and a contextual nightmare, peppered with puzzling references to the first film in a lame attempt at homage.
  8. 40
    Shot in shades of steely gray and streaked with near-constant rain, this gloomy revenge thriller is a sadistic cartoon.
  9. 40
    The film itself is a muddle, all rapid-fire step-edits and grainy, blue-filtered hokum. What is good is Stallone.
  10. Reviewed by: Jay Carr
    A sodden-looking film.
  11. 30
    Stallone returns in a gangster remake that wears itself (and the audience) out trying to be cutting-edge stylish.
  12. 30
    It's almost always night and almost always raining.
  13. 25
    Should you get Carter? Sure - but make it the Michael Caine classic Warner Bros. is releasing on video next week.
  14. This noir mystery is murkier than it needs to be, through no fault of Stallone's.
  15. 20
    If you've never seen the original, you may have no idea what's going on.
  16. Reviewed by: Sean Means
    Sly, slick and slow.
  17. Reviewed by: Todd McCarthy
    A useless remake of Mike Hodges' 1971 British gangland cult classic.
  18. If there's one piece of wisdom to be culled from this botched project, it's this: No one gets Carter.
  19. The result is a throwaway story hidden beneath a messy jumble of weird camera angles, worthless editing tricks and an ill-placed, obnoxious score.
  20. 10
    So minimally plotted that not only does it lack subtext or context, but it also may be the world's first movie without even a text.
User Score

Mixed or average reviews- based on 36 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 5 out of 11
  2. Negative: 5 out of 11
  1. ElaineT.
    Feb 13, 2001
    We walked out and got our money back about 10 minutes into the movie. It was shot too close, Stalone looked awful. His eyeliner was too obvious. The acting was embarrassing. Was there a plot? As I said, we couldn't stay to find out. Besides, I had to rearrange my sock drawer. Full Review »
  2. Oct 6, 2013
    Good turns by Stallone and Rourke are wasted by Tony Kaye's over-stylized direction and poor pacing. Bad films are not near as bothersome as the ones with good source material and a good cast that frankly should have been more than merely watchable. Full Review »
  3. Jul 29, 2012
    I dont understand the negative reviews i dont think people really gave this a chance.In no way is the Action movie like Cobra or Tango and Cash but Stallone is Excellent and is on his game,As is my other fav actor Mickey Rourke.Great story Great movie! Full Review »