X
- 2000
- R
- Warner Bros.
- 1 h 42 m
- 2000
- R
- Warner Bros.
- 1 h 42 m
Summary Hit man Jack Carter (Stallone), a mob enforcer in New York, returns to his hometown of Los Angeles for his brother's funeral. Realizing the death was not an accident, Carter seeks revenge.
Directed By: Stephen Kay
Written By: Ted Lewis, David McKenna
- 2000
- R
- Warner Bros.
- 1 h 42 m
- 2000
- R
- Warner Bros.
- 1 h 42 m
Get Carter
24
5.9
Where to Watch
Summary Hit man Jack Carter (Stallone), a mob enforcer in New York, returns to his hometown of Los Angeles for his brother's funeral. Realizing the death was not an accident, Carter seeks revenge.
Directed By: Stephen Kay
Written By: Ted Lewis, David McKenna
Where to Watch
Top Cast
Metascore
Generally Unfavorable
Based on 20 Critic Reviews
24
0% Positive
0 Reviews
0 Reviews
45% Mixed
9 Reviews
9 Reviews
55% Negative
11 Reviews
11 Reviews
Metascore
Generally Unfavorable
Based on 20 Critic Reviews
24
0% Positive
0 Reviews
0 Reviews
45% Mixed
9 Reviews
9 Reviews
55% Negative
11 Reviews
11 Reviews
Kay doesn't seem to know the meaning of moderation.
The only fun is in watching Stallone square off against Alan Cumming and Mickey Rourke.
User Score
Mixed or Average
Based on 45 User Ratings
5.9
40% Positive
18 Ratings
18 Ratings
38% Mixed
17 Ratings
17 Ratings
22% Negative
10 Ratings
10 Ratings
User Score
Mixed or Average
Based on 45 User Ratings
5.9
40% Positive
18 Ratings
18 Ratings
38% Mixed
17 Ratings
17 Ratings
22% Negative
10 Ratings
10 Ratings
I dont understand the negative reviews i dont think people really gave this a **** 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!
Report
Never saw the original Get Carter but this remake with Sylvester Stallone was okayish but not the best. I'm rating it 6 purely because some of the action was good and fight scenes and Rachael Leigh Cook is my kind of ideal woman or young girl in this, she's hot... Mickey Rourke was laughable and can't act if his life depended on it and we get so many annoying characters and Stallone isn't perfect either. The action scenes are done okay and Rachael Leigh Cook are the only reason this gets a 6
Report
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.
Stallone returns in a gangster remake that wears itself (and the audience) out trying to be cutting-edge stylish.
Should you get Carter? Sure - but make it the Michael Caine classic Warner Bros. is releasing on video next week.
If you've never seen the original, you may have no idea what's going on.
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.
Forgettable remake lacks the bite of the original with a distracted bumbling Stallone mumbling his way through the plot which basically plays to the same tune but lacks much of the punch of 70's carter in spite of its far larger Hollywood budget. 2000's carter is less brutal and far less intimidating. There is some fantastic cinematography here wasted with some...distracting performances from the a-list cast. Rourke and Caine were excellent here though and it's a shame neither of them had been cast in the central role. Stil might bel worth a watch if you liked the original.
Report
Note: 1971 vers; After seeing a trailer I resisted seeing this downbeat British so-called ‘thriller’ for many years but recently gave in. Can’t say it was worth it, if anything, it simply shows that some audiences were over-indulging in the new ’freedoms’ within production codes of the 70s. This overly bleak, overly brutal, overly immoral product is a sign of its time and about as perverse as it could get. The main characters motivation is poorly developed and unconvincingly drawn – we have a trained killer who ruthlessly uses everyone, his friends included, to get his way. His totally soulless, uncaring nature makes him as unlikeable as the sordid characters he’s out to kill. So, unless you are a criminal lowlife there’s not one soul you can identify with in this painful story. His violent treatment of women is as sick as the very situations he’s supposed to be ‘defending’ them from, those being; sexual exploitation via pornography with murder thrown in - potty writing to be sure. The moviemakers are clearly enjoying inflicting the same level of grotesqueries on women as they hypocritically claim to be ‘combating’. Beautiful Brit Ekland is again reduced to the thankless and pitiful role of a sordid gangster’s moll – no help to her career whatsoever. The bad guys are all so obviously bad as to be borderline ‘caricatures’ - we are being manipulated into disliking them just so we can ‘enjoy’ their violent demises. This overworked story element can either be done well or end up as the silly sensationalism we see here. Michael Cain claims his ‘super’ cool killer was based on some of his own family and friends (nice!) claiming he may have ended up being the same if not for the movies. His violent tough guy fights are so poorly choreographed and edited as to make them rather unbelievable. ‘Carter’ gets raves from some but is essentially just another sordid seventies movie like ‘Villain’ (Burton) and others in the new age ‘R’ Certificate ilk.
Report
Production Company
Morgan Creek Entertainment,
Franchise Pictures,
The Canton Company,
Epsilon Motion Pictures,
Carter Productions
Release Date Oct 6, 2000
Duration 1 h 42 m
Rating R
Tagline The Truth Hurts
Awards
The Stinkers Bad Movie Awards
• 4 Nominations
Razzie Awards
• 2 Nominations
World Stunt Awards
• 1 Nomination
