ridiculous rating

While it doesn't offer any answers, it both thrills and makes you think.

There is, somehow, an interesting story here, as well as some good acting. There are also some good scenes

There's a more than satisfactory amount of boom-boom in the movie's trim running time.

Unless the people involved in a remake of an original film from the past truly have a passion for what they're doing, most people do not have high hopes for the overall outcome. Many viewers do not believe there are needs to reconstruct or modernize their favorite film property. Different interpretations are not normally accepted because they deviate too far from what made the original so memorable. Actor Sir Michael Caine has proved in many projects that he is quite the capable performer. Even before he starred in the first Get Carter (1971), Caine had had a number of good roles. Get Carter (1971) was one his best roles of the 70s and it forever stuck with him. By the late 1990s, Sylvester Stallone on other hand had hit a slump in his career. After supposedly retiring from action films (which doesn't hold up today), Stallone took part in lesser acclaimed films. Most of these tanked or were not even theatrically released. This film is one of those blunders during that time but it isn't as bad as some say.Basing its premise off the original, Jack Carter (Sylvester Stallone) learns of his brother's death. Feeling his brother's death was no accident, Carter begins investigating who and what might be the reason for his personal loss. The people Carter begins questioning are suspects like Geraldine (Rhona Mitra), Eddie (Johnny Strong), Jeremy Kinnear (Alan Cumming), Cliff Brumby (Michael Caine) and Cyrus Paice (Mickey Rourke). All of these individuals have some kind of connection to Carter's brother. On top of that, Carter tries to figure out how to reconcile his personal career with his family. His brother's wife (Miranda Richardson) doesn't really want him around and her daughter (Rachael Leigh Cook) doesn't understand him. Both of which are trying to cope with their loss. All in all, the rewritten screenplay by David McKenna wasn't bad. McKenna was also the writer to the widely acclaimed movie American History X (1998). It's not flawless like many scripts but it is workable. Here's what doesn't work first though.There are several unnecessary aspects going on throughout the running time. Unlike the original where Carter was a gangster, this time he's a hired bouncer of sorts. There's a subplot where Carter is having an affair with his boss' mistress. There's no real payoff for this plot thread. It gets resolved but there isn't much to feel for it because of how little it's focused on. Also some specific and significant plot points are not as clear as some might think. This can get confusing if one isn't paying attention enough. The other problem belongs to the editing executed by Gerald B. Greenberg. Greenberg who's had a long career should know better. The problem is having fast to slow film editing for quick snippets of the movie. What's the point of speeding up a scene for a few seconds, then to have it play a regular speed for a few seconds and then speed it up a few seconds again? That's not style, that's needless speed adjustments. Other than these issues, the film plays out okay.Although he hasn't gone on to direct numerous other theatrical features, Stephen Kay's direction was doable for the story. Kay has had more recent credits as an actor in general hospital. The actors achieve what they set out to do. Sylvester Stallone's acting is not at the emotional hard hitting level and that's not expected with this character. His performance is supposed to feel relatively disconnected from everyone else because nobody else does what he does. That's why his niece and sister in law are not sure how to converse with him. Rachael Leigh Cook is believable as Carter's niece considering she started her career much earlier than this feature. Alan Cumming and Mickey Rourke both play their characters well. Rourke plays his role the most relaxed and comfortable. Even Michael Caine has a significant role, of which he has quite a harsh tongue as well. Even with Stallone saying he was retiring from the action genre, this film still has action sequences.Are they as brutal as some of Stallone's other R-rated films - no. However this is made up by Stallone's ferocious anger that is portrayed on screen. Almost the entire movie has Stallone clenching his teeth with rage. There's a lot of built up energy here. The action ranges from shootouts to fist fights. The camera-work by Mauro Fiore was decent. The only weird thing is that much of story takes place in rainy settings. Not sure if that was just due to filming location during certain seasons or was intentionally filmed on days like those. Either way, the lighting was good as well for the scenes filmed. Fiore also worked on other films like Smokin' Aces (2006), Avatar (2009), The A-Team (2010) and Southpaw (2015). The film score by Tyler Bates was a unique listening experience. Most scores rely more on orchestra. However Bates focused more on percussion, which gives the sound a smoother feel. Bates also reprises the original Get Carter theme. Even the softer themes are acceptable. Not bad.Editing and subplots are the only big issues among this production. This remake isn't terribly unwatchable as some viewers say. It doesn't surpass the original but it's not awful. The acting is fine, the action is fun and the music is nicely updated.

Continuing my plan to watch every Sly Stallone movie in his filmography in order, I come to his first movie of the new millennium 2000's Get CarterPlot in A Paragraph: Jack Carter (Stallone) a mob enforcer living in Las Vegas, travels back to his hometown of Seattle for his brother's funeral. During this visit, Carter realises that the death of his brother was not accidental, but a murder. With this knowledge, Carter sets out for revenge. This is a strange case, and certainly a missed opportunity!! The movie doesn't seem to flow right, and that's probably due to the fact that there were lots of changes during the production of the movie. Director Stephen Kay clashed with Franchise Pictures, the financier, over the tone of the film. Kay wanted the film to be more of a character driven "anti-revenge" film, while Franchise wanted a more traditional Stallone action picture. Sly who was trying to move away from action pictures agreed with the director, but 15 (yes 15) producers and poor test screenings who complained about the lack of action in a Stallone movie, resulted in lots of footage on the cutting room floor, several reshoots and and two new endings later, it's totally different in tone to what was intended. Michael Caine's character who was also only in one scene in the original cut, but test audiences liked him and they transformed the movie to give Caine a bigger role. It's sad and disappointing that Sly saw this as another character driven movie to follow up 'Copland' with, but it ended up as nothing more than a routine action flick, that is quite forgettable.Most of Miranda Richardson's scenes seem to have been left on the cutting room floor, and John C McGinley simply disappears from the movie despite being great in it. Alan Cumming is fine and Mickey Rourke is an intimidating presence to go against Sly's Jack Carter, Whilst Michael Caine does what Michael Caine does. But it's Rachael Leigh Cook who is brilliant here. The scene between her and Sly on the rooftop and is the best scene in the movie. I actually consider that scene one of the best scenes of Sly's career. It's just a pity the the rest of the movie wasn't filled with such scenes. As a remake it's awful, as a stand alone Stallone move, it's about as watchable as 'Tango & Cash' and 'Cobra' but without the cheese.

This movie is just not worth watching...It starts slowly with a stupid scene, the whole movie goes from one scene to another within seconds, even the fighting and the killing are shorten and you find yourself watch half a fight and then the result of the fight...There is a plot... but while watching you just get lost, details are moving too fast and the only long shots are the important clues (so you immediately know it's a clue) and the drama talks.The editing and sound mixing is super bad, in order to fill it all in 102 minutes you can hear talks starting from the scene before and only a few seconds later you can sea the real scene. The video editing is not a hit either, a lot of flashbacks and other trite scenes.Shortly, not a recommended movie.

Jack Carter left his Seattle home to become a Las Vegas mob casino financial enforcer. He returns for the funeral of his brother Richie' after a car crash during a storm. Talking to daughter Doreen, Jack suspects it was murder. Cliff Brumby, whose club Richie ran, is financially linked to porn and prostitution baron Cyrus Paice, who claims to be just a front-man for IT tycoon Jeremy.After Jack finds a CD, containing images of Doreen, Jack goes after the lot of them...I've always had a fondness for this movie, but then again, I've never compared it to the remake, just as a stand alone Stallone vehicle.And it works this way. Compared to the original, it's just a remake by name, and loosely on the story, nothing else.Stallone is good in his role, but he especially shines when he shares scenes with Leigh Cook, the two of them have some real chemistry, and gives the film a more humanistic feel to it.There are some strange, but effective direction styles, especially when Mcginley is on screen, different alternates to situations and lines repeated in different manners, odd but strangely compelling.The rest of the cast support Stallone well, and make the film that little bit more classier than it should be, but all in all its a solid movie, pointless remake.If your a fan of Stallone, see this, it's really not as bad as the naysayers.