Rating: 
Summary: Artful Directing, Finally
Review: It so happens that in the timeline of cinemas, the critics and viewers of movies walk into a theater with preconceived notions of what a film should be. Directors are trivialized left and right--the good ones at least. How else do we explain the lack of Academy Awards on Terrence Malick's belt after the Thin Red Line; people's degrading of John Woo movies as simply action, and not art; and, to pique my ire, the looking over of David Fincher in Fight Club? Sure, Get Carter will never be a Gladiator or a Fight Club, something to inspire you and leave you disallusioned, but the directing is top-notch. If you enjoy angles and flashes, and the way these things can offer a greater insight into a character's development than simply the script, look no further than Stephen Kay. At times, Carter is a gentler man. In others we see violence through his eyes in flashes of anger. Sure, the Die Hard's are great--they have the one-liners to make you laugh, and quote them when they're funny. But there's nothing else there. Characters do not evolve beyond introductions, and scripts offer no peace of mind. I loved the Professional, even if it was a bit slow and thick at parts. This movie excels where that one failed to coninue in excellence. Carter is a truly interesting character, and Kay was smart enough to know that the movie should revolve around him--he is the subject and purpose of the movie. And it works. Give this movie a chance--at 15.0$, how could you not? If you like directing as an art, and as a corrolary to scripting, look here. Don't look for action, though the car chases are the best since Ronin, or cheesy one-liners. And I say, in summation, thank god for artful directing, finally.
Rating: 
Summary: No Suspence
Review: The problem with this movie is you can't play Rambo and then try to make a serious movie. There is an attempt at a story but nobody stands a chance against Stallone and that the problem. Every ten minutes or so he just beats up or intimidates another villan. I think Stallone is a good actor but I wish he would stop playing Mr. Invinceable. It would have been a better movie If the villan's were someone you should be afraid of. If this was a action movie you tend to accept one villan getting it every ten minutes. But when you try to make a film with a plot the villans should have more character. It would be nice to see Stallone in a film where he build the suspense. Where you have some doubt on wheter he could pull It off. A movie like The Fugitive; I think would be an interesting character for him.
Rating: 
Summary: Stallone Delivers
Review: Although I am not a huge action movie fan, I have really enjoyed several of Stallone's films. This one is no exception. I know the critics really bad-rapped it, probably in part because they were comparing it to the original. Well, I haven't seen the original, so I am juding the 2000 version on its own merit. While I think some parts of the plot could have been more fully developed, overall, I enjoyed the visual style, the music and particularly the relationship between Stallone and Rachel Leigh Cook in the movie. I enjoyed seeing Stallone's vulnerable side as he tries to make amends with his family and comes to terms with what happened to his brother and niece. His pain over not being able to prevent either incident is tangible, and I was glad to see him kick some serious butt because of it. I think he really was trying to help his niece realize that her painful experience and any other mistakes she made don't necessarily have to define who she will become. Maybe he felt the mistakes he made had defined who he had become; but even he is able to overcome that somewhat, by opening his heart and loving his familly. The extras on the DVD are great, too. The original trailer and the 2000 trailer, as well as the commentary by the director are real pluses. I would recommend this DVD to anyone who likes action and anyone who likes Stallone
Rating: 
Summary: Terrible, Predictable, just plain bad
Review: The movie was terrible. I cant believe I spent 7 bucks to see it in the theater and I'm upset because I'll never get those two wasted hours of my life back. As soon as I walked out of the theater I forgot the whole movie because there was nothing memorable that happened. No good one liners, nothing. Just a bad plot, bad acting, bad everything. Dont waste your money and especially not your time on this wothless movie.
Rating:
Summary: Boring, very boring
Review: This is the first Sylvester Stallone movie that my wife didn't like. If you recall Judge Dredd or some of his other stinkers, thats saying a lot. I thought this movie was boring and stupid. A good example is when Mickey Roarke beats up Stallone, then leaves him outside so he can recover and come back in to kill him. Most os the time this move doesn't make any sense and even Stallone acts like he's bored. If you feel you have to see this movie, rent it first, you'll be glad you didn't buy it. I warned you.
Rating:
Summary: Action Movie--Nothing Less, Nothing More
Review: This is a typical action romp with Sly Stallone--and it pays off. Though it's not Sly's best, the action is strong, the dialogue is sharp, and the plot is intense. And Sly's acting is definately above-average, as is everyone else's in the movie (i.e. Mike Caine, Mick Rourke). Those expecting Oscar to visit aren't going to expect much, but as a good Stallone action film, it works. Most critics are holding "Get Carter" to expectations it doesn't meet. But the movie is not "American Beauty." Sly is an action star--it's what he does best, and in "Get Carter," he delivers.
Rating:
Summary: Get Carter
Review: although the story line was not exceptional, I found the cinematography wonderful stallone played well as did all the cast exspecially caine i wsvery impressed
Rating: 
Summary: Mediocre Remake
Review: This is a mediocre remake of a 1971 film by the same name, with Sylvester Stallone inheriting the title role from Michael Caine (who also has a minor role in this film). The screenplay has been updated to make it more techie (cyber porn, cell phones and internet billionaires). Writer David McKenna ("American History X") attempts to flesh out Carter a bit more and make him a nice guy in a bad profession. Unfortunately, while that helps, the dialogue is uniformly bad and the characters are boringly stereotypical. Director Stephen Kay is creative with the camera, but adds excessive style without regard to substance. He throws every technique ever invented into the frame in a flurry of strange camera angles, strobe effects and fast forward photography. The result is a presentation that is more idiosyncratic than brilliant. There is so much hand held photography that by the end of the film, the viewer has whiplash from trying to follow the action. Speaking of action, there is not much of it. There is a lot of talk, a few fistfights and one decent car chase and that is about it. For a film that clearly targets a male audience, this film fails to deliver what guys want most. Stallone gives his standard tough guy performance, which is generally among the best in the business. He is still in good shape at 54, but one has to wonder how much longer he can keep playing these characters before it becomes incongruous. As has been the rule in remakes of late, the former Carter, Michael Caine is given a supporting role in this film. Caine is excellent as the slime bag pulling the strings behind the scenes. Rachel Leigh Cook also gives a fine performance as Carter's niece, and does an outstanding job in one poignant scene where she describes to her uncle how she was raped. Alan Cumming plays a sniveling rich boy who made millions in technology and provides an almost comic contrast to Stallone's deadly seriousness. Mickey Roarke provides his character with a sinister and despicable personality, and is still as tough as they come. However, he is another actor whose thug days are numbered. I rated this film a 5/10. Despite some good acting, a dull script is embellished with unnecessary directorial flourishes making it more annoying than entertaining . Women subtract at least two points for testosterone overload.
Rating:
Summary: Worst Movie Ever
Review: Ok, this was probably the worst movie ever made. Stallone is an idiot who can't act to save his own miserable life. I saw this DVD 5 months ago and i still havent goten over the lack of plot, terrible acting and the nasty veins on stallone's sholders.
Rating:
Summary: Waste of Money
Review: To sum it all up, this movie sucks! It was one of the worst films I had ever seen. This was by far Stallone's poorest performance. If I could give a rating lower than one star I would. I recommend you save your money on this one!
|
