A remake better than the original. - Get Carter (2000) Discussion

[–] D_R_Cran 17 years ago

I think you need to learn about real film making and not terrible american remakes with terrible acting and an even more terrible over the top s**t dialogue, grow up and watch proper films you american freak!

reply

[–] Peannuts66965538 17 years ago

thanks any way but im not from the usa
thanks, theres nothing wrong with get carter 2000 its not one of his beter films
but not a bad story line ive seen better films then this from sly

reply

[–] mercury4 17 years ago

Very true. This is not his best, but it isn't the worst movie ever made like a lot of people made it out to be. It basically follows the same story as the original, accept that they change characters around a little bit. The biggest difference is that they made Jack Carter a good guy and not a murderer. In the remake he lets Thorpey live and he isn't the one that sticks the needle in his brother's woman on the side, Geraldine (Margaret in the original). In the original he was a hitman, but in the remake he's more of an enforcer like Rocky that goes after guys when they don't pay up. He kills the character Eddie the way he kills Brumby in the original. He kills Cyrus, who was like the Eric character in the original. He takes out Kinnear and it looks like he's going to kill him the way he killed Eric in the original, but he let's Kinnear live. Kinnear in the remake is younger and basically a wimp that involuntarily gets mixed in Jack's brother's death. In the original Kinnear was behind everything. In the remake Brumby is the one that turns out to be the head honcho. The Sylvester Stallone remake needed a better director; like maybe Richard Donner or William Friedkin. George P. Cosmatos would've even been better than Stephen Kay. It could've been done better, but Get Carter of 2000 is not a 1 star movie. It is different from the original Get Carter, but not worse.

reply

[–] This_Is_Anfield 17 years ago

If we are being totally fair then there is no debate here fortunately. There is an ocean of difference between the original and the remake. The original will rightfully go down as one of the classics and will be remembered for many years. The remake, rightfully again, will fade into obscurity - actually it already has.

reply

[–] m-slovak79 16 years ago

OP said, "A remake better than the original."

bottom line...

Get Carter (1971) = 7/10 (but if i had to choose a 6 or 8 i would say 6)
Get Carter (2000) = 6/10 (but if i had to choose a 5 or 7 i would probably say 7)

in ways the original was better but in ways the remake was better. but basically i think the original needed a little more 'flash' to it which is it's main flaw, but i think ill give the small edge to the original one cause i liked the ending better on the original plus the character in the original is more cold blooded the way he's presented... although in general Stallone does play the tough guy part better in movies than Caine does.... so overall it's close, but ill give the edge to the original.

and honestly, i think the remake (2000) probably is rated low cause my guess is the fans of the original probably gave it a really low score cause they where upset about a remake regardless of how the remake turned out.... so the remake is definitely underrated cause it's for sure better than it's current 4.7/10 average rating if you ask me... i would say a mid to high 5's is where it should be at minimum overall... cause it's not THAT BAD.

i also think the original is a little overrated to but not alot or anything... cause it's currently @ a average rating of 7.6/10 and i would say a high 6's or MAYBE low 7's tops is about right for it (i.e. around 6.8-7.2/10 range)

p.s. im a American to... and i generally like Stallone and Caine's acting.

reply

[–] slimypants 16 years ago

I think the only reason you feel the original needed more flash is because you are American. You guys seem to love your Hollywood glitz. The original Get Carter was all about gritty realism. Having grown up in Newcastle I know how accurate movie was in portraying an industrial city in decline, the sense of desolation and despair. Newcastle was definitely the star of the film.

Also, Caine in the original was one menacing MF. Yeah Stallone has big muscles, so what? I could easily see Stallone prancing round a wrestling ring in skin tight lycra, but while he's busy admiring his muscles in a mirror Caine would stick a smashed Brown Ale bottle in his face (followed by a half glass). Game over!

reply

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] integralesixteenvalve 16 years ago

"I agree 100%. I adore the new version. It's fantastic. I seen the original afterwards, and i thought it was dreadful. It bored the hell out of me. "

"I seen the original"? If your grammar is anything to go by, no wonder you liked the remake better. The original was far beyond your intellectual capacities!

'Culture, sophistication, a little bit more than an 'ot dog' You said it Bob!

reply

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] integralesixteenvalve 16 years ago

Unfortunately, the more you ramble the more you show how little you know. Firstly, Get Carter was not popular on it's first release but gained it's following as time went on. Secondly, swatting is what you do to flies. If what you mean is 'swotting', well, I haven't done that for a good 15 years. You, however, sadly embody why every other film that comes out of Hollywood is a braindead retread of far better originals. By entertainment, you mean something that doesn't require you to think. Which is why you found the original boring.

Give that organ between your ears some exercise, mate. It might just thank you one day.

'Culture, sophistication, a little bit more than an 'ot dog' You said it Bob!

reply

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] banditemilyx12-1 16 years ago

There's no way.
The way Caine portrayed Jack Carter cannot be beat.

The expressions he used throughout the film gave the audience a better chance of feeling the emotions.
- For example, when he sees his dead brother for the first time, he doesn't do a dramatic break down, he's just taking it all in.

reply

[–] habler6 16 years ago

No quotable lines ? u have to be kidding. 'Your a big man but your out of shape" "Your eyes are like piss holes in the snow" "You knew id have to kill ya didnt ya" just off the top of my head, burned into my skull never forgotton classic lines.

reply

[–] truehammer 16 years ago

People like you should be terminated at birth. Hollywood needs to stop stealing our classics and making them crap and stick to making their own garbage. The Long Good Friday next, is nothing sacred?

"No kitty! This is my pot pie!"

reply

[–] thelastfaceyouwillsee 15 years ago

My attitude to this movie has softened since I first saw it. After a couple of viewings, it still isn't a patch on the original but it isn't such a terrible movie either. I don't object to remakes - even bad ones. A great movie is still a great movie even if it shares the same name with a steaming pile.

Caine's a far better actor than Stallone and there's a 70s northern grimness about his film that cuts to the bone. On its own merits Stallone's Get Carter is still watchable - Mickey Rourke's Paice is a hardhitting slimeball and Alan Cummings is great as the techno-nerd Kinnear. It could have been edgier, grittier and I think the location was too 'nice' - setting it in an industrial town like the original did might have added atmosphere.

I think more could have been done about the sleazy business the various villains are engaged in. Paice's porn empire looked like a glossy legit business - it would have been more interesting to have had Carter stumble across a nasty underside to it (like in 8MM). As it is the plot is too lean and lightweight in comparison to the original.

Being a Hollywood popcorn movie, I wasn't surprised to see that Stallone's Carter not only survives but drives off a seemingly reformed man. In any case in this version he is debt-collector rather than a killer. Caine's Carter is a professional hardman whose specific 'job' is never really explained although he has no qualms about killing.

Carter doesn't die in the original novel, BTW, and reappears in two (lesser) sequels.

reply

[–] Leveticus 15 years ago

I prefer Stallone's "anti-hero" version of Jack Carter.

"Does it look like I give a damn?" - James Bond

reply

[–] si_a_robinson 15 years ago

After settling the score for his dead brother, Carter decides to give up his life of crime, having formed a bond with Doreen

What a great ending, Typical Hollywood. Sorry you are deluded if you think that the remake is anywhere near as good as the original. Period

reply

[–] BRONSONasHARMONICA 13 years ago

Hopefully now you are 7 years older you have matured and see the original as the far greater film.

You know, Wobbles... I'm kinda mad at you.

reply