IMDb user reviews for
Get Carter (1971) More at IMDbPro »

Filter:

Best Chronological Prolific Authors Loved It Hated It Hide Spoilers:

Page 1 of 15:

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11]

Index

145 reviews in total

---

69 out of 87 people found the following review useful:
Masterpiece of intense drama, with hidden depths, 3 April 2001

Author: (gavin@thepsychoticreaction.fsnet.co.uk) from Grimsby, England

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

"Get Carter" is often said to have inspired the current crop of British gangster films. If this is the case, Guy Ritchie et al must have well and truly got the wrong end of the stick. I haven't actually seen "Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels" or any of the "Right Royal Cockney Barrel O'Monkeys" type films which followed it, but I get the impression that these are merely dumb entertainment for "new" lads. In contrast, "Get Carter" is unremittingly bleak. If Samuel Beckett wrote a gangster film, it might come out something like this. The grim Newcastle locations add to an atmosphere of decay and despair. The naturalistic camera work avoids cliches and adds effectively to the atmosphere. Long, static shots give the impression of actually being present as a bewildered bystander as the gangsters go about their "business". Although the long tracking shots of people walking/running are almost pythonesque at times, this only serves to emphasise the down to earth realism of the film. After all, even violent gangsters have to go through banal routines such as walking down the street. The score is minimalist but very effective, in contrast to the modern British films which seem to be conceived as a gravy train for music publishers and second rate "indie" bands.

There are few, if any, sympathetic characters. Jack Carter, the central character, is not at all pleasant or heroic. The only people for whom he shows any affection are Frank and Doreen, and he is unable to express this affection except through money and violence. Keith thinks he is Carter's friend, but when he is let down and beaten up he realises that he is being used. Carter does not appear to love Anna, and it is not certain whether she really loves him, although there is a genuine sexual attraction between them. Carter belongs to a misogynistic and hypocritical culture which the film scathingly exposes. The only scene in which he shows any genuine emotion is when he discovers a porn film featuring his niece, Doreen. The cruel irony is that in the opening scene, he was seen looking at dirty pictures with his cronies, and his disgust must be partly directed at himself even though he refuses to acknowledge it. He then expresses his shock and outrage by going straight upstairs to assault and humiliate the nearest woman! And she just happens to have appeared in the very same film as Doreen: a clear case of men projecting their own sexual guilt onto women. The makers of the film cannot have been unaware of the implications of this sexual hypocrisy. The scenes are deliberately juxtaposed to emphasise Carter's ambivalence and double standards.

The certainties of a linear narrative have been bravely eschewed. Carter is only able to react to events which are beyond his control and is sometimes led up blind alleys, taking a long time to realise what is really going on. This, again, is realism at its best. Real life does not have a coherent plot and nobody has complete control over their own life. Carter's lack of control is a central theme of the film. He likes to think that he is big, hard and clever, but his acts of revenge are ultimately pointless. Like Frank Machin in "This Sporting Life", he is emotionally shallow and able to express himself only through futile acts of aggression. He is cruelly exposed in the final scene as the smile is wiped off his face, the closing shot of the sea emphasising man's powerlessness.

The film also contains elements of social comment and class politics. Frank is portrayed as a decent, honest, "salt of the earth" working class type, while the slimy and sinister Kinnear has a chauffeur and lives in a big house in the country where he hosts decadent orgies. These themes come to the fore in the (often overlooked) funeral scene. As Frank's small cortege pulls through the gates of the crematorium, we see an endless stream of cars leaving from the previous funeral. The message is that the "liberation" of the 60s brought few practical benefits for working class people in the north of England. Again, this relates to the dominant theme of control, or lack of it. The "swinging 60s" are exposed as a dead end of pointless hedonism. The extent of women's liberation is also questioned. "Get Carter" portrays a society in which women are not at all liberated except in a few superficial ways. The female characters in the film are all victims, owned and used by men who see them as sex objects and little more. It is implied that the sexual freedom brought by the contraceptive pill has benefited men more than women.

It's not all angst and depression though. There is some good fighting, swearing, shooting and dangerous driving. There are also many subtle touches of black humour. Nevertheless, this is not a mindless action film. The consequences of violence are never ignored or glossed over. We are shown Keith lying on his bed in agony after getting a severe beating, leaving us in no doubt that his brief flirtation with gangsters has ruined his life.

"Get Carter" is a masterpiece, although it will not be to everyone's taste. If you want non-stop action, try a mindless Arnold Schwarzeneger film. There is nothing for you here. However, if you are prepared to approach "Get Carter" with an open mind and think about it rather than be a passive observer demanding to be entertained, you will find a rewarding work of art with hidden depths. Forget Guy Ritchie. The only worthy successor of "Get Carter" is Neil Jordan's "Mona Lisa", which addresses similar themes and is equally bleak and disturbing.

---

50 out of 64 people found the following review useful:
Is this the best gangster movie ever?, 24 March 2005
Author: Graham Deans Williamson (gdwilliamson@deathsdoor.co.uk) from Middlesbrough, England

Is it? It's certainly the cornerstone of Michael Caine's extremely distinguished career, with the great man proving icy, formidable and utterly unforgettable as Jack Carter, a London-based gangster travelling up to a bleak, industrial Newcastle to find out the truth about his brother's death. We probably expect Caine to be excellent unless the material around him is overwhelmingly bad, and even then he can remain watchable. But he's surpassingly brilliant here.

There are some good supporting turns too, from Petra Markham as Carter's much-abused niece (or is it his daughter?) Doreen. Geraldine Moffatt as Glenda - who nearly matches Carter for casual amorality - and the painfully underrated George Sewell. The most interesting presence is John Osborne as local crimelord Kinnear, and it's Osborne's presence that I think is central to understanding 'Get Carter', what it stands for and why it's still both misunderstood and infinitely better than its legion of imitators.

Osborne broke the conventions of British theatre in the 1950s with his 'Angry Young Man' melodramas such as 'Look Back In Anger', and his (surprisingly good) performance points to the attitude director Mike Hodges takes towards his material here. 'Get Carter' is less of a gangster thriller and more of a social realist drama, taking a whirlwind tour of Newcastle and the surrounding regions, sometimes alighting at a beautiful pastoral landscape but more frequently stopping off in dingy bookkeepers, pubs with paint peeling off the walls and streets full of identical red-brick houses. As with his more recent films 'Croupier' (1998) and 'I'll Sleep When I'm Dead' (2003), Hodges has an unerring knack for conveying the feel of a location to the audience, a trait which becomes particularly resonant for any Newcastle natives watching this movie today and noting that the gritty, sleazy Newcastle of the 1970s may as well be on a different planet to the shiny, trendy Newcastle of today.

It seems odd to call such a well-loved film misunderstood and under-appreciated, but it is, on both counts. It's misunderstood in Britain because its canonization as a classic came during the 'New Lad' era of the mid-90s. The defining film of that movement is Guy Ritchie's 'Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels' (1998), a film as different from 'Get Carter' as two British gangland movies can be. Ritchie, along with his media cohorts, is selling a nostalgic ideal of gangsterism as a hip and fashionable lifestyle with all the objectionable bits bleached out. Hodges, who is old enough to remember what London was like under the Krays, has no truck with such sentimental rubbish, and so 'Get Carter' is probably the least glamorous gangster film ever made. You'd cross the road to avoid Jack Carter, and the film never soft-sells his capacity for horrifying brutality - often towards women. This is gangland Britain as it was, rather than as people would like to think it is.

Certainly, Carter's sexual prowess is enviable - he sleeps with practically every female character in the film - but little of it looks enjoyable. Sex in Get Carter is often mechanical and pointless, sometimes interrupted by violence and, in the film's most celebrated sex scene (with a cameo appearance by Britt Ekland), so mundane it can be achieved without Caine moving a muscle. Hodges' attitude is absolutely take-no-prisoners, and the overwhelming grimness and brutality of Get Carter (aided by Roy Budd's chillingly minimal score) is still striking today.

Which probably leads to the second reason Get Carter is under-appreciated - its American reception was and is surprisingly cold. Surprising because just a few years later those same critics would be praising Scorsese's 'Taxi Driver' (1976), a very similar film that subverts the conventions of the crime movie into something more disturbing and naturalistic, and even shares some of 'Get Carter's darker themes. Even when the misconceived Stallone remake came out in 2000, some critics were still puzzling over why a nasty little British thriller that few people had seen would be considered worthy for a remake - as opposed to the British reaction to that later film, which was outrage at a national treasure defiled.

Perhaps it's a question of context - whereas American critics could appreciate how real 'Taxi Driver' was as a portrait of the worse areas of 1970s New York, they had no such context for 'Get Carter', seeing only the brutality and amorality without any of the redeeming social observation. They wanted a gangster film, but it's more than that, a whole lot more. Either way, whether you love it, like it or have never seen it before, it's always worth dusting off and taking a look at the film behind the myth. The myth is seductive. The film is better.

---

34 out of 43 people found the following review useful:
A Masterpiece of Grittiness, 15 March 2005

Author: Wulfstan10 from United States

This is one of Caine's best roles and undoubtedly one of the greatest gangster/crime films ever made. It is unrelentingly harsh, gritty, and bleak in showing the nasty world of Carter.

Few characters are truly likable or admirable and most have a mix of good and bad. This applies to Carter himself and even the bystanders or victims. Everyone is portrayed as flawed somehow, even those who are tragic. This is one of many aspects that adds to the realism of this film.

This grittiness is true not only of the world of crime, but the entire world of the early post-industrial Northern England, once at the forefront of the industrial revolution but by then a depressed backwater that had yet to feel the true benefits of recent social and economic changes. It thus provides some subtle social commentary as well, although one may easily miss it.

In addition to its raw grittiness, the film is also very intense. There is a building tension throughout, and a palpable that things are not right. At the same time, the events, in particular the action and violence are rather slow but relentless.

In fact, the way the film presents the violence and action is one of the keys to its greatness. It is an unusual, fascinating, and very powerful depiction. There isn't gore or even lots of blood or the like and, like the rest of the film, it generally progresses slowly and calmly. It's not exhilarating or glamorous, but instead deliberate, relentless, and, above all, cold. The coldness of the violence and how Carter in particular, but others as well, kill and hurt in an unfeeling, perfunctory manner makes it seem all the more harsh.

Another interesting aspect of the film is the juxtaposition of the idea that someone can force or change events around him against the feeling that one can merely react to events beyond his control. Both of these themes seem to clash in Carter and his actions, for one of these themes may at times appear to be what's happening, yet in the end it seems that the other exerts its dominance.

Ultimately, this is superb, extremely gritty, and powerful drama. It contains action and violence, but it is not an action film and most expecting a non-stop action film, with flashy fighting, "getting the bad guys," etc. may well be bored.

---

29 out of 45 people found the following review useful:
One Of The Best British Films Ever Made, 10 April 2003

Author: Theo Robertson from Isle Of Bute, Scotland

Michael Caine has often said that GET CARTER was the first gangster movie not to portray gangsters as either being stupid or funny . He`s right , but he could also have added that this was probably the first film not to show gangsters as being sexy in anyway . Sure Glenda , Magaret etc might be physically attractive but sexy ? I don`t think so . And the men aren`t any less unattractive , almost all of them are cowardly two faced weasels or violent thugs and often these character traits overlap.

Director Mike Hodges has made a bleak , nihilistic classic film . He isn`t flashy unlike present day film makers associated with gangster flicks but that`s not a criticism . I love the way Hodges makes use of the locations in showing the North East of England as a cold , austere windswept urban area of high rise council estates and red brick terraced houses with outside toilets . There is a train of thought that by showing the audience all this it dates the film but it`s also true that it reminds us that living standards are also different today . No one takes a phone call in the pub because everyone has a mobile phone nowadays , the internet and videos have replaced slide shows and silent 8mm as the medium for porn , and it`s now illegal to dump the slag from coal mining into the sea because of EU regulations

GET CARTER also has some really great dialogue which I could sit here all day quoting . But I won`t bother except to say my favourite line is when Carter jumps out of bed naked and holds a gun on Con and Peter

Con : Put it away jack you know you won`t use it

Peter : The gun he`s talking about

classic dialogue from a classic film

---

21 out of 30 people found the following review useful:
The ultimate in British gangster chic, 2 June 2001

Author: fatglyn from Plymouth, England

If Shakespeare could have written a gangster movie, "Get Carter" would surely be the one. Jack Carter is the 1970s embodiment of classical tragic heroes like Hamlet or Macbeth. Also, in the finest Shakespearian tradition, as the film reaches its climax, the bodies begin to mount with alarming rapidity.

The film is initially a slow-burner, but what is arguably a career-best performance from Michael Caine sustains interest until the plot begins, in every sense, to kick in. And when it does, there's no stopping it, as Carter ruthlessly, and recklessly, sets about dealing with his enemies.

The industrial city of Newcastle is depicted as gritty, seedy and unapologetically working class. The grainy camerawork gives the impression that this is a real-life documentary rather than a gangster flick.

Probably every British gangster movie since has used "Get Carter" as a benchmark, particularly "The Long Good Friday", or even the revoltingly trendy "Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels". Any why shouldn't they? For the ultimate British gangster icon, you need look no further than Jack Carter and his silver Ford Cortina.

A genuine classic.

---

28 out of 44 people found the following review useful:
Forget Lock Stock and 2 smoking......, 26 January 2001

Author: jamie lear (jamielear@hotmail.com) from Marbella, Spain

Forget Lock stock...this is how a British gangster film should be made. Michael Caine is excellent as the London based hardman going back to Newcastle to avenge the death of his brother. The use of provincial locations in the early 1970s is almost unique in british cinema. Newcastle itself, it has to be said,looks as cold and ruthless as Jack Carter himself and wouldnt be used by the North of England tourist board.Look out for some first rate performances especially Ian Hendry and the playwrite John Osbourne as a sinister Mr Big.The film is violent and uncompromising but also very entertaining with a neat line in black humour. Dont miss it!

---

13 out of 16 people found the following review useful:
Brutal British crime melodrama with faint echoes of Raymond Chandler!, 2 September 2001

Author: ironside (robertfrangie@hotmail.com) from Mexico

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

This is a gangster movie which takes the central figure-hardly the hero, because Carter (Michael Cane) is a brutal racketeer-out of the confines of Soho and away up north to the gangland of Newcastle-upon-Tyne...

The plot concerns Carter's efforts to discover who was responsible for the death of his brother... Against the wished of his London gang-boss he takes the train to Newcastle, and embarks upon a single-handed crusade of violence against the north-country gangsters...

"Get Carter" is a film which, in its way, is as ruthless as Don Siegel's 'Dirty Harry.' Carter is not a likable character... He is a perplexing lead character whom we never grow to care about, or even understand... He just happened to be a crook and a murderer pursuing his own private vendetta...

Memorable scenes include Caine with a shotgun ejecting a couple of thugs from his bed-and-breakfast; the car going into the docks with an unnoticed passenger in the trunk; and a mob boss taking a dive from a multi-story parking garage...

---

21 out of 32 people found the following review useful:
70's period piece that still cuts the mustard..., 29 September 2002

Author: Peter Hayes from United Kingdom

Strongman and enforcer Jack Carter (Michael Caine) returns to his native North East (of England) to investigate the suspicious death of his brother. Here he encounter a world of sleaze, booze, violence, casual sex and people in search of easy money.

Hard to call it a classic early British gangster film given that they were so few around, but more a cracking thriller that makes full use of its cast, plot and (unusual) Newcastle Upon Tyne location.

Writer-Director Mike Hodges wanted violence with reality and he delivers it with real punch. Unlike most thrillers bystanders are not immune from the action and at various stages harsh punishment is handed out for minor crimes by anti-hero Caine.

Caine underplays his hardman role nicely - letting the action, rather than his emotions, tell the story.

Several people claim real-life events "inspired" this story, but as far as I can tell the only direct reference to real events is that the one-arm bandit business started to earn big money (in the North East) and London gangsters "wanted in." That lead to bloodshed, but that is not the thrust of this film - although one of the main characters is, indeed, in that business.

Having gone to the trouble of reading the screenplay, I was surprised how thin the dialogue was. This is a good example of how it is better to "show" things rather than "tell." I did learn, however, that the thugs that come to beat Caine up are supposed to be gay - one may wear a pink neckerchief but I thought that was just the dandy fashions of the day!

Those that are not familiar with Newcastle may also like to note that the place is nowhere near the sea, in case you decide to take a holiday up there and are thinking of packing your trunks!

On release the film did well enough in the UK, but died a death in the USA due to being released as a double bill with Dirty Dingus Magee: A terrible Frank Sinatra movie.

If you like hard-edged thrillers that don't play nice then Get Carter may well be worth your time and effort.

---

15 out of 22 people found the following review useful:
classic, 31 August 2004
Author: ginger_sonny from London, England

British gangster classic starring Michael Caine as the eminently quotable, ultimately tough Jack Carter

Hard to believe that a major studio felt the need to remake this British gangster classic, which ranks up there with the likes of The Long Good Friday as one of the finest home grown films of the past 30 years.

Caine is the gangster who goes to Newcastle for his brother's funeral and begins to suspect his death was no accident; cue edgy thrills and violence as he exacts revenge on the folks he believes responsible.

Caine, as in the majority of his signature roles, is superbly armed with a set of eminently quotable one-liners ("You're a big man, but you're out of shape" tops the bill this time), and as emotionally detached and violently ruthless as Point Blank's similarly vengeful Lee Marvin, while director Hodges paints a gritty, bleak picture of the gangster underworld.

Soap fans will be equally intrigued to see Coronation Street's Alf Roberts (aka Bryan Moseley) being tossed off a roof.

---

7 out of 10 people found the following review useful:
How movies used to be made., 4 June 2001

Author: Lee Bartholomew (sage_patrynxx@cfu.net) from Cedar Falls, IA

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

With quality in mind. The dvd of this movie is excellent. Commentary et al. (Spoilers!!!)

In comparing with the 2000 version, this one had more depth to it. Nowadays it's like, we're afraid to show nudity. Land of the free, with a first amendment and movies like Eyes Wide Shut get censored or they don't shoot the film. I really hate that. So here's a movie that's 30 yrs old, that outshine's the 2000 version. Kinda like a Dirty Harry movie, it has much action in a movie made in it's time. I'm amazed.

Biggest change is (and Michael Caine comments on the fact that americans don't like their hero's, or villains killed) So it's no surprise that Stallone has this hippy go lucky ending, while Michael Caine's version has himself killed because we are made to hate him and he hate's himself. It's one of the best movies I've discovered.

9/10

(These are just a few main factors that went into my rating.) Quality: 10/10 Replayable: 9/10 Entertaining: 10/10

---

---

Page 1 of 15:

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11]

Add another review

---

Related Links

Plot summary	Plot synopsis	Amazon.com summary
Ratings	Awards	Newsgroup reviews
External reviews	Parents Guide	Plot keywords
Main details	Your user reviews	Your vote history