Sylvester Stallone thinks

When we discuss Hollywood flops, it is important to emphasize that the term “flop” has nothing to do with the quality of the film. This refers to the extreme financial failure of the film. Francis Ford Coppola's “One from the Heart” was a massive flop, but more than 40 years later it's now considered an artistic triumph (something to keep in mind as we move on from 2024's “Megalopolis” blitz). “Casualties of War” by Brian de Palma was an expensive bombshell for the legendary filmmaker, but the film received rave reviews at the time and remains one of the greatest Vietnam War films ever made. And while Hudson Hawk by Michael Lehman While Bruce Willis' commercial reputation may have taken a nosedive, people with refined tastes have come to recognize its anarchic genius.

When a non-franchise film comes out, my initial instinct is to find a way to stick with it, even if it came up a little short artistically. The world is a better place for fiascos like “Town & Country,” “Cutthroat Island,” and “Jupiter Ascinding.” So when I learned that Sylvester Stallone recently called one of his underrated “Gangster” for his role as Dwight Manfredi to Taylor Sheridan's Paramount+ Series “Tulsa King” I was thrilled. It's not a perfect movie by any stretch, but John Landis' Oscar has a raunchy screwball spirit and plenty of terrific performances from the likes of Tim Curry, Don Ameche, and Marisa Tomei. I didn't quite see the connection, but Stallone has been making all kinds of dubious associations lately; At least it would shine a spotlight on a mostly forgotten film.

Unfortunately, he didn't mean “Oscar”.

Another term that is too often used as a pejorative is “redo”. Whenever a remake of any movie, hit or flop, is announced, people who like to bemoan Hollywood's lack of originality don't mince their broad words. How quickly they forget that some of the greatest films of all time – such as Howard Hawks' His Girl Friday, John Carpenter's The Thing and David Cronenberg's The Fly similarly – there are remakes. Granted, there is sometimes good reason for knee-jerk skepticism, if not outright vitriol, of some remakes. When accused sex offender (and known no-nonsense) Brett Ratner signed on to take a second crack at Thomas Harris' Red Dragon, which Michael Mann had already turned into a classic thriller as Manhunter, it was the right Let's say for a film that wasn't valuable, was on its way.

When director Stephen Kay first teamed up with Sylvester Stallone to remake Mike Hodges' British gangster classic Get Carter, it was kind of complicated.

Immediately, we knew better than to wait to wait and a yarn of dirty revenge on par with the original, which boasts an unforgettable scene in which a completely naked Michael Caine pistol-whips a potential assailant on the street in front of his apartment. Hodge's film was a tongs-sandwich of gritty 70s crime cinema. A Hollywood remake is unlikely to go as far (although “American History X” screenwriter David McKenna provided some promise).

There was also the question of the film's production company. The franchise owned by Dry Cleaners, starring Elie Samaha, was notorious for bankrupting its stars. When “Get Carter” was announced, the company was already joking that it had sunk loads of money into John Travolta's Scientology dream project adaptation of L. Ron Hubbard's Pulp Sci-Fi novel “Battlefield Earth”. ). Samaha was infatuated with Stallone and therefore probably supported him in all creative disputes. (Sly is a careless script tinkerer, and not always for the better.)

So how did it turn out, and in what way is it a precursor to “Tulsa King?”

The best thing that can be said about Kay's “Get Carter” is that it is literally in the atmosphere. Set in Seattle, Washington, you feel the rain and chill of the city in a way that few movies have captured. That's something. Also worth noting is Mickey Rourke's menacing portrayal of a sleazeball gangster who comes out on top in a fight with Stallone.

Alas, Kaye decides to go straight for the original, featuring Michael Caine as a loan shark and composer Tyler Bates mimicking Roy Budd's idiosyncratic score. These elements serve only to remind the viewer that they are not watching a Hodges film, and as a result, Hamstring's new film strives to differentiate itself. Worst of all, there is a happy ending that clashes with the essential nihilism of the tale.

Coming in at a reported $63.6 million budget, Get Carter flopped hard with $19.4 million worldwide. A poor non-managerial performance was a huge blow to Stallone's rep for being internationally bankable. Although James Mangold's “Cops Land” What would have renewed critical interest in Sly's career three years earlier, they largely wrote off the remake as a pale, pointless imitation of a much better film.

Where does the “Tulsa King” figure in here? According to Stallone on his Instagram:

“It's interesting that 25 years ago I acted in one of my best films, the underrated Get Carter, and now that I look back on it, it looks like I'm subconsciously going to play Dwight Manfredi in The Tulsa King 25 years from now!

The obvious similarity is that Carter and Manfredi are fish out of water, shaking up towns they don't know with their brutal, unforgiving way of doing illegal business. But since Manfredi wants to put down roots and build Tulsa, Carter just wants to avenge his brother's murder and skip town (even if it leaves him a marked man for life). If you haven't seen Kay's “Get Carter,” the best I can say is that it's not “rhinestone” or “stop! Or my mom will shoot.” You won't regret watching it, but I doubt it will deepen your appreciation for “The King of Tulsa.”