If director Elizabeth Banks was hoping that her new version of Charlie’s Angels would be universally loved then she obviously wasn’t paying attention to the last couple of movies starring Lucy Liu, Cameron Diaz, and Drew Barrymore. The initial film that starred this trio was received far better than its follow-up sequel, but even the sequel seems to have been able to get more love than this new idea from Banks according to Rebecca Lewis from Metro. Apparently her movie isn’t going to be a reboot, but instead it will be a continuation of the movies that have already come along, which could be another mistake in a line of them that have already been made when it comes to this idea.
If you go on and visit the Data Lounge you might see a few opinions about the show, the TV show keep in mind, that speak of Charlie’s Angels being empowering for women as Banks has already been heard to say. There’s a great deal of truth in this since quite honestly there weren’t a lot of rough and tough women on screen during that time when the show first came out. Even when the movies came out women were still in the process of becoming tougher on screen and the actions of the Angels, namely kicking butt and taking names, was welcomed since it was refreshingly new. The whole idea of women needing to be saved by men routine was wearing very thin before that point and seeing them take charge of a situation was a lot of fun since it introduced a new dynamic into the movies that was enticing and allowed people to see a new side of action movies. Of course if you’re of like mind with Hayley Phelan of Man Repeller you might have found the overt reference to violence against women kind of repellent since the show made no attempt to tone it down at times. But then again, these are tough, badass women that are being sent to solve crimes and in some cases save the world. It would seem that being threatened came with the job.
There are those however that would argue that the tight and sometimes revealing outfits the Angels wore were less empowering and more exploitative. It doesn’t seem to change in Banks’ movie but the whole idea of them being strong and empowered women does mean that they get to wear what they want and whatever makes them feel good, so exploitation seems to be the name of the game now and again so long as it’s something that’s done by choice rather than on demand. It kind of sounds like hypocrisy in a way but that’s the type of argument we’ll leave for another day. Instead let’s focus on why this new movie just isn’t going to go the way that Banks wants. There’s a lot of reasons that could be touched upon but there’s really only a couple that seem to sum up just why it might not perform all that well.
She’s been kind of a problem child for a while now and as some would even go so far to say she’s been box office poison since she doesn’t seem to have another setting apart from what she used during the Twilight saga. That seems to be her default mode and to all Kristin fans out there, apologies, but that switch seems stuck in the ON position and might have even been broken off to prevent the settings from being changed. So far in her career she hasn’t really shown a lot of growth and yet somehow she’s still around because some folks still believe in her. To each their own, some people do tend to find her skilled and quite talented and that’s their prerogative. But having her as the lead of a movie doesn’t seem to guarantee its success unless she’s part of a teenage, angst-ridden plot line that has more to do with vampires and werewolves than anything else.
This story needs to rest a bit longer.
Whether it was because the sequel to the movie didn’t pan out or because the idea of Charlie’s Angels has been seen so many times on TV and in movies, being played out in random scenes here and there throughout the years, people have just grown tired of it. The novelty of the first movie was a big part of what made it fun to go see, but the second movie lost that verve without ever gaining it back and it would seem that this upcoming movie isn’t going to be picking up where the first movie left off either.
It would actually be better if it was a reboot.
This is after all the era of the reboots and remakes since directors and producers have been seen to join the frenzy that comes rushing forth like an avalanche once someone makes the first one. Listing this as a reboot might have gained a bit more interest, or not. But putting it up as a continuation, while it might be popular with other movies, is just a big mistake in the making since it seems to indicate that somewhere down the line Charlie trained another bunch of angels that could replace the others once they got too old. Simply starting over would have probably been a better idea.
At this point the only reason to watch would be to see how many people actually make it to the theater.