How hard can it be to make a Charlie’s Angels movie? New on UK Netflix, as if we didn’t have enough problems right now, this 2019 version ain’t your momma’s Charlie’s Angels, in fact, is really isn’t anyone’s Charlie’s Angels at all; Elizabeth Banks’ offers a full throttle continuation of the benighted franchise that has been the very definition of a dud, an expensive, heavily promoted comedy/thriller that no-one outside of Variety’s critic seems to want.
The industry trade-paper generally aims for some kind of salty accuracy in their reviews, but it’s hard to match up the movie under discussion with this description ; ‘written and directed, by Elizabeth Banks as if she’d been making cheeky renegade action films all her life. The movie is relentless, it’s pulpy and exciting, it’s unabashedly derivative…rousingly of-the-moment feministic…ace car-chase filmmaking — breathless and ultra-violent, with big mounted weapons…awesomely elaborate action sequence that unfolds in a quarry…’ Instead, Charlie’s Angels has all the breathless, awesome action of Pitch Perfect 3 or The Spy Who Dumped Me, generic, anonymous fodder with phoned-in performances, dull green-screen punch-ups and no discernable flavour. It wouldn’t seem possible to disrespect such vanilla source material, but somehow Banks manages it.
The problem starts from the packaging. As a tv show, Charlie’s Angels made stars of the girls in the central roles, and they became household names. The cinematic reboot brought Drew Barrymore, Cameron Diaz and Lucy Liu to the roles, an update if not necessarily an upgrade. But how would you feel about the Angels being played by someone like, pause to consult notes, Naomi Scott? She was in Aladdin, right? Or what about, he googles quickly, Ella Balinska? What would an actress whose claim to fame is brief appearances on Casualty and Midsommar Murders bring to the party? No pop culture frisson whatsoever is the answer. Charlie’s Angels needs three stars, big, or fading, or upcoming, just recognisable names. Would you fancy The Magnificent Seven with a cast of unknowns? Ocean’s 11 with a semi-professional cast? The producers on this film had one job, and they don’t seem to have taken it that seriously. Almost anyone would be better than the girls chosen here.
Soon to be Princess Diana, Kristen Stewart is the only element here that’s on point; she’s a big star who has successfully shunned blockbuster roles since Twilight in favour of great performances in small movies, and seems to have chosen unwisely here. She’s introduced as a swaggering super-spy called Sabina, and bonds with the other girls while on a confusing assignment situated in drag Hamburg dockland, one that involves the death of contact/wrangler Bosley (Djimon Hounsou) and a memory stick landing in a river. From there, the action flips to Istanbul, another locations worn smooth by spy movies, where a racetrack meeting provides the Angels with a chance at revenge. Another Bosley (Banks) is feeding the girls instructions, but could a third Bosley (Patrick Stewart) be sabotaging their mission?
Whatever the actual DNA was of the tv show and movies so far, Banks screws around with it to mind-numbing effect. How many Charlies are there? How many Bosleys? How does it help for us to see one Bosley cheaply photoshopped into still photographs from the previous Angels films and tv shows? Meanwhile Sam Clafin plays an Elon Musk-type zillionaire who has invented a generic McGuffin energy source that provides the uninteresting stakes for muddled punch ups and chases. The result is a movie that sinks like a stone, with some nice costumes about the only thing that passes muster.
Charlie’s Angels was, in its prime, a lazy chauvinist show that invited men (and women) to gawp at weapons-grade models under the guise of a conventional detective thriller; somewhere between Baywatch and The Rockford Files. Re-nose this property with some girl-power feminism and you have nothing at all, two over-riding philosophies in chauvinism and feminism that simply don’t gel. New wine is old bottles is one thing, but the 2019 version of Charlie’s Angels is the weakest of weak sauce.
I’d never even heard of this. And after your review, I can see why. I’m just astounded that anybody has heard of this. It sounds like Grrrrl Power had a baby with Mission Impossible, brrrrrrr…..
I think you can eliminate this from your enquiries….
😀
I’d pay money to see this. Not my money, but your money. But still money.
You’re in it! I though you gave Patrick Stewart a run in the man beast stakes….
You’d think they’d have given me a comp DVD.
The original title was Alex Good: Full Throttle.
Truly awful.
Agreed.
Oh just nope. I left when Farah did.
Kate Jackson for me, but we got out at the right time.
She was my least favourite, she spoke funny.
A big crush for me at 10 years old.
Aw that’s sweet. 10?????
Yes. My dad was in hospital and I used to imagine rescuing Sabrina from burning buildings to pass the time on the long journey to visit him. I now recognise such fantasising about male saviour roles to perpetuate outdated notions.
Haha well yes there’s that. At 10 I wanted to be Sterling Moss, only the girl version.
Yet you are clearly living life in the fast lane!
I was, now I’m on the hard shoulder crawling along with my hazard lights on.
I’m climbing up a motorway embankment hoping to have enough cash for a tuna panini meal deal at Knutford services while I wait for the AA.
Is that a euphemism or are you really??
I drive a Ford Euphemism.
I don’t why I expected a sensible answer.