DJariya

I liked the 1st original movie. Hated the 2nd one.

But, I do like Liz Banks, Patrick Stewart, Naomi Scott. So I did order an A-List ticket for Friday. So I'll be seeing it.

There's an early "Girls Night Out" early screening tomorrow where you get a free copy of the soundtrack. But, my local AMC isn't participating.

dex14

This was fun. Definitely a step up from the previous two. The plot is bland though. Typical follow the rich white man cliches.

All the girls were great. Nice direction from Banks, and some cool action scenes.

I'd definitely be down for a sequel.

Orbi-Wan Techno

Hitting this *snort* right after work tomorrow. Then Ford vs Ferrari on Saturday or Sunday...

greydttwo

dex14

Kristen Stewart was just so funny in this. There's this scene early on where Naomi Scott says something like “I get it, you’re lady spies,” and then Stewart points at herself in a way... it was so small, but I laughed so hard.

Balinska was a nice find.

Some good cameos in the credit scenes.

Perkinsun Dzees

Charlie's Angels, the weekend's other new high-profile offering, appears to be in serious trouble. Directed by Elizabeth Banks, the Sony pic may only earn $4 million on Friday for a weekend debut in the $10 million to $11 million range.

dex14

Yikes. I don't know why this wasn't released in the summer.

devilshalo

MiB: International and Far From Home. Tho I think it could have been ok in August.

DJariya

Just got back from seeing it. It was quite fun. Action was good and the girls had good chemistry. Really liked Liz Banks as Bosley plus her directing skills have really improved since Pitch Perfect 2.

I admit I'm not a big Kristen Stewart fan, but she was really fun and likable her and I also thought she was quite funny.

and yes, Ella Balinska is a great find. Very tall and quite attractive.

Mid-Credit cameos were very cool especially:



And I know it was just an "Easter Egg" but I was a little surprised that they unofficially kept it in continuity with the original Angels TV show and the previous 2 movies.

dex14

Damn... they are saying it won't even break $10mil now. Awful.

What do you mean by "unofficially". It takes place in cannon with the others, officially.

DJariya

When they first announced this movie, I recall the word reboot being used. I know that word seems to have different meanings. I didn’t take it as having continuity with the series and older movies until we saw the Easter eggs and cameo. Then I said, Ahhh that’s a cool tie in.

And I just wanted to mention, I was glad they didn’t do the stupid no guns policy of the previous 2 films because Drew Barrymore was producer and is against weapons being used in her movies.

DJariya

https://deadline.com/2019/11/charlie...hy-1202787938/

Deadline theorizes why this seems to have bombed financially. No star power, Kristen Stewart isn't a draw and not enough action. They also say this movie had script developmental issues.

and from my perspective, maybe opening in the Fall and the same weekend Disney + first launches with a massively anticipated new series probably wan't the best choice.

I can see a lot of people just staying home this weekend, especially the target audience for this, and those didn't have any interest making the trip to the theatre this weekend.

stingermck

Put me in this category of it needing more star power. Im a fan of the tv show and the McG movies but I don't like Stewart at all and the trailers didn't do much for me.

Orbi-Wan Techno

From my review page ORBI-WAN GOES TO THE MOVIES:

CHARLIE’S ANGELS (PG-13) - Fast, fun and action-packed reboot has a winning cast, a post-#METoo mindset and sass to spare in this extremely entertaining Mission-Impossible-lite spy adventure

Fun Orbi-Wan Fact - In 1990, I met and hung out for an evening with John Forsythe, the original voice of Charlie Townsend, during a special D-Day celebration in Cannes, France.

“I think women can do anything.” This is the opening line of the new Charlie’s Angels reboot, and has been the unspoken motto of the entire 43-year-old franchise since its beginning in 1976. Director Elizabeth Banks has taken this motto to heart, and creates an informed evolutionary step in this concept’s development. She and her fellow filmmakers have left behind the bikinied-butts-and-boobs mentality and aspect of the television series and Barrymore/Diaz/Liu movies, and focus on the brains and strength that the well-trained and armed Angels must bring to the espionage game.

The Townsend Agency of 2019 have evolved into a multi-nation organization, employing multiple Bosleys (a way cool concept) to manage the different teams of Angels that are stationed around the globe. One of the original Bosleys (Patrick Stewart) is retiring after 40 years of service, and a sweet photo montage tells us that yes, he worked with the original TV angels, as well as the 2000 McG versions.

Elena (Naomi Scott), an extremely smart and eager scientist, is in danger after a powerful AI system called Calisto that she has developed is being sold by the company she works for, despite the fact it can be easily hacked and turned into a tool of assasination. The current LA-based Bosley (Elizabeth Banks) assigns Angels Sabina (Kristen Stewart, having a terrific time here) and Jane (Ella Balinska) to protect Elena and recover the AI after an attempt on Elena’s life in Paris ends in tragedy for the Townsend team.

However, there seems to be more afoot, as whoever is after Elena is also familiar with Townsend protocols. Also, Elena is inspired by her guardians, and is determined to show them and Bosley that she would be an excellent candidate for her own set of Angels wings.

Despite the stakes, this version of Charlie’s Angels retains a lot of the “fun” of the 2000 version (which had many of its own charms) without being a spoof. The high-tech aspect and well-choreographed action pieces are exciting in a Mission-Impossible kind of way, and the movie is quick-paced and very funny at times. And I loved the music soundtrack!

This interpretIon of Charlie’s Angels was a lot of fun for me. I loved it a lot, and will be adding it to my library when is becomes available. I am giving these behind-kicking ladies 4 out of 5 lightsabers. The movie also leaves open the possibility of sequels and spin-offs, given the international presence of the Townsend Agency. I would be good with that.

NOTES FOR PARENTS: Charlie’s Angels is rated PG-13 for action violence, brief language and some suggestive material. The word “motherf*****” is seen is a subtitle but spelled out symbols, like in a comic strip. During the credits, the word f*** is barely heard in a skydiving scene. The word sh** is the most prominent profanity, In an opening scene, Sabina is seen undercover on a date with a target, and there is some flirting and leg touching before the team takes the target down. There is very mild suggestive dialogue in one scene. An electronic weapon that, when hacked, can cause lethal brain seizures is at the center of the plot, and we see a person die by accident when one goes off. An important character is killed early on during a car chase. Although the Angels’ philosophy is non-lethal engagement, in a couple of cases the henchmen they are fighting are killed. The bad guys kill some people at close range, but there is nothing graphic or bloody.

MID- AND AFTER-CREDIT SCENES: When the credits start rolling, they are peppered with scenes of Elena’s actual Angel training, and includes some fun cameos. There are no after-credit scenes.

LIKE and SHARE the review page ORBI-WAN GOES TO THE MOVIES with family and friends.

ORBI-WAN GOES TO THE MOVIES is protected under CREATIVE COMMONS.

Koby

stingermck

This salty interview has not aged well

Orbi-Wan Techno

Hey, as someone who actually WATCHED the Elizabeth Bank version and LOVED it, I am really sad that it is not finding an audience. My wife and I were both teenagers when the OG series first aired and my wife is a huge fan of the original teams and has a grudging tolerance for the Diaz/Barrymore/Liu version. This reimaging aligns the current Angels with the entire franchise as a continuation and evolution, with a de-emphasis on the cleavage and sexy aspect of what came before.

RichC2

That interview doesn't seem that salty tbh. Though the IMDB reviews seem to think it is, christ that place is an irredeemable hole these days even without the message boards.

I think a big issue is people had a clear image of Charlie's Angels when the Diaz/Barrymore/Liu ones came out, that isn't the case these days. The entire 18 and under crowd was born after the first reboot.

I think that's a big issue with advertising these reboots and re-releases, older crowds still don't flock to theaters and the advertising focuses too heavily on nostalgia and "Remember this?" while trying to sell it to a crowd with none. The original series ended in 1981, the first movie reboot came out 19 years after that, and this one is 19 years after that, it's just too far removed from the source material and legacy at this rate.

stingermck

More from the interview. Ooof. I don't know. I just think its bad form to criticize successful movies. It just comes off as whining.

I'll watch it when it is available on streaming, but I was surprised my wife did not want to see this. She loves action movies, and especially ones with female leads.

RichC2

She isn't wrong about the comic thing though (in general, she was wrong about Wonder Woman setting up the rest of Justice League, it was more standalone than that), but it has nothing to do with men/women, action movies in general are bombing outside of the comic genres. Case in point: Terminator Dark Fate, Gemini Man, Rambo: Last Blood, Tomb Raider, Sicario 2, The Predator, Mile 22, etc; all did middling business.

Though of course, none were all that great.

Mabuse

brayzie

Ash Ketchum

I enjoyed the first two-thirds of this film very much. I thought the four actresses were gorgeous and utterly delightful, especially Kristen Stewart and Naomi Scott, who are both extraordinarily cute, charming and funny. I’ve only seen Stewart in one other starring role (AMERICAN ULTRA), so this came as something of a surprise to me, given her reputation for soul-searching indie roles. Scott is quite a surprise, too. I’d previously seen her in POWER RANGERS (2017). English actress Ella Balinska was new to me, but she handles the bulk of the action and she’s very good at it. She’s also beautiful and glamorous. I’d love to see her star in her own series of martial arts movies.

So, after the first two-thirds--fast, witty and engaging--the convoluted plot kicks in during a big party sequence at a tech billionaire’s mansion and it’s just not that interesting. Nor are the villains, who take up way too much screen time in the big finale. Other than Patrick Stewart, who plays a retired Bosley, none of the male actors have any charisma and the girls have no serious romantic foils. I guess they either couldn’t afford a male star or they chose not to have one for political reasons. Either way, the movie goes off the rails with too many MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE-style plot twists. I also couldn’t stand the nonstop soundtrack of vapid contemporary pop songs. But I’m glad I saw it, if only for the three leading actresses, plus Elizabeth Banks.

MysterioMan007

I agree. If a movie tanks, it's not "men's fault because they do not want to see action movies with women", neglecting the fact that women aren't buying tickets to see it, either. If a movie's good, I don't care who the lead is... Kill Bill had a female lead and it's probably in my top 50 movies of all-time. There's a ton of good female-centered action movies I like: Aliens, The Heat, The Long Kiss Goodnight, The Hunger Games, Resident Evil, etc. I probably wouldn't mind watching Charlie's Angels, but it doesn't really look good to me, if I'm being honest. So, I'll probably wait for streaming and not go to the theater for it.

Rob V

Elizabeth Banks is wrong... I don't care who leads, her movie just isn't appealing to me on paper. Having read all of your feedback, I'll at least rent it now. I think Elizabeth is missing the fact that there is only so much time in a day and, in our household, if we are going to go to a movie, it's probably a blockbuster.