Charlie's Angels (inc. 2019 reboot) | Page 14 | The Popjustice Forum

Charlie's Angels (inc. 2019 reboot)

Discussion in 'TV + Film' started by Mr. Mr., Oct 3, 2011.

  1. PubLIZity is iconic.

    Lander, Andrew.L, RUNAWAY and 7 others like this.
  2. I wanted to see this but it wasn't being shown anywhere near me.
  3. Ok. I finally seen it with my own eyes. Its not good, but its not awful. I'd give it a solid C+, or B- if I was feeling generous.

    The problem with it is exactly what I knew it would be based on everything its insufferable director has said - her brand of feminism is so fucking hamfisted. Charlie's Angels is by nature innately about girl power. We did not need to be beaten over the head with it for an entire hour. Which is why I stand by Elizabeth Banks not really understanding her source material. The crack the security guard gives Naomi about not smiling or the thing about the device coming in pastel colors for girls would have landed more as the eye roll they're supposed to be if they were more isolated moments in the movie instead of just one thing in a long line of "Hey! We're women and thats hard cause men are sexist!" that permeates the entire first hour of the movie. Once the action really revs up the movie finally loosens up a bit and becomes fun, and it is most notably fun when Elizabeth is not onscreen sucking all the energy out of it. And by the way she's a fucking awful actress. Now as a director I thought she did a nice job - the pacing was good, the film was attractive, the action scenes were well done in my opinion.

    Kristen (aside from the opening fight scene where her dialogue was trying way too hard to be funny) was great in it and her entire wardrobe in this movie was to die for. Ella was solid and Naomi was too although there were a few moments where I thought she was the weak link acting wise. I thought photoshopping Patrick Stewart in Bill Murray's place was... odd. And the entire end credits scenes with Naomi in Angel Training with C list celebrities was a huge fucking cringe.
    Last edited: Feb 20, 2020
  4. The movie was not good. Elizabeth Banks shouldn't have gotten so much control over the whole project. Her Bosley was practically the 4th Angel. We know she used to be one but she was TOO present during the movie and taking the attention away from the actual Angels. Elizabeth just did way too much. That forced #MeToo moment at the end is a prime example. I hope she learns from this. Especially writing a screenplay that's not as shit... The jokes fell flat. The supposed humor this movie has is just awkwardness.

    What I did like was when they showed the pictures from the cast of the original two movies. That was probably the most exciting part. That says it all really.

    But the thing that surprised me the most was Kristen's performance. She had a lot of fun doing this movie and it shows. You could already tell from the trailers. And surprisingly she was one of the best (because there's so little to the movie) characters. Especially when she's undercover.

    She also genuinely made me question my sexuality in the opening scene and then also in the club.

    I am NOT ashamed.
  5. Just watched it, it was not what I thought - didn’t feel like a Charlie’s angels movie... just some generic action movie - nothing major and not a patch on the previous casting
    Steve003 likes this.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.