‘Charlie’s Angels’ to Rise from the Woke Ashes
Elizabeth Banks' disastrous 2019 reboot couldn't kill frothy franchise
This critic witnessed something noteworthy at a movie theater this week.
The “Wuthering Heights” press screening in Denver, Colo. featured a female-friendly packed house. And, when co-star Jacob Elordi returned to the storyline mid-film, his face freshly shaved and his commoner threads replaced by fashionable duds, the crowd audibly gasped.
Audiences go to the movies to see beautiful people looking beautiful. It’s just science (and biology).
The 2019 reboot of the ABC show “Charlie’s Angels” didn’t take that message to heart. The film starred three attractive actresses, but the focus was on Empowerment™, not beauty.
This was at the peak of woke storytelling, and even the script echoed that progressive spirit.
“I think women can do anything,” purred co-star Kristen Stewart in the film’s opening seconds. “I want all my options available so I can decide for myself.”
What happened next? The film bombed, earning just $17 million stateside. The franchise was done. Cooked. Dead on arrival.
Until now.
The same Hollywood that sees A.I. as an existential threat can’t stop recycling IPs (intellectual properties). So a new, new “Charlie’s Angels” film is in the works. We know little about the upcoming movie save a key screenwriter attached to the project – “The Proposal’s” Pete Chiarelli.
The upate will likely be less like the 2019 version and more in line with the two blockbusters spun from the ’70s TV show.
The TV series focused far more on beauty than hardcore sleuthing or mystery elements. That was the whole appeal, at least to many viewers.
It showcased unapologetically gorgeous women fighting crime and looking dazzling along the way. The first two “CA” films did mostly that, too. And they were good, campy fun.
Today’s young movie goers likely have zero connection to the source material, and, at best, a passing relationship to the films featuring Drew Barrymore, Cameron Diaz and Lucy Liu.
The mission will be to establish the new “Charlie’s Angels” as something both classic and new. And, perhaps, embrace the Male Gaze, at least a little.
Cult members cannot step out of the Kool-Aid line. And Hollywoke is a cult. There’s not an ice cube’s chance in Burbank that the studio-soviets will course correct.
Charlie’s Angels? More like Charlie Brown…………………Lucy’s gonna promise then pull that football away again, Chuck.
The male gaze was the entire purpose of Charlie’s Angels. All three jiggled their way through each episode.
I can avoid the new one just as easily as I did all the others. Reboots, sequels, remakes with a slightly different look, stolen stories from abroad and Anglicized; all show the death of creativity in the sewer formerly known as hollywood.
What are the odds that the studio backing this fully embraces their twisted wokeism by making all three Charlie’s Angels transgendered females instead of actual biological females?
To Wong Fu, with Love… with a side of CA? lmao
The new reboot needs 1970s full extreme hair, skippy outfits, sultry honey potting, and humor. All were missing in the 2019 version. They can do it.
They’ll be black trannies this time.