Charlie's Angels (2019)

From Awful Movies Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Charlie's Angels (2019)

538B7966-253E-498D-9AD5-35A703114ACE.jpeg

Charlies Angels 2019.jpg

Sony, have you learned anything from the last time you made a propaganda film?
Genre: Action
Comedy
Directed By: Elizabeth Banks
Written By: Elizabeth Banks
Starring: Kristen Stewart
Naomi Scott
Ella Balinska
Elizabeth Banks
Patrick Stewart
Photography: Color
Distributed By: Sony Pictures
Release Date: November 15, 2019
Runtime: 118 minutes
Country: United States
Prequel: Charlie's Angels: Full Throttle

Charlie's Angels is a 2019 American action comedy film directed and written by Elizabeth Banks. It is a continuity reboot of the Charlie's Angels film series that serves as a continuation of the television series of the same name and the previous two theatrically-released installments, Charlie's Angels and Charlie's Angels: Full Throttle.

Plot

After accidentally creating a device that can be used to cause people to have fatal seizures, scientist Elena Houghlin discovers that her boss intends to use it for evil purposes, and goes to the Townsend Agency for help. Elena is then asked to work with two of the agency's Angels, Sabina Wilson, and Jane Kano, to bring down her former boss, and later discovers a conspiracy within the Townsend Agency itself.

Why It Sucks

  1. Reviving Charlie's Angels was a questionable idea in the first place, considering how the previous two theatrically-released films aren't generally liked as anything more than guilty pleasures, the 2003 video game based on the first film is generally considered one of the worst of all time, and the 2011 television series was a complete flop.
  2. The movie has a very inconsistent tone, as it sometimes seems like it is trying to be a reboot with a darker tone similar to the Daniel Craig-era James Bond movies, while at other times it is just as wacky and silly as the previous two movies.
  3. Questionable casting choices; neither Kristen Stewart nor Naomi Scott have much in the way of physical presence or fighting skill, meaning that when they beat up far larger bad guys, it ends up seeming unintentionally funny rather than impressive. Ella Balinska is the only one of the three with any actual combat training, which becomes extremely obvious in any scene where all three Angels are fighting (by contrast, two of the three Angels in the 2000s movies had combat training, with Lucy Liu being a world-class martial artist, and Cameron Diaz being a kick-boxer in her spare time).
  4. Abysmal and laughable acting, particularly from Kristen Stewart, who gives a mediocre performance as the lead Angel, Sabina. Ella Balinska isn't anywhere near as bad as Stewart, but isn't very memorable, either (though isn't helped by the fact that her Angel, Jane, is written with absolutely no personality).
  5. Bad directing by Elizabeth Banks.
  6. Much of the plot is ripped off from Mission: Impossible - Rogue Nation and Mission: Impossible - Fallout, both of which are infinitely far more superior films than this one.
  7. Charlie's operation has been expanded from just three women (and Bosley) who operate out of his mansion to a worldwide agency. This might have been an interesting idea, but the way they go about it turns the Angels into a generic spy network like you'd see in the aforementioned James Bond or Mission: Impossible movies.
  8. Awful action sequences, especially compared to the ones in the previous two films.
  9. Much like the 2016 reboot of Ghostbusters, the movie is blatantly sexist against men, as every male character is either stupid, cowardly, evil, or a throw-away character who dies after a few minutes.
  10. Insulting twist later on, when it turns out that Mr. Bosley is actually the main villain, taking away the one remotely sympathetic male character.
  11. Anti-climatic ending, which ends up being just the Angels having a fistfight with Mr. Bosley and his henchmen.
  12. Abysmal soundtrack, with "Don't Call Me Angel" by Ariana Grande, Miley Cyrus and Lana Del Ray being one of the worst songs of the film.
  13. Factual error: The kids are playing the 'Final Fantasy' video game with 2 controllers but it's a one player game.
  14. Our main characters have no chemistry with one another.

Redeeming Qualities

  1. Naomi Scott does easily the best job of the three lead actresses, and her character is the only likable/tolerable Angel.
  2. Even though most of the acting isn't much to write home about, Patrick Stewart and Djimon Hounsou both give good performances.
  3. Even though "Don't Call Me Angel" is the worst song, that music is still cool.

Reception

Critical response

The film received mixed-to-negative reviews from critics with a 51% rating on Rotten Tomatoes with a critic consensus that reads "Earnest and energetic, if a bit uneven, Elizabeth Banks' pulpy Charlie's Angels adds a new flair to the franchise with fun performances from its three leads." However, it was quickly mixed-to-widely panned by the fans of series for its SJW content and female political agendas. It earned a 2.9 user score rating on Metacritic and holds a 4.6/10 rating on IMDb. Kenneth Turan of The Los Angeles Times commented: "Despite all its hand-to-hand fighting, the latest Charlie's Angels never really gets a proper grip on things." Joshua Rothkopf of Time Out stated: "For all of its #MeToo heavy lifting, though, the film still doesn't work, mainly for the same reasons as before: Constructed as symbols (not human beings), these characters have too much spy stuff to do and yet, not quite enough."

Director and actress Elizabeth Banks couldn't handle even the slightest bit of criticism at all, blaming men for the negative reception and failure of the film, which only hurt the film even more. Kristen Stewart was also guilty of this to a lesser extent, complaining that they were just trying to have fun while making the movie and that critics shouldn't have been so mean.

External Links

Comments


avatar

GrilledCheese800

14 months ago
Score 2
The movie was trash..but I don´t even wanna start with the soundtrack-
avatar

Mr. Tenno

14 months ago
Score 5
I knew this was gonna be a bad, woke movie.
avatar

Mr. Tenno

14 months ago
Score 1
I wathced a advert for this film, and I found this reboot a SJW film.
avatar

EijiZeBoi

14 months ago
Score 0

I didn't complain about the film being "not mentioning that word". I only complain about how horribly executed it was.

You see, I wouldn't mind an action movie having feminist themes, as long as it has good execution, such as Mad Max: Fury Road. Unfortunately, Charlie's Angels' feminist themes are executed terribly.
avatar

Masson Thief

14 months ago
Score 3
The word SJW isn't used as out of context as the word Nazi is nowadays.
avatar

MeMeGuYWasLost

14 months ago
Score 1
Same.
avatar

Mr. Tenno

13 months ago
Score 0
Youre right. As a GamerGater, I'm trying to not be like TheQuartering. I think the film barely got any marketing. I only saw a advert of the movie.
avatar

Spongebuff1991

14 months ago
Score 8
I didn't bother to see this.
avatar

Stephenfisher2001

14 months ago
Score 8

That's good.

If you thought Ghostbusters (2016) is bad, think again, Charlies Angels (2019) is EVEN worse than 2016 rebooted Ghostbusters one.

Sadly, I'm not into Charlie's Angels, it's not in my cup of tea. -_-
avatar

Spongebuff1991

14 months ago
Score 8
I avoided that reboot as well.
avatar

MeMeGuYWasLost

13 months ago
Score 3
Well Charlie’s angel 2019 is basically gb 2016 2.0.
avatar

Spongebuff1991

7 months ago
Score 0
You have a point!
avatar

LancedSoul

6 months ago
Score 0
I could say that Charlie's Angels is like Ghostbusters (2016) and Men in Black: International.
avatar

LA2002

13 months ago
Score 6
I'm glad I didn't see this mess. And I'm also glad that this film was a box-office bomb.
avatar

Stephenfisher2001

13 months ago
Score 6
Yeah. f**k this film.
avatar

MeMeGuYWasLost

12 months ago
Score 2
Agreed.
avatar

Declan Kearns

12 months ago
Score 3
Movies like this are responsible for the downfall of the female lead protagonist. I would rather watch The Long Kiss Goodnight, Tank Girl, Aliens, The Descent or Lara Croft Tomb Raider anyday over this terrible movie.
avatar

Stephenfisher2001

10 months ago
Score 2
Yeah, Aliens, Ripley is nothing, but a total bada** female and the greatest female movie ever! :)
avatar

EijiZeBoi

11 months ago
Score 4
Mad Max: Fury Road will always be the best feminist action movie. Movie studios should take notes from that movie if they want to succeed in being feminist.
avatar

Stephenfisher2001

10 months ago
Score 0
I agree! :)
avatar

LA2002

9 months ago
Score 0
Yeah. Not shove forced diversity and PC catering.
avatar

Nitesh Surya Vanapalli

8 months ago
Score -4
Has Sony not even learned from their mistakes of the Ghostbusters reboot?
avatar

Xian Pu

8 months ago
Score 2
They did learn some lessons, just the wrong ones. They gave this movie a much more modest budget than GB2016, and tried making a "woke" version of a franchise that fanboys were less likely to go apesh*t over. Of course, all that meant was that the movie ended up a financial disappointment instead of an outright flop, and no-one cared enough to actually watch the movie in the first place.
avatar

LeroyManTheFirst

7 months ago
Score 1
Copypaster!!
avatar

Eric Cartman 2001

8 months ago
Score 3
Who even asked Elizabeth to watch movies starring men?
avatar

AttackerAngel85

2 months ago
Score 1
Oh my god, they should make a male reboot about how bad women are.
avatar

MatthewThePrep

6 months ago
Score 2
avatar

MatthewThePrep

6 months ago
Score 1
A franchise considered to be an example of how the mighty have fallen.
avatar

Xian Pu

6 months ago
Score 1
It was pretty much already dead after Full Throttle and the 2011 series, really. This movie was the equivalent of digging up the corpse and doing degrading things to it.
avatar

JDM4678

5 months ago
Score 2
How to NOT reboot a TV show and movie series aswell
avatar

What.jpeg

3 months ago
Score 0
It's so bad, i didn't even see it.
avatar

Dragos133

3 months ago
Score 0
This is what happens when Sony and Columbia Pictures try to reboot a TV show and a movie, but they fail miserably.
avatar

ThereIsNoUsername

2 months ago
Score 0
So bad I didn't even heard about it until I did and it was about how much it flopped in the box office.
avatar

Robertoiglesias271

2 months ago
Score 0

This movie really knows how to not feel like a typical movie. Like it feels like it's the own creator's film. The only problem with that, is that it sucks.

Also THANKS A LOT FOR MAKING YOUR ACTION SCENES BE FUCKING BORING!
avatar

JDM4678

one month ago
Score 0
Sony sure sucks when it comes to films

You are not allowed to post comments.