שלום! Sorry, but I no longer have time to read or write for this site. I wo...
שלום! Sorry, but I no longer have time to read or write for this site. I won't cancel my account but I won't be active anymore.
Member since:21.06.2000
Reviews:218
Members who trust:242
Well, the sequel to this movie is about to be released, so I thought it time to take this poorly written op on the first movie and try to improve upon it.
First of all, yes, I must admit, I went to see this film! But to tell you the truth, I wasn't in the least bit disappointed. Nope. Not even a little bit. Why? Simple. If they had tried to take themselves seriously, this film would have fallen on its face. As it was, from the first moments in the opening scene, I knew that the whole film was going to be high action and tongue-in-cheek. Why else would they have shown the in-flight movie as being "T. J. Hooker: The Movie" and then have a character sigh and say "Another movie from an old TV show."? With that clearly in place, I knew I was in for pure, unadulterated fun. And that's exactly what I came away with.
The Plot: So, what is this movie about? Simply stated, a trio of beautiful women are called upon to keep voice recognition software out of the hands of the wrong people. They are aided by a very mysterious boss - who is never seen but only heard - and his less mysterious assistant. Of course, these ladies are the ones that ultimately have to figure out how to find the culprits, and how to defeat them, as well as save the life of their unseen boss. Along the way they get into some interesting, sexy and even hair-raising scrapes, while enlisting some pretty fantastic sleuthing and fighting abilities.
The Actors and the Acting: One of the things that makes one feel that this movie is a stretch of the imagination is the use of female actresses who either don’t seem tough enough or smart enough to pull this off. Drew Barrymore (in the part of Dylan Sanders) knows how to play the “smarter than she looks” girl, but just doesn’t seem like she could kick *ss anywhere besides between the sheets. And while Cameron Diaz (Natalie Cook) does look like she could be pressed to cause someone bodily injury, she acts like she doesn’t have enough
brains to think her way out of a paper bag. Only Lucy Liu (Alex Munday) seems to have both the toughs and the smarts to carry off the whole job. Ah, but together they do seem to have enough of it all to pull it off.
Bill Murry plays their boss’ messenger boy, John Bosley, and while he is his usual funny self, I found him underused in this film. I was glad that we could hear the familiar and smooth voice of John Foresythe playing the faceless boss, Charles Townsend (a.k.a.: Charlie), which he portrayed in the original series.
The Script: As I mentioned in the opening of this op, we are clearly set up at the outset of this film for this to be a purely fun adventure. Many nods to the original TV series appear throughout this film, which those who remember it will undoubtedly smile at. Also, having a character called “The Thin Man” brings us even further into the past - back as far as the 30s and the Dashiel Hammett stories and movies. Unfortunately, aside from this name, I saw no other similarities, unless the fact that they’re both crime comedies counts. Hold up… if I recall correctly, those old Thin Man movies had quite a few double entendres worked into the script. This film also relies heavily on that type of quip. For instance:
“Roger Corwin: You have great hands. I could use someone like you on my staff. “Alex: My hands aren't going anywhere near your staff.”
So you can see, the writers seemed to use as many sex and action clichés as possible to further the idea that this film is nothing but a titillating, romping and laughing matter. Purists, however, may find the plot holes too wide and gaping, and some of the banter mundane or stupid. That they might have been better off putting this back in the 70s instead of updating it to the year 2000 could be a valid flaw, but I think it’s a debatable issue.
The Special Effects, Cinematography, Direction, Sets & Scenery: I’m no expert in this field, but it did seem to me that a good deal of attention was paid to this side of the film. There are scenes where one of the girls is fighting and there’s no way that they didn’t enhance the action with some special effect. And yet, except for the fact that one knows that this couldn’t have happened in real life, these appeared quite seamless on the screen. Some of this can be attributed to some excellent choreography in the fight scenes, but some must have been done in combinations with computers. That one can hardly tell which is which would be a true plus for this film.
Moreover, I found that the fairly unknown director, known as “McG” (a.k.a. Joseph McGinty Nichol), has employed some pretty fancy camera work here. One scene in particular had me totally on the edge of my seat. Its a drag-race-gone-wild scene where the film editing was purely spectacular. The flashing between the two cars and feeling of speed was truly a stroke of genius. I haven't seen anything quite as impressive since the opening dance scene in the movie "All That Jazz" (if you haven't seen that film, you're missing something just for that opening, believe me). And as for the rest of the action and fight scenes, I’ve noticed reviews where this was favourably compared to the Die Hard and Matrix films. That’s pretty high praise for an action comedy, and I tend to agree. I also happen to like the stronger emphasis on martial arts verses bang-bang shoot-em-up, guns blazing scenes, which apparently was at the request of Ms. Barrymore.
Again, some people would have preferred that the Angels do their bouncing to the background of the 70s. I’m thinking that McG wouldn’t have been able to achieve as believable a combination here if he was hindered by having to check his historical accuracy. What he did achieve was the feeling that these three girls were a real team. What’s more, the feeling throughout the film that the whole cast was having one hell of a good time was very evident. The art of a good director is turning a bunch of individuals into a team, and this was certainly achieved here.
Finally, there’s some beautiful eye-candy in this movie, and I’m not talking about the bodies or faces of those three Angels. Filmed on location in Southern California, there’s a castle like complex there that a large bit of the action takes place in which I’d love to visit. There is also a flat that has interiors which are something beyond belief and also has one amazing view overlooking what is probably Los Angeles. Plus, I understand that one of the homes used in this film is the same one that was used in Barrymore’s film debut - E.T. Well, her being one of the producers would account for that touch of nostalgia, wouldn’t it?
The Soundtrack: The title track was recorded by Destiny’s Child, and its heavier than pop but not quite metal rock sound was very complementary to this movie. I’ve read quite a few reviews of this song in particular which haven’t been totally flattering, however, especially since it seemed at the time that the group only recorded songs where they could plug their own names into the lyrics. If you ask me, who cares? And that the rest of the original music is much in the same vein is no problem.
What was most fun, however, were all of the older, non-original songs included in this film. With old songs by Heart, Michael Jackson, Jimi Hendrix, George Michael and Marvin Gaye, among others, how can you go wrong? This is a film that I think I’d like to own the soundtrack for, even if I never decide to buy the DVD.
Bottom Line: OK. So the plot was a bit thin. OK. So the acting wasn't Oscar material. OK. So the comedy was a tad lame at times. But the action was well done, the special effects were on a high level, the choreography of the fight scenes was spectacular and most importantly, the good guys (or should I say, gals) won in the end over the bad guys and with lots of flash and flare in the process. Isn’t that you go to see an action film for? Well, that and the tight costumes on the sexy women, I suppose.
All in all, this movie was just plain fun. Why not just take an evening off and forget the world's troubles and just let your self enjoy for a change. If you want to do that, this is the movie to see! And I, for one, am very much looking forward to the sequel - which I hear is promised to have even more “grrr” than the first one.
Thanks for reading.
~~~~~ Technical Stuff: This is a review of the film only, as per the criteria below.
I was unable to find the official web page for this, but you can get most of your information about this film from the Internet Movie Data Base web page where this film can be found at http://us.imdb.com/Title?0160127
Charlie's Angels: The Movie (1999). Rated PG-13 for action violence, innuendo and some sensuality/nudity. UK Rating 15. Runtime: 98 min. in the UK this is available on DVD (via Amazon.co.uk for only £7.99), but the video and soundtrack are only available in the US. ~~~~~
How helpful would this review be to a person making a buying decision? Rating guidelines
Production Year: 1977 - Action/Adventure - Director: Clint Eastwood - Original Language: English - Classification: 18 years and over - Starring:Clint Eastwood, Sondra Locke, Pat Hingle, William Prince, Bill McKinney
Production Year: 2002 - Action/Adventure - Director: Vincenzo Natali - Original Language: English - Classification: 15 years and over - Starring:Lucy Liu, David Hewlett, Anne Marie Scheffler, Joseph Scoren, Matthew Sharp, Jeremy Northam
Production Year: 1964 - Action/Adventure - Director: Cyril Endfield - Original Language: English - Classification: Parental Guidance - Starring:Stanley Baker, Jack Hawkins, Ulla Jacobsson, James Booth, Michael Caine, Nigel Green
HappilyCharlie's Angelsis a surprisingly successful TV-into-movie update of the seminal ... more
1970s jiggle show. Cameron Diaz, Drew Barrymore (who also produced) and Lucy Liu star as the hair-tossing, fashion-setting, kung-fu fighting trio employed by the my...
Postage & Packaging: £1.21 Availability: Usually dispatched within 1-2 business days...
HappilyCharlie's Angelsis a surprisingly successful TV-into-movie update of the seminal ... more
1970s jiggle show. Cameron Diaz, Drew Barrymore (who also produced) and Lucy Liu star as the hair-tossing, fashion-setting, kung-fu fighting trio employed by the my...
Postage & Packaging: free Super Saver Delivery Availability: Usually dispatched within 24 hours...
Cameron Diaz, Drew Barrymore and Lucy Liu are Charlie's Angels - a trio of elite private ... more
investigators who, with the latest in high-tech gadgets, martial arts techniques and a vest array of disguises, unleash their state-of-the-art skills on land, sea ...
Advantages: Cameron Diaz and...that's about it Disadvantages: Poor acting, poor script, poor plot, rubbish villain, totally unbelievable, a shameless rip-off - mocks the memory of the much, much better MI and Matrix
Advantages: Anything that has Cameron Diaz in it, wet and 'unzipped' to the waist has got to get 5 stars Disadvantages: not sure Lucy Liu was the right casting for the 3rd 'Angel'
flashpointz 27.08.2002 (27.08.2002)
·
Read review
Ciao members have rated this review on average: very helpful
Review of Charlie's Angels (DVD)
Advantages: Drew Barrymore, Cameron Diaz... Disadvantages: The most stupid film ever, even worse than The Avengers, possibly as bad as Batman and Robin
![Charlie's Angels [DVD] [2000]](http://picnicb.ciao.com/uk/78545971.jpg "Charlie's Angels [DVD] [2000]")
very helpful by (93%):
helpful by (7%):
