'Allo! I'm not contributing to Ciao for the time being but if you are bored / desperate / weird enou...
'Allo! I'm not contributing to Ciao for the time being but if you are bored / desperate / weird enough to wish to continue to read my ramblings, you can find me on Dooyoo under the user name plipplop. See you around! :P
Member since:15.07.2000
Reviews:694
Members who trust:826
Every once in a while a film comes along that is so unbelievably awful I fail to understand how the production team can hold their heads up in public. Charlie's Angels is one such film - evidence that it doesn't matter how much money you throw at a film, it can still be shite.
Charlie is an elusive millionaire who, for reasons unknown, hires an elite force of female undercover agents who undertake top secret assignments for paying clients. In this tale, the Angels have been hired to help locate and rescue a millionaire computer engineer who has apparently been kidnapped. They soon recover the engineer, but subsequently discover that it was not the engineer that the kidnappers were after, but some top secret personal identification software that would enable the owner to track anyone around the world. Things all start to become a bit hectic as apparent allies become enemies, and the girls find themselves in a race against time to rescue their supervisor, and the elusive Charlie.
I quickly concluded within the first three minutes that the film was going to be ridiculous. The opening sequence shows us the Angels in action,
in a completely inexplicable mission that appears to have no purpose other than to throw in one of those "peels the face off to reveal.." kind of sequences that Hollywood thrives on. The action is like a combination between Mighty Morphin Power Rangers and The Matrix gone wrong, and is part of a movie that never fails to go for the "bad-ass girl power thang". In one sequence, the girls have to break into the competitions high security head quarters, which they achieve through a combination of ridiculous Ant and Dec style disguises, coupled with Lucy Liu in full dominatrix gear - yoikes!
Fans of the 70s/80s television series will be highly disappointed with the modern-day counterparts of the original Angels:
Drew Barrymore looks as dumpy and plain as ever, with as much sex appeal as a soiled Wellington. Her ample proportions are clumsy, and she seems consistently uncomfortable with all her action scenes.
Lucy Liu gives us the cliched oriental mean machine routine, pouring herself into as much skintight leather and PVC as she can possibly imagine. She exhibits her usual lack of personality and exudes absolutely no warmth whatsoever.
Cameron Diaz is perhaps physically the most likely Angel, although her impossibly thin waistline and impossibly pert backside are a far cry for the voluptuousness of the original angels. She moves well, and is a convincing fighter, but for some reason is credited with the brain capacity of lichen. Her giggly "Little Miss Innocent" routine may have endeared her to some - I was praying for her to get her head kicked in.
Bill Murray (one of my least favourite actors) does what Bill Murray can (very little) and bumbles along as the teams' loopy leader - ultimately providing yet another candidate for a big slap.
The good guy turned bad guy is played by Sam Rockwell who, in true Hollywood fashion, turns from mild mannered Internet geek (glasses, Hawaiian shirt, baggy trousers) into the mean baddie (tight black vest and jeans with shades). It becomes quite apparent that the movie makers realise that the film is so dumb and pointless that they have to revert to simple wardrobe clichés to enable the audience to work out who's good and who's not. Matt Le Blanc from Friends even turns up as Liu's dumb boyfriend - sounds familiar doesn't he?
There were moments of potential uplift. Crispin Glover is well cast as a psychotic hitman with a penchant for martial arts and tufts of the Angels hair and there are some genuinely well-choreographed fight sequences that lend themselves heavily towards the Matrix. There are plenty of bangs and explosions to keep the kids happy, but that is about as far as it goes. Even the soundtrack seems lost, as the groans of the viewer far outweigh some of the tracks being played (Destiny's Child's Independent Woman plays has a surprisingly small presence in the film).
What's so completely ridiculous about the film is that Charlie's Angels is completely self-contradictory in its aims of promoting girl power. Rather than showing us a skilful, mature, slick band of female agents we are instead subjected to a trio of hormonal immature girlies, who use their breasts and pencil like figures at every opportunity to get their own way. The Angels have absolutely no presence whatsoever - they don't stand out from any other group of teenage females that you might dread ending up next to on the bus.
The DVD presentation contains plenty of extras - various mini-documentaries, outtakes plus a director's commentary, but frankly the film is so piss-poor I'd be surprised if anyone makes it that far.
If you've half a mind to watch this film - that's all you'll need…..
How helpful would this review be to a person making a buying decision? Rating guidelines
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
Ha! I loved it (and particularly liked your description of Cameron Diaz having the brain capacity of lichen!)
pinkprincesskt 08.09.2002 20:24
I didn't think it looked very good, but I think it may be okay!! I'm still not sure about it.
tekk 20.06.2001 13:49
Okay... it was trashy, sexist and borderline pathetic but (in my opinion anyway) it was still a hell of a lot of fun! :) I own the DVD and have seen it a few times... a good movie as long as you don't like to actually think whilst viewing! :) Dave
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...
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 ...
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! Availability: Usually dispatched within 24 hours...
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]")
May 31st, 2001
very helpful by (98%):
helpful by (2%):
