With an opening of just $8.6 million over the weekend, the latest attempt to bring back the Charlie’s Angels franchise has crashed and burned out of the gate. Even with a relatively low budget ($48-50 million), the film won’t be making that back stateside and this IP either needs to take a long break, or finally be laid to rest. However, despite its financial misfortune, this is a film that deserved much better because it’s fun escapist entertainment and it’s effectively lead by its three leads who put a modern spin on the Charlie’s Angels we have come to know.
Writer & director Elizabeth Banks (who also plays one of the Bosleys as we learn Bosley is a rank and not just a name) definitely has her finger on trying to make this more of a statement of girl power, even more than the 2000 film and its 2003 sequel that starred Drew Barrymore, Cameron Diaz & Lucy Liu. Those films went for pure camp and that actually worked in its favor because it didn’t take itself too seriously and was extremely fun in the process. What was lacking, especially after a recent rewatch, was a stronger sense of female empowerment. I’m not saying the film necessarily objectified them fully, Drew Barrymore was a producer on those films mind you, but as directed by McG, there was a lot of focus on using them as eye candy, especially in the sequel which took what worked the first time and multiplied by 100 to mixed results. This 2019 version does feature three beautiful leads but they are portrayed for their intelligence, strength, & self-awareness, rather than their sexuality. The opening scene, which features Kristen Stewart in a blonde wig coyly playing naive to subdue her mark, makes you think it’s going down a familiar route but we soon learn that this film will be a much different beast.
The world of Charlie’s Angels has expanded considerably although this film does exist in the same universe as the 1970’s TV show and the films from the early 2000s. This go ’round, the Townsend Agency, led by the disembodied voice of a mysterious leader only known as “Charlie,” is a global investigative network of female spies, not just “three little girls who went to the police academy.” Stewart plays wild card, Sabina, a Park Avenue princess turned snappy badass who swears she’d be dead had she not been saved by the Angels. Dubbed “Miss Independent” by a lovesick mark in the opening scene, free-spirited Sabina acts as the comic relief who creates diversions by ridiculously dancing for security cameras and knows how to subdue henchmen with her feminine wiles. On the other hand, there is Jane (Ella Balinska), a tough former MI6 agent who entered the Townsend Agency when she grew tired of the chain of command. She’s formidable and prefers to work alone which makes her and Sabina an odd couple of sorts as Angels. The last Angel, or better yet, Angel in training is corporate whistleblower Elena (Naomi Scott), a brilliant but undermined scientist whose invention could revolutionize the power industry or be used as a deadly weapon if it falls in the wrong hands. She lacks the skills of the other two Angels but she’s smart and proves to be the final person necessary to form this new trio of Angels.
I’m going to get the negatives out of the way. The plot is standard action movie fare. How many times has an invention come around that can be deadly if it falls into the wrong hands? This is the true area that Banks falters because she’s doing a lot here that’s different and a bit fresh but the story itself feels dated. The same can also be said of some of the action. Some of the fight scenes work, particularly Stewart’s acrobatics in the opening scene, but there isn’t enough of it and what we get is mostly by the numbers. Nothing stands out about the various car chases and explosions and perhaps that’s because Banks only has one film under her belt other than this one (Pitch Perfect 2). A more experienced hand at the action would’ve made a big difference.
There is also the issue of a strong central villain. Jonathan Tucker is a glorified T-1000 knockoff as Hodak who is all action and no lines while Nat Faxon and Sam Claflin don’t make much of an impression on their end as well playing Peter Fleming & Alexander Brock, respectively. The first film had fun villains like Crispin Glover’s Thin Man and Sam Rockwell’s Eric Know. Even the sequel, despite its flaws, gave Demi Moore a movie comeback as fallen Angel Madison Lee. There isn’t anyone that comes close to that here so the threat never feels viable.
It is to Banks’ credit that a lot of the film does work though. Banks allows us to get to know all the Angels and we care about them as individuals and friends. There is less tomfoolery and more attention paid to making the Angels fully fleshed out characters. So while I found the film lacked a bit in terms of action, it was made up for by watching these girls at work. Kristen Stewart proves she can be snappy and funny in a role that finally shows she can have some fun and not be sullen for two hours of screentime. Stewart is a good actress in the right material but I’ve never seen a humorous side of her. It’s refreshing to see her having a good time. Naomi Scott, fresh off her own girl power turn as Jasmine in the live-action Aladdin, is instantly likable as the civilian in danger who finds her strength as she joins the team. Scott is definitely going to be one to watch in more future projects. British actress Ella Balinska is someone I’m unfamiliar with but she definitely conveys a compelling kickass persona. The best thing about the three actresses is that they are all very different, bring something unique to the table and turns that into solid chemistry. As one of the Bosley’s (Patrick Stewart and Djimon Honsou fill the role as well with the latter being more of an extended cameo), Elizabeth Banks offers a new spin on the character and throws in a twist that isn’t groundbreaking but it definitely was a surprise in regards to one of the Bosley’s.
2019’s Charlie’s Angels has been described as “WOKE” by some of the players involved and a few critics who happened to like the film just enough like myself. I’m not a fan of buzz words like this but I can definitely see the sentiment. This isn’t the Charlie’s Angels we’ve been offered in the past as it pays a bit more respect to the three ladies headlining the film. The closing credits also features some well-placed cameos that drive home that this is a universe of women that come from very different walks of life. It’s a shame that the poor box office has now spun a negative narrative. Banks believes that if this film didn’t make money, it shows that studios shouldn’t back female led-action films. I think she bit off a little more than she could chew with that statement but I also know that in some circles she isn’t wrong. Charlie’s Angels failure isn’t about its quality, it has more to do with selling an outdated IP to young girls who aren’t familiar with it. What Banks does do here is show that you can have a film led by three very different women and it can charm the audience. Maybe time will allow this Charlie’s Angels to eventually find its audience but in the meantime lets not give up on having capable female performers have their chance to show they kick ass with the boys too.
