Review of Charlie's Angels (2000) by Blake P — 20 Feb 2016

Charlie's Angels is another TV to film adaptation where I have never seen the series. From its blatantly modern touches to the 70s TV classic, I only presume it doesn't hold up so well. Charlie's Angels is, in a word, corny. It's filled with bad one liners, terrible characters, a poor story, and the acting is wretched.

Three super intelligent and super skilled spies who work under a mysterious unseen millionaire named Charlie attempt to solve a kidnapping scheme of a tech giant, only to find out that looks are very deceiving. There's not so much of a big plot here, it's basically thrown into the middle of a deep friendship between the main characters and their unimportant love lives.

Charlie's Angels seems to me like it was a very overhyped film pre-release and, like it did for me, disappointed viewers, only I had a sense of what I was in for. Despite its all star cast, ranging from Drew Barrymore to Tim Curry to Bill Murray, the film fails the most in actually telling a consistent, real story. The characters, who are almost all the same - bland and girly - are more important and more focused on than the weak story. Their friendship, Bill Murray's wacky escapades (which, by the way, as much as I love Murray, his character is completely and utterly unneeded), and their dull, lifeless new relationships make Charlie's Angels more of a soap opera than a supposedly action packed femme fatale. When it does get into the action, it is fast paced and to the point. The super sleuth aspect of cracking who's behind what is effortless to say the least. Get used to the feel of the film, because it constantly stays overly fast paced and especially corny. I think maybe the one thing I did enjoy about Charlie's Angels is how hilariously terrible it is at holding up today - it's the epitome of 2000, with outdated technology, late 90s alt hits, etc. Charlie's Angels is nothing special - don't let its cast deceive you.