Welcome to Thunderdome

What they lack in sexiness I guess they'll make up for with no personality?

I've always found Elizabeth Banks attractive... but apparently she's Bosley. Kristen Stewart never did it for me, no idea who those others are.

Massive bomb. Only a bit over $8M opening weekend.

Can this please end Kristen Stewart's 15 minutes?

Leisher wrote: Massive bomb. Only a bit over $8M opening weekend.

Can this please end Kristen Stewart's 15 minutes?

Misogyny is strong this weekend

I heard someone else say, "I wish they'd give us a movie about funny woman spies, instead of a grrrrrrl power movie."

It is literally impossible for Hollywood to make a movie with females as the leads without degrading men.

What went wrong.

Sony knew Charlie’s Angels was a one quadrant movie, eyed at women 13-39, especially given its lack of action scenes

You know what's not a good idea? Taking an established franchise about super hot women as spies and turning it in a talkie, with less than super hot women, geared towards suburban housewives.

Why does shit like this even get a green light to be made?

Leisher wrote: Why does shit like this even get a green light to be made?

To prove that things like this can be greenlit?

TheCatt wrote:

Leisher wrote: Why does shit like this even get a green light to be made?

To prove that things like this can be greenlit?

Just because a producer has the cash to finance a movie they think is Important, doesn't mean that producer is intelligent or has good sense.

Watched it during quarantine.

Not sure "Get Woke, Go Broke" has ever been more appropriate.

I'll grant them that Stewart is actually attractive in the opening scene, but once the wig comes off... Her hair just sucks for her face. I get it, you're a lesbian. (In the same way that Anne Heche was a lesbian...yep, shots fired.) Why does that mean you must have a bad haircut? The other two were more attractive then I initially thought as well.

The film, overall, also isn't as bad as you might think!!!

That being said, it's formulaic, unrealistic, condescending, offensive, drivel.

Is there a fucking dance scene for no reason? Yep.
Are women shown physically fighting men and holding their own? Yep.
Are women shown outsmarting the men throughout the movie? Yep.
Are the "good guy" male characters one dimensional and treated like prizes? Yep. (I love how "equality" always becomes oppression for those who used to be on top.)
Is the bad guy exactly who you think it is from the beginning? Yep.
Are all the bad guys shown to be incompetent, cowards, weak, etc.? Yep.
Is the tough bad guy given dialogue despite being in the whole movie? I think he spoke once?
Is there a completely fake scene stuck into the film where the dialogue is intentionally written to make the twist seem shocking? Yep. (Intentionally lying is not good story telling. Misdirect, sure, but don't lie.)
Is there a random montage of "girls doing stuff" to represent girl power right after the opening scene? Yep.
Is there even more female empowerment stuffed into the credit scenes? Yep.
Is Charlie now a woman? Yep. (Oh, is that a spoiler? I don't give a fuck.)
Are the Angels' battle tactics hilariously bad, which I'm sure went right over the filmmakers' heads? Yep.
Is there an empowering scene representing women of all creeds and colors? Yep.
Are there cameos from famous women? Yep.

Again, I truly, truly didn't hate the movie, but fuck Hollywood needs to learn to write actual female characters instead of male action heroes that just happen to be women. You can be empowered without doing so at the expense of others. You know, like you accuse men of doing...

You can't make this shit up.

To be fair, that first one is completely made up according to a google search.

Well, you knew that because it didn't give a source. However, the message is accurate and exactly what happened.

It's especially true of the all female Ghostbusters when all the SJWs and whatnot were attacking anyone who thought the casting and choices being made were bad. Then after the movie came out those same SJWs attacked those same people for not supporting the film.

Oh, and Birds of Prey.

I saw this being a remake of the two with Drew, Cameron, and Lucy. Same over the top action scenes, etc. Except they removed the ditzyness of the Cameron character.


Creepy thin guy played major roles in both of those, and never said anything either.
Bosley people changing (converted to a title) over the generations.
I didn't mind Charlie being a female, because she was an original. Again, Charlie is a title, not a name.
Ex-Angel, I mean Bosley is the bad guy.
Chase scene on horseback instead of indy cars. But still a racetrack.

Just so many similarities. Most original part was recruiting someone new. I don't mind women winning fights in action movies. Think, Mr. and Mrs. Smith. I don't think guys have to win every competition against women. In fact, Captain Pickard kicking Bank's ass was less believable than the rest of the fights. What is he, like 80? He would be so brittle now. Punching someone would shatter his hand. Unfortunately, I went into the movie looking for everything that was wrong with it instead of watching it like I watched the old ones. I liked the old ones, and probably would have liked this one more had I not been exposed to the negative press. I liked the cameos in the closing credits too. I didn't like the RBG reference. So tired of the references to her across many IPs. HUGE points off though for K. Stewart. She's VERY annoying. Elizabeth has gotten annoying as she matures as well, but I can still tolerate her.

Cakedaddy wrote: I didn't like the RBG reference.

Ruth Bader Ginsberg?