New Charlie's Angels Movie

[TommyT]

[Leo656]

Terrific. Terrific.

Trivia: 1970s Farrah Fawcett was comprised of 63% cocaine and 37% Quaaludes, with a creamy caramel center. Oh baby.

[oldmanwinters]

Originally Posted by Andrew NDB

I think it can be boiled down pretty simply. The movie made 8 million dollars in weekend #1, right? Elizabeth Banks says that men don't see female action movies... so I guess that must mean that she thinks that 8 million is only female audiences, right? Mostly, at least?

OK, so let's assume she's 100% right. That 8 million dollars just came from female audiences. But now let's pretend we went back in time to this past weekend and somehow the SAME number of men also showed up to see the movie. Now that puts it at 16 million... which is still a catastrophic and fatal box office on the back of a movie that cost 50 million.

So wtf is she even talking about? She made a bad movie that nobody wanted to see. Not males, not females, not anybody.

I like your math.

Seems odd she should blame the Action-Movie Men for not coming out at all, when it seems like she should be blaming the Action-Movie Women for not coming out in a large mass.

[Candy Kappa]

It’s out already? Huh, I was hyped seeing the trailer a while back and then nothing until it just jumps out of the shadows.

[IndigoErth]

After seeing the trailer on tv... the characters just feel annoying to me. Like superficial caricatures of women, or some kind of vibe like their aim is at 20-year-old college-age women who like to frequent clubs, but I doubt that demographic cares all that much for action movies.

That a trailer -- which is supposed to contain the good stuff to get attention and bring in an audience -- features character reactions about... a closet... yeah, seems kind of weak.

[Candy Kappa]

Ah, it's not out yet over here, comes out 29th November.

As much as I liked the trailer, maybe a IP like Charlie's Angels needs more cheese, like the Rock Baywatch movie, that was a big dumb fun movie with bright colors and action.

[Andrew NDB]

Elizabeth Banks before box office numbers come out: "This movie isn't for men." Elizabeth Banks after box office numbers come out: "Men are misogynistic pigs for not seeing this movie!"

Originally Posted by Candy Kappa

As much as I liked the trailer, maybe a IP like Charlie's Angels needs more cheese, like the Rock Baywatch movie, that was a big dumb fun movie with bright colors and action.

Probably right. Or even go the other way and go with a more raucous, R-rated, "21 Jump Street" route but with Angels instead of undercover police. I'd watch that.

[CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy]

Elizabeth Banks? This Elizabeth Banks?

[Cure]

That's Elizabeth Hurley.

[CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy]

Originally Posted by Cure

That's Elizabeth Hurley.

Sheesh, you're right. Got wires crossed in my brain. Guess it's been awhile since I saw either actress in a film...

[Leo656]

Elizabeth Hurley is in a bikini on Yahoo almost every single day. And she still looks incredible.

She's figured out that she doesn't need to waste time and energy acting anymore when all she has to do is twirl around in a bathing suit. And God Bless Her for her amazing level of clarity, and her commitment to the cause. Not that she was a bad actress, but... given the choice, I'd definitely skip watching her act and jump right to the bikini sh*t. Pretty sure most people would agree.

See, some people just accept their purpose and own that sh*t. "I'm sexy, look at me!" No pretense, no shame. I respect the hell outta that.

Especially ones that are 50-something-going-on-30, like Elizabeth Hurley. Mrowrrrr.

[oldmanwinters]

Originally Posted by Leo656

ones that are 50-something-going-on-30

Haha, I'm gonna have to remember that phrase.

[Andrew NDB]

Kristen Stewart bummed that there won't be any sequel because they made an "important movie":

http://www.darkhorizons.com/kristen-...ngels-failure/

[oldmanwinters]

Stewart should prepare for a series of SyFy b-movies or quirky romantic comedies on Lifetime. Or maybe a starring role on the CW.

[Sumac]

Originally Posted by Andrew NDB

Kristen Stewart bummed that there won't be any sequel because they made an "important movie":

http://www.darkhorizons.com/kristen-...ngels-failure/

The movie, which was already made about 10 years ago?

[Andrew NDB]

Elizabeth Banks on how the failure wasn't her fault at all:

https://www.darkhorizons.com/banks-t...eboot-regrets/

[Leo656]

What confuses me is, I could'a swore that at the time she and everyone else involved swore it WAS "just for chicks", y'know, "pushing back against the Male Gaze" and all that, and now she's saying "I wanted it to be for Everyone", and blames the marketing for it being a "chicks only" thing.

I mean, maybe. Marketing departments "misrepresent" pictures in a way the filmmakers never intended all the time, but still. I'd need to look up the older quotes but I could'a swore that she did indeed have an outspoken hand in it being a Chick Movie.

[Coola Yagami]

Originally Posted by Leo656

What confuses me is, I could'a swore that at the time she and everyone else involved swore it WAS "just for chicks", y'know, "pushing back against the Male Gaze" and all that, and now she's saying "I wanted it to be for Everyone", and blames the marketing for it being a "chicks only" thing.

I mean, maybe. Marketing departments "misrepresent" pictures in a way the filmmakers never intended all the time, but still. I'd need to look up the older quotes but I could'a swore that she did indeed have an outspoken hand in it being a Chick Movie.

I'm pretty sure she did cause that's usually how this song and dance goes. Either the marketing is woke, or the people involved in the movie including the actors talk about how woke it is, or both. They push the fanbase away, then blame that same fanbase when their project fails.

Like how can you expect the same people you insult to watch your **** regardless of what you're calling them and accusing them of? And what does it say about your project that not even the people that pretend to care and virtue signal about it don't actually watch it either?

[Leo656]

Well it's like I've said before, the very idea of making a "Chicks Only" action movie like this thing or the last Terminator movie is bizarre, because chicks don't like that kind of movie authentically. They put up with them if their husband/boyfriend wants them to watch it, but by and large, women overwhelmingly do not like or care about action movies, and it's NOT because they predominantly star and focus on men. Women simply have different priorities and want different things from a movie. So doing a typical action romp and then saying "This one is 100% by and for the ladies!" is simply a fool's errand, there's just no audience. Has nothing to do with who made it or who's starring in it or what the point of it is; women just won't pay to see that type of movie, they never have and they never will.

I mean, tough break that some people have to find that out the hard way, but some things are just hardwired.

[Andrew NDB]

Originally Posted by Leo656

Well it's like I've said before, the very idea of making a "Chicks Only" action movie like this thing or the last Terminator movie is bizarre, because chicks don't like that kind of movie authentically.

If only it was just that with the last Terminator movie. It went down a checklist of things deemed "problematic" of late as if to retroactively purify the series of them. "White savior... gone! Killed, as a child!" "Border control... bunch of border patrol massacred!" Etc.. Really pretty infuriating to think about.