Tonight saw the premiere of the rebooted “Charlie’s Angels” starring Rachael Taylor, Minka Kelly and..um…the one we’ve never heard of… oh, yes..Annie Ilonzeh. Not that anyone much expected it to be a gem, but the general concensus seems to be that it’s D.O.A.
Was it a mistake ditching the light, lampoonish tone of the Drew Barrymore movies in exchange for something that takes itself more seriously? I’d say so. And by all accounts, there’s nothing in this reboot than there wasn’t in the rejigged “Knight Rider” or “Bionic Woman”, and they’re all but a distant memory.
Most critics and viewers praise the high and costume stylists more than anything else in the show. That’s always a worry.
TVFanatic said : “This new version has some fatal flaws. In “Angel with a Broken Wing,” we meet the new Angels and I’m turned off before we’ve even begun. Not by the actresses. They’re all beautiful but by the characters. There’s lots of girl power here and I’m all for that. That’s half the reason why I watch most anything Joss Whedon ever does. Of course, the other half is that his writing is in a whole other league than anything you’ll see here. And for all of the Angel high kicks and martial arts moves, none of it left me satisfied. I’m torn because I want to like this remake. Yes, it is cheesy and predictable, but so was the original and I have fond memories. Unfortunately, I just don’t have the love for these characters and I’m not feeling enough of the fun. Maybe that will come with time. We’ll see. We’ll hope.”
Entertainment Weekly said : “I’d opt for the old, “let’s not over-analyze this, it’s just a show to watch pretty people for” interpretation, but the dialogue kept getting in the way of even simple ogling. “Abby put the cat in ‘cat burglar’”? “We’re angels, not saints”? Sheesh… Unless I’ve been misreading the EW.com audience, I can’t imagine many of you are going to forsake Community or The Big Bang Theory or Vampire Diaries or even The X Factor to continue watching Charlie’s Angels, are you?”
Chicago Tribune said : “…And they wear fabulous clothes—or just swim trunks in Bosley’s cast (not complaining)—while doing it. There’s nothing wrong with escapist fun, but I like at least some brains in the mix.”
Hollywood Reporter said : “The writing is atrocious. It’s like a spoof that suddenly took itself seriously. That ABC could have made this on the drama side and the yet-to-air Work It on the comedy side – far and away the two worst shows of this new season – says a lot about what it takes to get fired in this town. Listen, to go on any more about Charlie’s Angels – even to the point of talking about who’s in it or who wrote it (why embarrass them any more than necessary?) gives the show more validation than it deserves. Don’t watch this show thinking it’s so awful it could be brilliant. Or that you could make a fantastic drinking game out of it. No, there are series that will fill those needs. Charlie’s Angels is offensive to every actor and writer currently out of work. It makes Jersey Shore look like Shakespeare. And it sets the standards of television back to, well, the lesser efforts of the 1970s. And that’s nostalgia nobody needs to relive.”
NY Daily News said : “It can’t survive the kind of comically bad writing that requires the ladies to point guns at each other, then work it all out by saying things like, ‘I swear on my life!’ Or to look at a bunch of ominous clues about a mystery man in a dead woman’s apartment and say, darkly, ‘I can’t believe she found him!’ The show does have a good look. You take these three women, put them in Miami and that part would be hard to screw up. But if you like smart women who hide the iron fist under the velvet glove, you’ll get more satisfaction elsewhere – like from, oh, say, Nikita over on the CW, who is better drama all by herself than this ill-served new trio of Angels.”
But listen, they’re just critics, what do they know!? What did YOU guys think? Was “Charlie’s Angels” as bad as some of these reviewers say it was? Sound-off below!