'Charlie's Angels' being rebooted, may be actually feminist this time
Elizabeth Banks is in talks to direct the latest "Charlie's Angels" movie, which is a good sign it might not secretly be for teenage boys this time.
It’s been 12 years since the ’70s slinky P.I. drama “Charlie’s Angels” last received a movie (namely “Full Throttle”). So as the world turns and the circle of life joins back up with itself, it’s getting a reboot. But when it arrives (if it arrives) it will likely find itself in a very different time.
In the ’70s the highly-rated show was brushed off by some as mere “Jiggle TV,” which even its makers would have to admit was spot-on. The movies, from 2000 and 2003 — starring Cameron Diaz, Lucy Liu and Drew Barrymore, and directed by McG — were basically “Jiggle cinema.” They attempted to have it both ways: to depict “strong female characters” (i.e., they kicked ass) who still appeared in various states of underdress — or in Barrymore’s case, total undress, as in a scene where her character is knocked off a Hollywood hills manse, winding up standing starkers in front of young boys. After all, they were the chief demographic.
(Oh, there was also a short-lived TV show in 2011.)
Which direction will the reboot go? Will it acknowledge the increasing advocacy about women being under-represented, both in blockbuster movies and as a target demographic? As it happens, it might, perhaps, maybe. The director currently rumored by the Hollywood Reporter to be “in talks” for the gig is Elizabeth Banks, the actress who also helmed this summer’s “Pitch Perfect 2,” which is, in fact, one of the top grossing films ever directed by a woman. She also has a good sense of humor and no strong history with action, meaning it could skip the fake-feminism of the McG outings and target women as well as men who don’t mind not being specifically targeted.
Or it could just include scenes like one where whoever plays Natalie Cook butt-dances in her skivvies for like a minute.