Python Hyena Charlie's Angels (2000): Dir: McG / Cast: Drew Barrymore, Cameron Diaz, Lucy Liu, Bill Murray, Sam Rockwell: Generates for the very purpose of showcasing three women seducing their way to victory. They are not given personalities. They are simply Drew Barrymore, Cameron Diaz and Lucy Liu throwing their feet about. Diaz meets the mailman at the door in her Spider-Man underwear. Barrymore strokes her tongue on someone's steering wheel. Liu swings a mean stick as she addresses a classroom full of males. Charlie is heard but not seen as he instructs the Angels on a mission. Title suggests that these women are not timid. The plot is numerous martial arts scenes that bare nothing to the original show. McG films it like a music video, but one wonders whether he actually remembers anything from the original show because this is a total farce. Barrymore fights off opposition while tied to a chair. Diaz engages in combat while talking on a cell phone. Bill Murray is cast as Bosley their mentor and while there are hints of comic flair, it is obvious that the role is pure cardboard. Sam Rockwell plays the villain whose role is about as enticing as a kick to the family jewels. Its feminist view seems to encourage retaliation against male society. In return, the male society should retaliate against this stupid film by burning every copy in existence. Score: 2 / 10

The_Film_Cricket Charlie's Angels is a Happy Meal with the box but not the meal. It comes with three pretty packages – Cameron Diaz, Lucy Liu and Drew Barrymore who do nothing of importance in the film besides pose, spout sexual innuendo and stand in front of over-cooked special effects (which, come to think of it aren't that special). This is grating to the film lover because these three actresses have done some really good work in the past, they are charming, intelligent and talented so why, oh why, would they choose such a hollow log of a project? I detect a problem when every single scene in the movie that I am watching feels like it would be more at home in a commercial for McDonalds, Mentos, Nike or Lite FM. Charlie's Angels contains not one single scene that breaks that movie out of its Happy Meal packaging or tries to manner anything resembling a story. It is an advertisement for itself, an over-edited revamp of the popular 70s television series but beyond the title you wouldn't know that since none of the actresses playing the Angels are playing the characters from the show. Maybe that's because the movie isn't really a movie, it's a collection of scenes left over from the music video – any wonder that it's directed by a director of music videos? He directs the film like a fast food commercial (he comes credited as McG!!) The movie's intentions fold back on themselves. The director seems to want to make a movie satire about movies based on television shows but ends up with a movie that is just as empty, tired and frivolous as any that have come before. Therefore, the movie's joke is really on itself.The movie strings a story somewhere as connecting tissue to get the actresses to strike a pose, wiggle their behinds and tease the males. Diaz, Liu and Barrymore play three, uh, detectives I guess who are sent on missions given to them by their boss who is heard but never seen (even by them). He instructs them on the case and they follow it through. What's the case? Does it matter? I mention that the movie is a tease and that's correct, starting from it's tagline 'Get Some Action'. The basic shot in the film consists of 'almost, but not quite'. A shot involves the Angels emerging from the water and Diaz walking up to the camera pulling off a wet suit (topless underneath) and having the scene fade within centimeters of the movie maintaining an PG rating.In a movie containing a lot of sexual innuendo I found that the biggest tease isn't even sexual. At one point Barrymore finds herself at gunpoint in her lover's apartment. He has her at bay by a 40th floor patio window, he shoots and she appears to have been shot because she falls backwards through the window. I perked up because I wondered how she would have ever survived, then I started to work it out in my head. Three seconds after the moment the director shows us in slow-motion how she got out of it – the bullet whizzed past her ear, shattered the glass and she fell backwards hanging by her fingernails over the balcony. Only moment before, I thought that the director was allowing me to think – Now that is a tease and a cruel one at that.

Stompgal_87 I vividly remember this film being publicised and Destiny's Child's 'Independent Women Part 1' being in the charts as well as clips from this film being featured in the video when I was 13. I wanted to see this film when it was out in the cinemas but I couldn't see it then because I was too young due to its 15 certificate in the UK (strangely enough, it's a 12 in Ireland and a PG-13 in America) but when I was 14, my mum hired the DVD and I watched it under her supervision due to its violent content, meaning I was okay. Finally when I turned 15, I received the DVD for my birthday, that complemented my PS2 perfectly, and I'd watch it every day after school to write down the script, much to my sister's annoyance and frustration. I still have that DVD and I also found the film on LoveFilm Instant. After having watched it for the first time in a while, I thoroughly enjoyed watching it just as much as I did as a teenager.I'd already heard of Cameron Diaz and Drew Barrymore when this film came out but this was the first time I'd ever heard of Lucy Liu, all of whom played the Angels perfectly with their high-octane stunts, numerous disguises and active leading roles, especially Diaz as Natalie, my favourite Angel who I found the funniest with her laugh-out-loud lines and superb dance moves, whether in her dream or against a Soul Train replica stage. The story was gripping and dramatic, especially when the Angels discover that Eric Knox's kidnapping was a set-up and have to get their Bosley back. The lines are mostly fun if a bit silly yet memorable while the soundtrack is very good and I also have that on CD. Not only did the film's soundtrack feature songs that were on CD but also songs that were not on it (e.g. Michael Jackson's 'Billie Jean' and Blur's 'Song 2') and snippets of incidental music consisting of various arrangements of the 'Charlie's Angels' theme tune plus some eerie, powerful and tense pieces. A lot of hard work and effort were put in the stunts and action scenes, the film is somewhat fast-paced and some of the special effects are incredible, especially the camera zooming into the cloudy sky of the Columbia logo before cutting to a plane flying against a real sky and the slow-motion bullet Knox fires when the moment he shoots Dylan out of the window is replayed. Afterwards, Dylan rushes towards a house where two boys are playing a computer game and she asks them for help, that house being the one featured in 'E.T. The Extra Terrestrial' in which Barrymore starred when she was a little girl. I was so impressed with the leading ladies' roles in this film that it prompted me to watch other works of theirs such as Diaz in 'There's Something About Mary,' Liu in 'Ally McBeal' and Barrymore in '50 First Dates.' This film also inspired me to write a spin-off television episode that was based on the Simpsons episode 'Trilogy of Error' as well as a crossover story in which the Angels meet Shrek (the titular character of yet another brilliant Diaz movie). While this film has several mistakes as listed on the likes of Slipups.com and Movie Mistakes.com, they were still fun to spot and were saved by the humour and the action sequences. The outtakes at the end were a laugh as well.Overall, this is an amazing girlie action flick that features memorable dialogue, stunning stunts, fantastic special effects and a superb soundtrack. I also recommend the sequel, 'Charlie's Angels: Full Throttle,' which is even better. 10/10.

sddavis63 This is yet another in a long list of movies that Hollywood has put out in the last couple of decades based on old TV series from the 60's and 70's especially (which to me, more than anything else, suggests a lack of creativity on Hollywood's part, since these old shows and premises just keep being recycled one after the other, but that's a whole other story.) Some of these remakes have worked; others haven't. "Charlie's Angels" falls more into the latter category to be honest.The TV show was never one that could be taken especially seriously, but for the most part it did try to be serious. This movie, on the other hand, sets "serious" aside almost from the opening moment. It's heavy on martial arts fight scenes, and is more of an action movie than anything else. The story (about the attempt of a villain to identify and kill Charlie) lacks coherence and isn't especially logical, but on the other hand the story is really just an excuse for everything else that's happening.In fairness, the fight and action scenes are pretty well done, and the "Angels" (played by Cameron Diaz, Drew Barrymore and Lucy Liu) are quite lovely, and the movie makes no attempt to hide the fact that it's going for sexiness (all in an acceptable "PG" type manner, of course.) Bill Murray adds no sexiness, but he is along for the ride as Bosley. Charlie, as in the TV series, is never seen but is voiced once again by John Forsythe.Generally speaking, though, the story here is simply weak. I wasn't in the least riveted to the screen while watching this, and it really (to me at least, and I admit that I wasn't a big an of the show but I did see a few episodes) didn't capture the spirit of the original "Charlie's Angels" TV series. (4/10)