Hi, everyone. "Moriarty" here with some Rumblings From The Lab...
Fri-DAY! Fri-DAY! Can’t wait. I don’t care if it’s “cool” to like the Angels or not. Two out of the three are just adorable, and since I already know I’m going to have to see this, I’ve got my fingers crossed that McG delivers.
Let’s see what our first reviewer has to say:
Greetings Harry.
Lord Summerisle here. Just got back from an L.A. screening of "Charlie's Angles 2: Full Throttle". (Or is it simply "Charlie's Angles: Full Throttle" with an implied "2" in the title? Was never quite sure about that.)
Bottom line: If you liked the first one, you will like the second one. More of the same only with a bigger budget and larger palette.
It's one of those films where they play bloopers at the end credits. All such films have a similar tone. If you've seen them, then you know what I mean.
Don't get me wrong - its much more enjoyable than the Cannonball Run films, but there is clearly the similar sense of the primary objective being for the cast and crew to have fun making the film in the hopes that the fun will spill over to the audience watching the finished product. Fortunately, it does for the most part.
It's also one of those films where they have main titles all throughout a big opening action sequence which telegraphs the fact that the filmmakers don't take the action very seriously. If they did, they wouldn't force an audience to choose between having to watch a "Produced by" credit at the same time a tank firing at our heroes. Do we really expect there to be any sort of dramatic tension to be built while credits are on the screen?
It's also one of those films with a wall-to-wall rock & pop song soundtrack where they spend 10 minutes of end credit time listing the songs' writers and performers along with the BMI/ASCAP/"Used with permission from" such and such music label credits. I'm sure you get the idea.
The Charlie's Angels films have never really held a close relationship with the original television series, save for scenes of the girls talking to the speakerphone with John Forsythe's voice. The television series was never really an "action" series apart from the occasional car chase. Even though the actresses in the original television Angels were roughly the same age as the current film Angels when they shot their respective projects, the television Angels always came across as alluring women while the film Angels cast still come off as teenage girls.
Nor has the plot ever really held center stage. (For the few that are actually interested, the Angels are called into action to recover a pair of finger rings that hold all of the secret information from the federal Witness Protection Program.)
What these films serve as are broad, flexible palates where Drew Barrymore, Cameron Diaz, and Lucy Liu can act out their fantasies in the various film genres - concentrating mainly on action and comedy while showing off their teasing sexuality.
There are parody references and influences from a whole slew of films here - James Bond (primarily "Goldeneye"), Die Hard, Matrix, City Slickers, Cape Fear, Speed, and T2 just to name a few.
The comedy usually comes from the "Three's Company" style of jokes with mistaken sexual innuendoes and double entendres. Then there are the James Bond-Arnold Schwarzenegger style one-liners (or at least the half that were audible over the pulsing soundtrack.) Other times, the comedy comes from the over-the-top action sequences Drew and company jumping off a bridge to catch a falling helicopter that is suddenly recovered and flown away in mid-descent. It's hard to call this comedy or parody though since the James Bond films that it is inspired by is already at that level of self-parody with no real extra room to maneuver with. And finally, the comedy also comes from the getting-old-quickly method of having star cameos in various roles.
Demi Moore seems to have re-grasped why audiences used to like her in this film. And yes, she does look hot. Also, Lucy Liu has much less of a cross-eyed look in this film that plagued her in the first Angeles film and a few other projects which makes her sexuality quotient go up in my book.
Sometimes, the comedy falls flat due to it being too self-conscious - though it is always self-conscious in varying degrees.
The filmmakers obviously knew what worked in the first film and just provided more of it. More costumes and disguises for the girls. More locales throughout Southern California. Bigger explosions. Bigger kicks. More sexuality. More chases. More improbable recalling of obscure facts and figures at one's fingertips in order to crack the case. McG MTV-style directing. Surfing. Horse riding. Motorcycle riding. Welding. Cameron Diaz's ass. Crispin Glover unhinged. You get the picture.
Barrymore, Diaz, and Liu are three young stars in Hollywood who wanted to make an ode to action and comedy film making as friends with a recognition that they are all living the Hollywood Dream in doing so. "Charlie's Angels" is the vehicle they found to do this with.
While I admit there is a streak of cynicism in my writing here, I must admit I had fun overall (as I did with the first film).
Still, I think that the spy-action film is already overly saturated with parodies and is rapidly getting boring. While there are a number of smiles in "Charlie's Angels: Full Throttle", I honestly don't think there is anywhere to go with a third installment of this series. Perhaps it is connected to my feelings that both the action and parody genres themselves have already peaked recently and have no real fresh ideas to explore. The parody film probably won't be revived successfully until the serious genres that they are based on for fodder find new avenues of exploration. I just don't see that happening in James Bond / Die Hard / Matrix genre films right now.
Lest this review seem schizophrenic, I will summarize by saying that "Charlie's Angles: Full Throttle" is a typical enjoyable summer movie. It will surely appeal to the teenage crowd its geared towards. It will also appeal to those who haven't gotten bored with Matrix-style action or feel that it is still interesting simply because it is Barrymore, Diaz, Liu, and Moore that are doing the action.
You will smile a lot, cringe at a few scenes that fall flat, tell yourself that it was mainly fun at the end, then completely forget about it a week later as you take in the next blockbuster released at the theater. Come to think of it, that is probably the most appropriate ode to modern Hollywood film making that Drew Barrymore could have come up with.
Lord Summerilse, out.
Excellent review. This next guy’s girlfriend told me that she was going to cut him off... shut the door to any further lovin’... if he sent me a bad CHARLIE’S ANGELS 2 review. Yikes!
Yo! Mori! It's about that time that one of those boners out there who manages to wrangle themselves into free screenings of movies before their release dates finally chimes in and expresses his (or her) opinon about that certain special film that, for 90+ minutes, he (or she) was subjected to.
Well, that boner is me. And that movie is: CHARLIE'S ANGELS: FULL-ON-THROTTLE-ME-IF-THEY-MAKE-ANOTHER-SEQUEL. Wowzers. Is it honestly possible for a director to out-direct themselves on their very own sequel, and yet also manage to out-direct their original film and any music video they may have ever participated in the creation of?? Stupendous! Mr. McG has rewritten the rules of popcorn cinema with his latest and certain most recent installment to his recreation of a TV series that quite frankly, was pretty doofy to begin with. Only, now, thanks to the addition of many swirling, magical asses, oodles of special effects and a zesty sampling of music we all wish we could remember why we like, Mr. McRib has crafted a special piece of mental masturbation that will be sure to thrill the 10 year olds who have the attention span to stomach it.
If you're familiar with the _expression: "Watch the trailer over and over and you've seen the movie." Then would there be no greater place to use that phrase than in association with this film. Of course, Mr. McNugget's first film was a large piece of fluff that you could have stuffed an entire Vegas-sized hotel's pillows with, but at least we could all generally agree it was "fun". It was highly forgettable, it was easily watchable, it had a meandering story and the all-important: Magical Swirling Ass of Magnificence. Oh, an it was F-U-N and knew it and didn't try to be much more. But what that film succeeded in was making us believe in was those characters: The Angels. It made us say: "Hey! These are fine young hotties who have certain character flaws, but still kick ass and are fine examples of female leading ladies. Not to mention, they have mucho charisma and oodles of personality." (At least, that's what I said.)
What the sequel does is say: "Oh, tell hell with characters that you'd care about or believe, instead we're going to give you lots and lots and lots of what we thought made the first film work, sans personality or charisma." But, dammit, this movie is going to be FUN. FUNFUNFUNFUN if we have to drive it into your brain with every explosion and gratuitous special effect we have stored in our computer banks. And that's my basic problem with the movie. It tries to be everything for everyone all at once.
Hey! If you're a fan of dancing to old disco tunes: This film is for you! Hey! If you're a fan of super motorcross chase sequences: This film is for you!
Hey! If you like lame jokes whenever a villian comes to a timely and well choreographed demise: This film is for you! Hey! If you like cameo appearances: This film is for you!
Hey! If you don't mind plotholes larger than the ever-expanding universe: This film is for you! Hey! If you have ADD and constantly require a change in visual and auditory entertainment every 5 seconds: This film is for you!
Basically, instead of trying to make a throroughly enjoyable movie, Columbia and McMuffin decided to design a piece of eye-candy so frickin' huge, that you'd be numb and tingly in your bottom by the end of the movie, bank $200 million and waltz it's way onto home DVD shelves in less time that it takes most people to choose between super-size and regular. Instead, what you get is a bloated, wasted use of a lot of interesting ideas directed with so much visual flair that it makes Joel Schumacher look straight by comparison. Now, before I get my arse flamed by every ADD-riddled youth out there, let me say this: There are fun sequences in this film. There's some good, solid, goofy-ass stuff that goes on in this thing that might make it worth a valuable phony-student I.D. or matinee screening. But overall you get this very drained feeling at the end of the film and you walk out in kind of a daze, blinking out the twinkling lights behind your eyelids, trying to remember where the hell you parked your car and not remembering much at all about the film you saw, other than maybe Crispin Glover's bizarre eyebrows, or Demi Moore's rock-hard abs.
Performances all-around were solid, with a special emphasis on the incredibly talented people like Bernie Mac, Luke Wilson, John Cleese and Matt Le Blanc being completely under-utilized this go-around. Another notable was Demi Moore, who turned in about the sexiest performance this side of Ana Morelos in Y TU MAMA TAMBIEN and was also Hey Harry,
I'm aghast. I managed to score a pass to see the new Charlie's Angels: Full Throttle screening and yet, you were nowhere to be seen. What happened to your love of all things magic and swirling, first and foremost Cameron Diaz's ass? Oh well, perhaps we will meet another time. But in the meantime, here's my review:
Charlie's Angels: Full Throttle.
Ah, Hollywood. There's nothing like it. Nowhere else on the planet can you truly take 70's pop culture, slick it up with snazzy special effects and then riff on the kitch of it all for two hours then call it a day. At this rate I fully expect Love Boat: Rudder Amidship out next summer starring Brendon Fraiser as Gopher, Tim Meadows as Issac and Bruce Willis as Captain Stuebing. And of course Charro, because what would the Love Boat be without Charro? But I'm digressing. Charlie's Angels.
Charlie's Angels (the first one) seemed to catch everyone off guard. From out of nowhere it appeared to the groans of "Not ANOTHER TV show movie" and went out to the tune of over $150 million domestic. And people really enjoyed it. It knew what it was and never overstepped it's bounds. And I have to admit, I had fun watching it. But where could they go? What was left to do? The joke, it seemed, was done just enough not to get tired. So what's left but to make a sequel and milk it for everything it's worth? Right?
Well, yes. Only this time, unlike so many sequels, someone actually figured out how to make it work again, and on some levels make it better than the original. How do they accomplish this, you might ask? By making it even more over the top than the original.
Let that roll around in your noggin for a moment. MORE OVER THE TOP THAN THE ORIGINAL. Yeah. Now at this point, calling it over the top is doing it a disservice. This movie makes xXx and Extreme Ops look like award winning documentaries on the properties and laws of physics. It's so god damned rediculous at times that you really can't do anything except say "What the Fuck?" and laugh out loud. And well, frankly, that's the intent. And it works.
Actually, CA:FT isn't really a film per se, in the most specific of terms, as there is but the barest thread of a plot holding together a series of jokes ranging from sponateous dance numbers, Three's Company like misunderstandings, and the just plain wacky insanity of it all as Cameron Diaz dresses up like a Swedish school girl and rides a mecanical yak. This felt more like a skit comedy film like Wet Hot American Summer or an episode of Mr. Show than it did a real film. But, at the same time, it fucking hi-diddily-areous.
This franchise has become more a Heroic Trio meets Fletch than it it's remained Charlie's Angels. But that's not necessarily a bad thing as the jokes keep coming at such a frenetic pace that you cease to care the minute the film opens that there's nothing actually going on.
This movie does nothing for 2 hours but goof on itself and other movies, occassionally pausing for a much needed scene of wire fu ass kicking. Sporting one of the coolest cameo casting calls in recent memory the likes of Bruce Willis, Robert Forster, Sean William Scott, Robert Patrick, The Olsen Twins, Luke Wilson, Matt Leblanc, John Cleese, a picture of Bill Murray and many others show up to yuck it up on screen in all their cameo goodness. Bothering to argue plot points or the rediculous nature of this film is moot. It's a comedy, first and foremost, a true spoof at this point rather than anything else.
Sure there's action and one hell of a kick ass soundtrack which sounds more like McG raided his CD collection than bothered to have people write new songs. And that was something I loved as well. More Prodigy pumped chase and fight scenes (Firestarter and Breathe rather than Smack my Bitch Up this time. McG? A big fan of Fat of the Land? Get out of here.) some Chemical Brothers, Rage Against the Machine, MC Hammer and of course some vintage 70's to really get the groove on.
This movie was solid fun, a gas from beginning to end that never ceases to stop uping the ante of rediculousness from first frame to last. You want a solid narrative? See the Hulk. You want to laugh your ass off? Well, this is the funniest movie I've seen all year rife with enough film geek glory to keep you laughing for hours afterwards. Void and Vapid? Yes. Entertaining? Hell yes.
But for the love of God, I hope it stops here. Let this be it, McG. Topping this seems just damned near impossible at this point. It would be like David Lycnh directing a Jim Carey comedy. That's just how fucked up this movie get's at times.
>And now, right into our last one for today:
Thanks, everybody. Nice work all around.
"Moriarty" out.
