Charlie's Angels Is The Newest #Woke Box Office Catastrophe, Failing to Even Break the $8.7 Million Mark in North American Opening

They can't go bankrupt fast enough.

But they're trying. Oh, is Hollywood trying!

In the wake of Terminator: Dark Fate's failure at the B.O..., we have the further breakdown of cinema IP in Sony’s Charlie's Angels reboot, which is tanking with a God-awful $8.6M domestic opening, $27.9M worldwide (from 26 markets), 3 Stars on Screen Engine-Comscore’s PostTrak, and a B+ Cinemascore.

The Elizabeth Banks-directed-written and produced pic is also opening in 27 offshore markets, China being one where it’s also bombing, with a $7.8M 3-day take in third place behind No. 1 local title Somewhere Winter ($13.1M). All of this is primed to further spur a WTF reaction and anxiety among film development executives in town in regards to what the hell exactly works in this have-and-have-not era of the theatrical marketplace.

...

Says RelishMix, which also foresaw this disaster approaching on social media chatter, "Angels is the latest example in a 'woke' effort to reboot a franchise that many were not all that interested in to start with. In fact, many references to the 2000 version get a call-out as a reason this one doesn’t seem to compare -- whether it’s the cast or the action teased from the film. And, as observed with other recent films, some action/adventure, unfortunately fans say they’re steering clear of this one because of its 'girl power' messaging."

Full-time feminist and occasional director Elizabeth Banks tried the usual "dark marketing" tactic of insulting men to get the women (and liberal soy-based men) who despise men to support her movie, making "Gender Aggrievement" the central marketing pitch for a popcorn movie:

In the age of reboots, revivals, and sequels, Elizabeth Banks wants to know why people are criticizing her for creating another chapter in the Charlie’s Angels franchise.

In a recent profile in WSJ Magazine, the Charlie’s Angels writer/director/star responded to the criticism she's been facing for rebooting the franchise with Kristen Stewart, Ella Balinska, and Naomi Scott. "You've had 37 Spider-Man movies and you’re not complaining!" Banks says. "I think women are allowed to have one or two action franchises every 17 years -- I feel totally fine with that."

In this interview, she announces that almost every story in history is told from a "cisgendered white male perspective" and that any woke story is therefore "fresher."

Audiences don't seem to agree, especially because almost every movie is now #Woke gender-swapped trash. How is this "fresh" given that eight thousand other movies in the past five years do it?

"Fresh" would be a movie about men doing masculine-type things. People would be shocked at that bizarre, unexpected gender twist.

She also declares that men have a responsibility to see women's movies, and I guess particularly those women's movies which intentionally demean and scapegoat men.

She also made sure that audiences knew this movie wasn't only for women -- it was also for the other 50% of the country, Teh Gays.

Elizabeth Banks, writer, director, producer, and costar of the new Charlie’s Angels from Sony, has delivered an action-packed popcorn flick that's fun, feminist, and queer.

One of the sociologically relevant pieces of Charlie’s Angels is a scene in which a female informant exchanges information, not for money but for menstrual products and birth control in order to help women in her native Turkey. Regarding that plot point in the movie, Banks says:

"One of the great tropes of all spy movies is the informant and the payment to the informant. I was really interested in stories from women around the globe who are less interested in receiving money for information because money can be taken from them by the men in their lives. And they actually need menstrual products and birth control and Pampers and Advil. I was so moved by the idea that there is a network of women around the world that are helping each other get things."

While Charlie's Angels has always been inherently campy, it's never been overtly queer -- that is, until Banks and Stewart chose to include a nod to Sabina’s queerness. Banks has also incorporated a few other nods and cameos that are sure to please LGBTQ viewers.

Oh, she worked in tampons, too. I was afraid the movie would completely overlook the classic action movie trope of Tampon Lecturing. This is really a four-quadrant play!

Banks just couldn't stop being annoying AF:

'Charlie's Angels' Director Elizabeth Banks Challenges Trolls: Action Movies Are My Realm

The film even opens with Stewart’s character commenting to a meaty male mark that she thinks "women can do anything." It's tongue-in-cheek, but it's also a fast summation of the messages Banks wanted her second feature to impart. "I wanted it to be a celebration of women," Banks said. "I wanted it to remind people that women are everywhere, that you can’t ignore us and that when you underestimate us, you give us a superpower[."]

...

Finally, as for anyone who might sneer at a woman claiming feminist space in the action realm (see: the recent reintroduction of Linda Hamilton, plus two other new female characters in "Terminator: Dark Fate," which emboldened scads of online trolls), Banks offered these thoughts.

"I will say that I think they’re apples and oranges, because 'Charlie's Angels' has always been about women, and the DNA of it is about women working together on this team," she said. "We are not treading in a male space. I think that's one of the big differences between these two things. I don’t know, I'm less concerned about that. Of course, those trolls are horrifying, but you know, I challenge them to get up and make a fucking movie action movie. I welcome any of them into my realm."

Elizabeth Banks must have know her Gay Tampon Propaganda was going to tank, because, just on the eve of the movie's release, she started making excuses for its impending failure.

Get ready for a shock: She blamed men and their sexism.

The filmmaker, who also wrote and produced “Charlie’s Angels” and stars in the movie as Bosley, called out a potential box office bomb as being sexist. "Look, people have to buy tickets to this movie, too. This movie has to make money," she said. "If this movie doesn’t make money it reinforces a stereotype in Hollywood that men don't go see women do action movies."

Although it is true that people -- not just men-- are reluctant to see action movies starring women -- for one simple reason, because it's dumb and silly -- it's not true that they won't see such movies.

John Nolte points out that men turned out for two Charlie's Angels movies in 2000 and 2003, despite the latter one being terrible.

[T]his has nothing to do with gender, and I can prove it... Here are two numbers that are not adjusted for nearly two decades of inflation: $40 million and $37.6 million.

All the way back in 2000, a movie based on the television show Charlie’s Angels and called Charlie’s Angels opened to $40 million. It would eventually gross $139 million domestic and $264 million worldwide (back when the international market was nowhere near as open as it is today).

All the way back in 2003, the sequel, Charlie's Angels: Full Throttle, opened to $37.6 million. It would eventually gross $101 million domestic and $260 million worldwide.

But here’s the difference...

The 2000 version of Charlie's Angels somehow managed to drive home its empowerment and sisterhood message without dumpster-diving into misandry. And unlike this current trio of generic, androgynous, mall-girl angels, the 2000 version featured three sexy women: Drew Barrymore, Cameron Diaz, and Lucy Liu, who didn’t apologize for being sexy, who used that power to convince us guys the movie was worth our time, and they delivered.

....

And so, Charlie's Angels (2019) is the fifth franchise the man-hating woketards have destroyed, the fifth golden goose strangled by these joyless and the artless harpies.

Is there any hot new take -- besides Tampon Lecturing -- in this movie?

No. As this critic points out, they're still doing the same 90s era You Go Girl shallow empowerment sloganeering they did in the first Charlie's Angels movie, 25 years ago.

Drew Barrymore and McG came along with a take that knowingly winked at its own history of sexploitation while playing into a very 1990s "you go girl" concept.

...

What is most surprising about the latest "Charlie's Angels," which was written and directed by Elizabeth Banks, who also plays the part of Bosley, is how little the "go girl" feminism of the 2000 film has evolved in nearly 20 years.

That doesn't surprise me. It's always been a shallow, glib bumper-sticker. It's a marching chant, not a philosophy.

By the way, the big reveal at the end of this movie is that the mysterious "Charlie" who's been giving these assignments to women for 50 years now... has been A Strong Empowered Woman all along, using a voice-changer to disguise her voice.

You go girl.

No, seriously: You go girl. You go NOW.

They also seem to be trying to "Defeat the Male Gaze" by casting women who aren't hot and by deliberately making them look less hot than they could look. "Take that, you incels!," as Ya Boi Zack says.

Compare that trailer to this one from the still-fondly-remembered 2000 movie:

It's not just men who prefer women looking hot -- women prefer that too.

The 2000 Charlie's Angels promised light, flirty sexy fun.

This new Charlie's Angels promises that it's going to have a word with your manager.

Weird how people don't want to see that.

posted by Ace of Spades at 12:31 PM

| Access Comments