Join 3,521 readers in helping fund MetaFilter (Hide)


Three words: Charlie's Angels Trailer.
June 23, 2000 3:19 PM   Subscribe

Three words: Charlie's Angels Trailer. This looks pretty funny, especially with Bill Murray involved. I guess the real question this movie raises is "are the re-makes of yesteryear successes going to continue in the 00's?" Personally, I thought it was a 90's thing, which I often call the "recycled decade." Side question: why don't the angels have guns in the ending silhouette? Is that because of the current anti-gun climate? [thanks Kristin]
posted by mathowie (6 comments total)

 
Rotten Tomatoes has 23 screen caps of the trailer: including the ending silhouette.

And from the Chicago Tribune on March 30, 2000:

"Gun shy

It's been reported that at actress Drew Barrymore's urging, the new "Charlie's Angels" film, which also stars Lucy Liu and Cameron Diaz, will feature no gunplay. The trio will use martial arts to thwart the bad guys. And remember the silhouette of the Angels for the TV show? None of the ladies will hold a weapon--they all will strike karate-chop poses."
posted by tomalak at 3:41 PM on June 23, 2000


I'm not sure if it's included in the trailer, but another change is that the Angels are also not associated with the police academy (and the guns). Entertainment Weekly from June 19, 2000 (pointer from another site).
posted by tomalak at 3:49 PM on June 23, 2000


As far as the "remakes of tv shows" question, I figured between "The Phantom Menace" and "Flintstones: Viva Rock Vegas"(and most likely the next "Batman" movie is going to be based on "Batman: Year One") Hollywood's new trend was going to be Prequels.

Apparently, they're not done yet, as supposedly Mel Gibson is remaking "Hogan's Heroes".

I always envisioned Jenny McCarthy and Jim Carrey playing Samantha & Darren in a remake of "Bewitched". Maybe there's still hope.
posted by EricBrooksDotCom at 6:48 PM on June 23, 2000


BTW, Matt... you're a genius! This post just made me realize what makes for an effective MetaFilter post that brings on discussion. My findings here. I get a lot of reponses to my posts, because I think this way, and I suspect many do.

Uh oh.... this was off-topic, wasn't it?
posted by EricBrooksDotCom at 7:30 PM on June 23, 2000


Yep.

:-)

This seemed like a good time to point out that the decade we're in now is "the Naughties"...

which I suppose will make more sense to Holgate than some others, he being a Brit.
posted by baylink at 8:47 PM on June 23, 2000


Bill Murray as Bosley? Damn! I was purposefully going to avoid this one. I'm so tired of Hollywood doing retreads of everything from Lost In Space to the Adams Family, but if Murray's in it, at least there'll be a few laughs.

But which of the three is supposed to be the smart one?

Thing is, that's why they make these obnoxious things. We go to see them. Well, maybe not you specifically. However, these retreads do seem to make a heckuvalotta money. If not in the theater, the name recognition insures video rentals. Whereas, new concepts and ideas are harder to sell to the public. It's so much easier for the publicity department: "Hey, remember that old TV show? Well, so do we. Here it is again, only with CGI graphics!" Wowee zowie sign me up!

Is this 'nineties trend' going to continue into the 21st century? Well as long as Hollywood can do more than break even shoving the same crap down our throats year after year, I don't see the trend ever ebbing.
posted by ZachsMind at 3:44 AM on June 24, 2000


« Older Yesterday ...  |  Evidently, there's a whole tim... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments