Angels Without Wings

Charlie’s Angels as a media franchise never quite outgrew its’ distinctly 1970s “spies, but sexy women” gimmick, even once the idea of women working in espionage became no longer a subversive storytelling tool but a welcome reality. But of course the very fact that it is a prevailing media property is a bit bizarre. The show enjoyed a resurgence in the early 2000s at the time when Hollywood was mining 60s and 70s television for its movie ideas (pandering to the nostalgia of Gen-Xers as they now do for millennials) with a Charlie’s Angels movie flat on the heels of the infamous Avengers and Wild Wild West attempts. Popular enough to spawn a sequel though (and inspire a Canadian cartoon many of my peers will remember), it was one of the more successful classic TV remakes of its era. But unlike the Mission Impossible series, which has managed to endure and evolve to the point it no longer is tied to or even resembles its source, Charlie’s Angels hasn’t. And Elizabeth Banks’ new effort to resurrect a property not relevant in the media landscape since 2003 (almost as long a disparity as the 2000 film from the end of the original show), can’t help but feel tedious and dated as a result.

This is a long way of saying it isn’t really a surprise that Charlie’s Angels flopped at the box office. Men in Black: International failed as well for the same reasons and with a more recent intellectual property. Old T.V. shows that once generated briefly popular movies don’t resonate anymore, especially ones founded on a concept that’s no longer novel, and we were mistaken to think Charlie’s Angels had the power to transcend that.

The movie itself is confused over how to exist in a modern context, against the omnipresent necessity of a recognizable “realism”. While it finds a way to deal with and subvert the patriarchal connotations of the Townsend Agency (the organization the Angels belong to), it doesn’t have much to say on the basic concept of collectives of lady spies supervised by men -and avoids questioning the finer points of that structure and it’s no doubt enlightening origins. On the one hand, it’s economic not to address such explanations and institutions; but as a reboot attempting to appeal to new audiences, some concessions are warranted, especially when it comes to orienting viewers within a world so clearly drawing from a source that was about women, yet playing to men. And this film, though it sheds that intent, doesn’t do enough to justify a continued relevance. Allowing women to be “Bosleys” is a nice gesture, but “Charlie” is still around (though played by a different actor: Robert Clotworthy to replace John Forsythe) and there really is no getting away from the euphemistic obsolescence of that title.

What further does the film no favours is a rather bland plot, interchangeable until the last act with any other action movie, and a relatively muted visual palette that keeps the film from standing out in its cinematography, production design, or even costuming –the latter a famous component of the franchise. The film favours toned down colours and flat textures; two major action scenes take place in environments of immaculate white and dusky grey. Its’ action though is rather more impressive, with well choreographed sequences, clear beats, and interesting set-pieces, edited with energy if not much flare. And these are the sequences that Banks is most focussed on, the pacing between being fairly uneven –indeed,  the first act is very rushed, and the conclusion shockingly hasty- because they are the scenes that showcase one of the greater strengths of the film in the personalities of its characters and how they work together.

Principally, Kristen Stewart is the show-stealer and most compelling character, as a veteran idiosyncratic and stunningly charismatic ‘wild card’ Angel called Sabina. It’s a return to the mainstream for Stewart after nearly seven years of cultivating her talents in mostly indie and arthouse films like Clouds of Sils Maria, Personal Shopper, and Certain Women in the wake of the Twilight franchise, and it’s a very welcome comeback. She’s slick and funny and always the most engaging presence on screen.  And she has genuine chemistry with her fellow Angels, the headstrong and resourceful Jane (Ella Balinska) and new recruit Elena (Naomi Scott), a scientist with a desire to prove herself. And Balinska especially makes quite an entrance onto the mainstream movie scene herself. Between these Angels, and especially emanating from Sabina (Stewart’s bisexuality now having become a part of her personal brand), there’s a lot of lesbian subtext and visual coding. From the relationship between Sabina and Jane to the subtly flirtatious way the former interacts with other women and the way she presents herself, there’s plenty of sexuality to be read into numerous scenes of the film on top of its already pointed sexual politics. But it is still subtext rather than text, and it’s tiresome for that representation to continually be hinted at while the movie shies away from anything concrete.

Banks herself co-stars as the trios’ Bosley, replacing a retiring Patrick Stewart, who may be having more fun than anyone else in the movie. There’s a meta-narrative here in the director of the film playing the director of the Angels that becomes more interesting given the trajectory that character is ultimately taken in. And it speaks also to the sense of ownership Banks exerts over the movie (she’s the credited screenwriter as well), which she’s demonstrated in her responses to its’ underperformance. But as sincere of a place as her sentiments are coming from, I can’t help but maintain Charlie’s Angels was doomed to fail from the start, and that her film in not making enough of an argument to validate its existence or relevance couldn’t avert that; thus consigning the Angels to the same heap of mediocrity as every other IP drained of its usefulness and mainstream appeal.

Support me on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/JordanBosch
Follow me on Twitter: https://twitter.com/Jordan_D_Bosch

Letterboxd: https://letterboxd.com/jbosch/