Spider-Man is the reason the new movie “Charlie’s Angels” bombed at the box office, or so says director Elizabeth Banks.
The new Elizabeth Banks version of the classic 70’s TV show “Charlie’s Angels”, is a repetitive, accidentally nonsensical, poor copy of every other action movie you’ve seen in the last 20 years, with a predictable plot. The soundtrack is outdated by at least a decade, and the film looks more like a music video produced by a YouTube user rather than a legitimate movie studio with a big budget and access to good actors.
It seems as if Banks was attempting to recreate scenes from 21 Jump Street, a comedic reboot of the late 80’s tv show of the same name, which put Johnny Depp on the acting map and led to his later success. Unlike that movie, however, “Charlie’s Angels” isn’t that fun, although the action scenes seem well shot, from a 90’s perspective. Its a very bland, slow moving unattractive spectacle, with predictable “surprises” and awkward dialogue.
Charlie’s Angels was an iconic 70’s TV show, which featured three women who were given missions by the mysterious “Charlie”, a person whose face was hidden from view at all times. He sent his angels on adventures that forced them to spy on the bad guys, beat them up and save the day. A reboot was first attempted in 2000, which seemed to be fun but not widely accepted by audiences or critics at the time, yet received a sequel as it eventually became a hit with the fans.
Director Elizabeth Banks can’t seem to accept that she’s just made a poor movie, and she’s quick to blame others for her lack of success, specifically men. She even attacks other comic book movies in both the Marvel and DC universe, saying they conditioned men to want to see male superheroes instead of females. “They’ll go and see a comic book movie with Wonder Woman and Captain Marvel because that’s a male genre.” said Banks. In this modern day “non-binary”, who-needs-a-damned-gender-anyway “woke” culture, no one should be surprised if Wonder Woman was a man who identified as a female, while using both the male and female bathrooms and declares that she’s a Trump hater. That still wouldn’t alter the fact that “Charlie’s Angels” bombed in 2019.
Elizabeth Banks’ history in attacking the Male gender is a broad, eye-opening and shocking discovery considering her past success as an actress. She’s starred in three of the original Sam Raimi Spider-Man movies, and later appeared in “Hunger Games“, which was a female-driven story about winning your freedom by killing others on a live tv show. She was even given her first big break on screen when she was still a college student and never acted a day in her life.
So why is Elizabeth Banks so angry?
In 1998 she starred in her first film, an independent movie called Surrender Dorothy. Director Kevin DiNovis discovered Liz and gave her a shot. But 14 years later, in a 2012 interview, Banks recalled, “The writer/director played the lead role… because there was no one else to do it. And he wasn’t a real actor. It was just one of those, ‘What am I doing here?’… I was still a college student, actually. And I thought, ‘I’d better go to drama school and learn how to never have this job again.“
You’d think the film was a complete bomb and that she had a horrible experience. In fact, DiNovis won multiple awards from various film festivals and it was the reason why Banks was cast in Spider-Man 1 in the first place. Why would Banks be so ungrateful for being plucked out of the chicken pen as a jobless college student, being cast in a movie that helped jumpstart her career?
In another misguided, estrogen driven attack against males, she accused legendary Director Steven Spielberg (E.T., Indiana Jones, Jaws and many others) of never putting a female actress in the lead role in any of his movies. In a 2017 interview, she proclaimed: “I went to [every] movie Steven Spielberg ever made. And by the way, he’s never made a movie with a female lead. Sorry, Steven. I don’t mean to call your ass out, but it’s true.” Banks must believe that Whoopi Goldberg is transgendered, as she was the lead actress in Spielberg’s “The Color Purple“, released in 1985. She also forgot another Spielberg movie called “The Sugarland Express“, which placed Goldie Hawn in the top slot back in ’74. Once again, Banks seems eager to insult, demonize and discredit men as a hobby, gleefully cheering herself on in a case of short-sighted amnesia.
Not all of Banks’ efforts are anti-male. Sometimes they’re pro-women, like her website “whohaha.com“, which is supposed to help female comedians get exposure. You’ve never heard about the site for the same reason you don’t like Charlies Angels: it’s sub-par, uninspired, and simply not good.
Elizabeth Banks doesn’t seem to care that she wasted someone else’s money to make a box-office-failure. “Well, if you’re going to have a flop, make sure your name is on it at least 4x. I’m proud of #CharliesAngels and happy it’s in the world,” tweeted Banks.
Had Liz actually decided to stick with her profession soley as an actor instead of trying to become a writer and director, she could have played one of the angels instead of gender-bending one of the most popular Male roles on the show and turning “John Bosley” into a woman. That’s right, in another anti-male move, Banks decided to reprise the role in her version of the movie and cast herself as John Bosley.
Directing isn’t easy, but if you’re going to attempt to reboot a franchise that lasted over 100 episodes and 5 seasons in the 70’s, you’d better do it with class and accept when you’ve failed.
Elizabeth Banks needs to get back to the drawing board, seek some advice from a mysterious millionaire, and get sent on a mission to make a great movie about 3 female spies who travel the globe, kick ass and save the day. It might sound like “Mission Impossible“, but with a little help she might be able to do it. If she comes up short again, we can all just blame Spider-Man.