Terminator Week has begun (see below). As an added bonus, I'm throwing in a couple other action movie reviews this week as well (this one and The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen). That's right. 5 reviews in one week. How's that for carpal tunnel, eh? So, enjoy.
Charlie’s Angels: Full Throttle
Review by Jon Waterman
***
The three angels are back to fight a new set of bad guys and save the day. Someone has stolen the two rings that contain the true identities of everyone enlisted in the Witness Protection Program. The ladies must battle their way through a slew of goons and return the rings to the rightful hands as well as try to defeat the evil genius behind the scheme.
It all sounds like a mindless, goofy time, doesn’t it? Well, it is. But luckily, that’s a good thing.
I really wasn’t too fond of the first one, but maybe I should go back and reevaluate. I felt this film better represented the “girl power” mentality the first film was boasting. The girls are strong, intelligent, flexible in several different senses of the word, jills-of-all-trades, and totally in control (besides taking orders from a faceless man). The first film seemed to play off their sexuality too much. Their looks are obviously present, yet they don’t drive the narrative. They don’t use their figures to get into the buildings or steal the plans (except for at the very beginning).
Speaking of the beginning. I truly enjoyed the idea of reintroducing the cast in the opening credits flashback story thing. It added to the concept of making the films separate episodes rather than continuations. It’s a smart move and you don’t feel like it’s wasted time.
Cameos, cameos, cameos. Oh my. Too many of them, and none of them worthwhile. I’m beginning to really hate the idea of cameos. Tell me how it’s funny to show Bruce Willis for two minutes? Or the Olsen Twins? Or whomever else I don’t care about seeing? Blah. As for the other actors, I don’t have much to say. Can you really expect gold from a popcorn flick? I say, “Only on the butter.” But I do expect more than really bad. Most of the actors were standard. But the one that everyone will be talking about is Demi Moore. Most will welcome her back to the screen and whatnot and say how great she looks and all the other brownnose stuff. But why would I want to welcome her back if I didn’t care she was gone to begin with and her return performance is the worst in the film. Her acting was incredibly campy and way overdone (and that’s really saying something for this movie). It made me cringe.
The music in the film somewhat hit a sour note (sorry about the pun, couldn’t resist). Supposedly there is a composed score in there somewhere (by Ed Shearmur), but I couldn’t tell you where (except in that opening credits sequence). The fight scenes and every other background sound was either some appropriate or wildly out of place pop song. It sometimes distracted from the movie, because the focus switched to the song from the visual. Music is intended to be subtle background emotion-enhancing stuff. This was an in-your-face full assault of cheesy, played-out Top 40 hits.
What really made the film worthwhile were the action sequences. Unlike most blockbusters, you can actually easily follow the movements. The jarring music video style editing is sparsely used, which is odd, considering the director, McG, got his start making popular music videos. Slow motion was overused, but the intention was good. Unlike most films that use wires to enhance the stars’ fighting abilities, “Charlie’s Angels” uses wires to defy all logic. They don’t try to play off the stunts as being life-like. It knows these are cartoon moves and has no shame about it. That makes it better and more fun to watch.
You know what. It’s summer. Have fun. Don’t take things to seriously. If this is your attitude, then run out and see this movie.
Charlie’s Angels: Full Throttle
Review by Jon Waterman
***
The three angels are back to fight a new set of bad guys and save the day. Someone has stolen the two rings that contain the true identities of everyone enlisted in the Witness Protection Program. The ladies must battle their way through a slew of goons and return the rings to the rightful hands as well as try to defeat the evil genius behind the scheme.
It all sounds like a mindless, goofy time, doesn’t it? Well, it is. But luckily, that’s a good thing.
I really wasn’t too fond of the first one, but maybe I should go back and reevaluate. I felt this film better represented the “girl power” mentality the first film was boasting. The girls are strong, intelligent, flexible in several different senses of the word, jills-of-all-trades, and totally in control (besides taking orders from a faceless man). The first film seemed to play off their sexuality too much. Their looks are obviously present, yet they don’t drive the narrative. They don’t use their figures to get into the buildings or steal the plans (except for at the very beginning).
Speaking of the beginning. I truly enjoyed the idea of reintroducing the cast in the opening credits flashback story thing. It added to the concept of making the films separate episodes rather than continuations. It’s a smart move and you don’t feel like it’s wasted time.
Cameos, cameos, cameos. Oh my. Too many of them, and none of them worthwhile. I’m beginning to really hate the idea of cameos. Tell me how it’s funny to show Bruce Willis for two minutes? Or the Olsen Twins? Or whomever else I don’t care about seeing? Blah. As for the other actors, I don’t have much to say. Can you really expect gold from a popcorn flick? I say, “Only on the butter.” But I do expect more than really bad. Most of the actors were standard. But the one that everyone will be talking about is Demi Moore. Most will welcome her back to the screen and whatnot and say how great she looks and all the other brownnose stuff. But why would I want to welcome her back if I didn’t care she was gone to begin with and her return performance is the worst in the film. Her acting was incredibly campy and way overdone (and that’s really saying something for this movie). It made me cringe.
The music in the film somewhat hit a sour note (sorry about the pun, couldn’t resist). Supposedly there is a composed score in there somewhere (by Ed Shearmur), but I couldn’t tell you where (except in that opening credits sequence). The fight scenes and every other background sound was either some appropriate or wildly out of place pop song. It sometimes distracted from the movie, because the focus switched to the song from the visual. Music is intended to be subtle background emotion-enhancing stuff. This was an in-your-face full assault of cheesy, played-out Top 40 hits.
What really made the film worthwhile were the action sequences. Unlike most blockbusters, you can actually easily follow the movements. The jarring music video style editing is sparsely used, which is odd, considering the director, McG, got his start making popular music videos. Slow motion was overused, but the intention was good. Unlike most films that use wires to enhance the stars’ fighting abilities, “Charlie’s Angels” uses wires to defy all logic. They don’t try to play off the stunts as being life-like. It knows these are cartoon moves and has no shame about it. That makes it better and more fun to watch.
You know what. It’s summer. Have fun. Don’t take things to seriously. If this is your attitude, then run out and see this movie.
<< Home