I went to see Charlie’s Engle 2 tonight. I’d never have thought of seeing it, but a co worker wanted to go and I spontaneously decided that it’d beat sitting around. At least the cinema would be air conditioned – a real boon with our summer here.
Charlie’s Angels is the second movie in that re-creation of the 70’s TV Show of the same name, just with up-to-date special effects (sort of) and modern celebrities in the roles of the three angels. Whatever their names. Does anybody really care?
The movie is just that: Cute girls beating the living hell out of the bad guys, with actually quite nice choreography and effects. Okay, I guess it’s really standard fare these days. The story is nonexistent (“Angels, you are to recover item X which should it fall into the wrong hands would cause terrible problems.”) I would actually liek to compare it to Tripple X, but where Tripple X failes, Charlie’s Angels 2 succeeds: It buils a fun movie. It does require you to turn off your brain at the cinema cashier, but it’s good clean fun. And of the three angels, at least Lucy Liu is really pleasant on the eyes.
The movie quite clearly does not take itself very seriously, and that’s a good thing because it could never stand on any other leg. Story? Huh? Acting? Beg your pardon? Effects? Yeah it’s got some. Coolness factor? Are you kidding?
There are some problems, especially later in the movie. Lucy’s boyfriend (played by Matt LeBlanc) explains to her father (John Cleese) about the “real” job of Lucy; however Lucy burts in and tells her father things which are sexually explicit – the joke being, of course, that he supposedly thinks Lucy and her friends are prostitutes. This is a really cheap, stupid gag that simply isn’t funny. A short mention would have been okay, but like this it serves no purpose and just makes the director, script-writers and actors look like idiots. And as if this was not enough, they pick the joke up at the very end.
The second problem is the overuse of really bad puns. I like puns. Puns are cool. But when the villain gets toasted in a ball of fire, the phrase “he’s fired” really, really, **really** is unimaginative and dumb. There are much better jokes in this movie; why did the writers have to do this? Maybe the average audience member is just stupid enough to enjoy this kind of trite; there certainly were many people around laughing at these substandard punchlines.
So in the end, can I recommend this movie? A conditional yes – if you can stand mindless action movies with a lot of cleavage and some cute girls in it. My advcie is to go to a half price screening. I paid 6.50 Euros; I think about 2-3 would be about right for Charlie’s Angels 2.