Latest Excuse Why Charlie’s Angels Failed? Marketing

It couldn’t have anything to do with a film that is all Woke, features 3 characters who are simply unbelievable as action movies stars (Tom Holland of Spiderman is great, but, how would he do as an action movie star without super powers?), no sexy in sight (isn’t that what the Angels were about? Women kicking but and being strong and being Women?), and, did I mention that the characters were unbelievable?

Top right pic: anyone scared? The Angel on the right looks like she’s in junior high. And then there was all the Wokeness. Anyhow

(Digital Spy) Charlie’s Angels’ own writer-director Elizabeth Banks herself has officially sounded the death knell: the soft reboot starring Kristen Stewart is officially a flop. On a budget of $48 million, Charlie’s Angels earned only $8.6 million over its US opening weekend. Ouch.

There is a multitude of factors contributing to the box-office success of a movie, and there is an argument that a film’s receipts have no bearing on its critical, or cultural, merits. Unfortunately, the world at large sees bad box office performance as the direct result of a bad film.

A perfect example of this is Terminator: Dark Fate, which underperformed at the box office despite being a solid action film in a franchise beloved by many. All the factors were ripe for success, yet it petered out at under $300 million worldwide.

Unlike the Terminator franchise, which has had many failed sequels and reboots before, Charlie’s Angels has enjoyed a relatively positive spotlight in pop culture. Even the 2000s reboot, which has not aged well, is still looked back upon with rose-tinted glasses by many.

So what went wrong for Elizabeth Banks and her new angels Kristen Stewart, Naomi Scott and Ella Balinska? In our opinion: marketing.

Right, right. It goes on to proclaim that the market was all wrong. Perhaps it was that the actresses picked were wrong, everyone knew it was all Woke, and that it was just bad. Apparently, just like Terminator. But, let’s revisit a paragraph, the one which caught my eye in this whole thing

There is a multitude of factors contributing to the box-office success of a movie, and there is an argument that a film’s receipts have no bearing on its critical, or cultural, merits. Unfortunately, the world at large sees bad box office performance as the direct result of a bad film.

If you’re making an arthouse movie or something similar, well, sure, box office performance might not matter. But, they won’t show it in a big theater if the theater won’t make money. And, as stated so many times “Get woke, go broke.” Hollywood and the rest of the entertainment industry aren’t getting it. They’re putting out mediocre films as blockbusters (and a few actual big movies here and there), and the rest are pretty much almost straight to video. It’s barely worth going to the movies anymore.

And, let’s remember, The Joker, which was definitely not PC nor Woke, is the first R rated movie to bust a billion dollars.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

18 Responses to “Latest Excuse Why Charlie’s Angels Failed? Marketing”

  1. Chumpchange says:

    Last week the left was demanding that men go see this show. It was their duty. The same men these racist batshit women hate. Fuk off. I won’t watch an SJW movie if they bolted me to a chair and pryed my eyes open with toothpicks. At one time I actually like Liz Banks. Not so much anymore now that I am the reason her movie failed.

    • John says:

      Lol
      Is that the reason that Teach went to see the movie ?
      The Uber right has always hated Hollywood saying it was run by liberal Joos

      • formwiz says:

        Sounds more like the Left.

        Ever since they found out the PLO was trained by the Russians, their attachment to Semitism has withered considerably.

  2. Chumpchange says:

    • ‘It reinforces a stereotype in Hollywood that men don’t go see women do action movies’

    STUPID!

    Catnis Everdeen was a blockbuster. Hunger games 1-4
    Tris Prior Divergent 1-3, did pretty well, even though the directors butchered the books with some bizarre twist which ran off the fans.
    Salt with Angelina Jolie was awesome.
    The new Laura Croft movie was pretty good. So were the old laura croft movies.
    Wonder Woman
    Annhilation
    The arrival
    Resident Evil
    The new Terminator movies
    The new mad max.
    Nakita
    GI Jane
    Lucy
    All the new star wars movies have female leads. Rogue one etc.
    Kill Bill one and two.
    Captain Marvel
    And so, so many more.
    Dark Phoenix
    Atomic Blond

    Give us a good movie and we will come. Don’t preach to us. Lizzie Banks had a post of the 23 secret feminist tidbits hidden in Charlie’s angels. Sorry, that’s a no go. You got what you wanted. You got all the SJW warriors to come to see your movie but oh wait they are all too busy denouncing hatred for White Men to spend a few bucks to watch your movie.

    • alanstorm says:

      “The new Terminator movies”

      Don’t you mean the first two?

      • Chumpchange says:

        The last two Terminator movies starred as the primary Sarah Connor a woman while the newest movie shows introduces to us a female terminator sent back to help Arnold and Sarah.

        The first two were also pretty female-centric as well but they did not have the SJW aspect to them.

        Alien movies were also Female leads and even the last Alien movie had a female lead along with a strong female protagonist in Charlize Theron. Again they were not SJW movies.

  3. Hoss says:

    One of my all-time favorite movies had a complete bad ass chick as the star: Alien.

    • Dana says:

      Yet Sigourney Weaver was not depicted as some ogle-worthy wench, but simply as a tough woman fighting hard to save her life.

      How amazing: you enjoyed an action flick featuring a woman which wasn’t based on her sex appeal.

  4. alanstorm says:

    I liked “Birds of Prey”, but apparently I was one of few.

    Wonder Woman was amazing. Ridiculously gorgeous, ridiculously badass.

    Lucy was OK, if you ignored the lack of plot. Still, Ms. Johansson (sp?) was pretty capable. And speaking or the Black Widow, she had a major part of every Avengers-related flick, and I thought was a shoe-in for a solo movie.

    Lack of strong women in film? I guess her definition of strong if different…

    • formwiz says:

      Strong meaning butch or non-cis.

    • Chumpchange says:

      Wonder Woman was really well done. It was an exceptional movie snuck in right before SJW hit Marvel, DC, and Hollywood with SJW threats.

      Captain Marvel was the movie that has started the war. Disney has had to pull several Star Wars movies in production because the backlash against their last two movies was so incredible that they were not making near the money they thought they would with their SJW offerings.

      The problem is that 1/10th of 1 percent of the population marches against a movie and drives off millions of potential viewers. The scene that caused me to turn off the last star wars movie not called SOLO which I refused to even watch was a scene in which the bridge of a starship was filled with women, some with pink hair and the only man was a cringe-worthy loser so men-hating feminists could wail against him in their own disjointed minds.

    • Chumpchange says:

      Black widow is getting her own franchise even though they killed her off in End Game, the plan is to have her back in the title role before any of the events of End Game. I think it might center leading up to and including parts of the early Avengers. I can’t see them not including the early days of Avengers when she was with Shield before it turned out to be an organization corrupted by HYDRA.

      Like the US Government Deep State.

  5. Dana says:

    Charlie’s Angels was all about ogle-worthy wenches to draw in male viewers. Is it perhaps understandable that men don’t think it a wise idea to take their wives or girlfriends to a movie where they are expected to drool over the women, or that women aren’t particularly thrilled with the idea of taking their men to see such?

    • formwiz says:

      The only good-looking one was Cheryl Ladd.

      And it was the full court kvetch that made it so bad even Lefties hated it.

  6. Mad Celt says:

    Could it be because even during its initial TV run back in the day Charlies Angels was mind pablum. I recall commentators referring to it as T&A TV.

  7. John says:

    Movie ticket sales even adjusted for inflation have been pretty consistent for the last 6 years at about 11 billion
    I haven’t been in a theater in maybe 10 years

    • formwiz says:

      That’s no compliment.

      If a studio doesn’t have a major hit at least every couple of years, it risks going the way of United Artists.

Bad Behavior has blocked 7077 access attempts in the last 7 days.