|
02.18.2002
I just watched "Charlie's
Angels". That is to say, I just spent 2 hours in my room
with the TV on while "Charlie's Angels" was on; I could
no more say I actually watched it than I could it was actually
worth watching. Aside from its biggest flaw (it sucked), it was
full of little mistakes (a total misunderstanding of the meaning
of camp; a soundtrack that insults the goodname of painting by
numbers; bad wushu; an inexplicable failure to feature any of
the three attractive leads in a nude scene; a complete waste
of several good actors). Usually, in this sort of movie, the
best thing about them is the outtakes that run over the end credits,
but here, in keeping with the overall tone of the film, even
the bloopers seemed phoned in and predictable.
Here is a movie directed
by a man with one name; a movie that put money in the pocket
of Tom Green; a movie that cost more to make than I will ever
see in my lifetime, even if I win the lottery several times,
and made it all back tenfold on its first weekend. It was an
enormous success both here and overseas, and who can argue with
success? I try to look on the bright side: Drew Barrymore has
nice tits, I tell myself. The genuinely talented Crispin Glover
probably got a new boat on his paycheck from "Charlie's
Angels", and Damon Albarn can probably throw all kinds of
business Dan Nakamura's way off the mountain of royalties "Song
No. 2" continues to generate. But I can't help fearing that
"Charlie's Angels" represents our legacy to the world
in miniature. From the car chases (which pulled off the neat
trick of being both incredibly loud and busy and completely boring
at the same time) to the misguided pseudo-ironic tone to the
whole art-via-groupthink premise of the movie -- a putrid but
incredibly expensive remake of a TV show that wasn't any good
to begin with -- this was a perfect example of what America generates.
We don't sell goods, ideas, or know-how anymore, just catchphrases,
explosions and inept metaphors. And the rest of the world doesn't
buy it because they like it, really; just because they sort of
expect it, and there's nothing else to do, anyway.
I know what you're saying.
You're saying I'm reading far too much into a harmless entertainment;
and you're right, I tend to do that. And you're saying -- again,
truthfully -- that it's stupid for me to bitch about a movie
that I knew was going to be terrible but watched anyway. You're
right. You're right, and that's all there is to it. But you know
what? You were the one who made "Charlie's Angels"
the number one movie in America, for several weeks. You paid
money to see it. You may have even seen it several
times. Let the blood shed by Lucy Liu's film career be on
your hands, you bastard. I'll see you in hell. Or at the premiere
of "Scooby-Doo". Same difference.
|
