Charlie’s Angels: 5 Reasons a reboot is futile

LOS ANGELES, CA - MARCH 11: Actors Naomi Scott (L) and Becky G at Nickelodeon's 2017 Kids' Choice Awards at USC Galen Center on March 11, 2017 in Los Angeles, California. (Photo by Christopher Polk/Getty Images)
LOS ANGELES, CA - MARCH 11: Actors Naomi Scott (L) and Becky G at Nickelodeon's 2017 Kids' Choice Awards at USC Galen Center on March 11, 2017 in Los Angeles, California. (Photo by Christopher Polk/Getty Images) /
facebooktwitterreddit
Prev
5 of 6
Next
Charlie's Angels
Charlie’s AngelsGetty Images /

Box office numbers indicate dying support for the Charlie’s Angels franchise.

Charlie’s Angels had a ridiculous $93 million budget and roughly $40 million in marketing. The sequel to that film was Charlie’s Angels: Full Throttle, which had an even more absurd $120 million budget, and approximately $60 million in marketing. Neither film looked like it spent even half of that. Since the first film netted $264 million, that’s nearly double the money. The sequel, however, only took $259 million, about a 70% return.

Considering those two movies had Cameron Diaz, Lucy Liu, and Drew Barrymore, it’s understandable there was interest. Diaz was coming off of Any Given Sunday, and had a natural following. Additionally, Barrymore was following up the awkwardly endearing Never Been Kissed.

Naomi Scott, Ella Balinska, and Kristen Stewart don’t carry nearly the same amount of notoriety. It wouldn’t be shocking at all to see another 30% decline, or more. Seeing Charlie’s Angels barely break even would be the death knell for the franchise. In fact, it could potentially set back heroine ensemble movies across the industry.

And that’s still a far cry from the classic series. Considering the 2011 TV series, however, spells doom. Within seven episodes it hemorrhaged over 3.5 million viewers. All together, it means the appetite for another Charlie’s Angels is not there.