Charlie's Angels. Why?

[mandragora]

For reasons that do not need exploring at this juncture, I caught an episode of Charlie's Angels on TV this afternoon. It was an ep with Cheryl Ladd, rather than Farrah Fawcett. But I don't think Farah would have made any difference.

It was terrible.

The plot was risible - I spotted the red herring and the villain immediately they came on screen. It involved the 'Angels' supposedly going undercover as call girls (ooh, missus), but all this involved was them schmoozing round the pool with some 'real' call girls and then 2 seconds later admitting that, actually, they weren't prostitutes at all, but really were private detectives.

Snort.

Oh yeah, Cheryl posed as a hooker and went to meet the client of one of the dead girls on his luxury yacht ::rolls eyes:: but all he wanted to do was talk about why his wife didn't understand him - after making Cheryl change into a rather fetching bikini, complete with high heels even though she'd been wearing trainers when she arrived. Gotta pander to the male demographic, of course.

The Angels came off as totally incompetent, for not spotting the villain immediately, who was so obvious he should have had 'villain' tattooed across his forehead. Plus, they had no idea how to defend themselves, even though they were supposedly trained police officers. Yeah, right.

What's scary is that way back when, when I was young(er) and more naive, I used to actually like Charlie's Angels. What was I thinking?

I know it's a product of its time, but... ::shudder::

Comments

[alsoa.livejournal.com]

Hey, I used adore watching Charlie's Angels for the clothes. And Farah's flicky hair. I'm not sure if I could rewatch and eppy now, though. I think I might end up cringing behind the sofa with you.