Is one of the main issues with the movies (the two McG ones and the newest one by Elizabeth Banks) they have to make what was a show about a team of private investigators, into about literally saving the world. Basically, the movies changed the public perception that Charlie's Angels was about globetrotting Mission Impossible-like super spies. Before, they were meter maids, office drones, and/or crossing guards in the LAPD/SFPD who leave those jobs because of the way they’re treated. My point is that do you feel that the movies rose the stakes higher than they really needed to be given the source material?

Has the TV series actually aged and represented women better than the Cameron Diaz/Drew Barrymore/Lucy Liu movies?

http://hillplace.blogspot.com/2011/09/reassessing-charlies-angels-35-years.html

But, if you can look past it, this was one of the few successful TV shows or movies in the 1970s where the lead characters were almost exclusively female, in a decade where male “buddy” stories dominated the big and small screens. Throughout the different cast permutations, the Angels were always depicted as mature, sophisticated, women. They were never whining, squealing, cutesy, “girls.” (Despite Charlie’s gently condescending reference to them as “three little girls” or “three beautiful girls” in the opening credits, depending on which season you are watching.) The “Charlie’s Angels” movies produced by Drew Barrymore were much more troubling because the big-screen Angels were more often the victim of sexual innuendos, trashy costuming, humiliating situations, boring boyfriends, and adolescent giddiness than their TV counterparts ever were. The Barrymore Angels were "empowered" in so far as they were willingly exploiting and degrading themselves. Ironically, the TV Angels, produced by Aaron Spelling and Leonard Goldberg, were comparatively much more dignified.

Unlike most movies and shows centering on women, the series always depicted the Angels as competent, cooperative colleagues. It avoided the cliche of portraying female colleagues as being competitive with each other. The focus for the TV Angels was almost never on their personal lives, but on their work.

Lindsay Ellis pointed out when reviewing the 2000 (https://www.buzzfeed.com/jennaguillaume/charlies-angels-2000-adult-rewatch) movie (https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/features/charlies-angels-cameron-diaz-drew-barrymore-lucy-liu-mcg-reboot-a9214026.html) that the Angels on the original series (https://www.grunge.com/129872/the-strange-history-of-charlies-angels/) weren't blindly (https://girlsarefriendsnotfood.wordpress.com/2014/04/18/spaces-of-resistance-in-charlies-angels/) loyal to Charlie and openly questioned his motives.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cVoDwD_zqOk

Go to the 14:18 mark, where the video cuts to a scene of Jaclyn Smith calling Charlie "that mythical boss" of Bosley's. And they weren't necessarily Mary Sues (https://www.metacritic.com/movie/charlies-angels) as depicted (https://www.themarysue.com/charlies-angels-2019-attempts-to-revive-a-franchise-that-is-better-off-in-the-past/) in (https://www.fareastfilms.com/?feature_post_type=michelle-vs-the-mary-sues) the movies (https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2019/11/the-complicated-legacy-of-the-2000-charlies-angels) either.

The Charlie's Angels (https://screenrant.com/charlies-angels-elizabeth-banks-reboot-original-better-worse/) movies (https://collider.com/does-charlies-angels-hold-up/) of the 2000s (https://www.theringer.com/movies/2019/11/13/20961934/charlies-angels-2000s-movies-full-throttle) seems like what we would get if somebody took the basic, fundamental concept (https://screenrant.com/charlies-angels-movie-behind-scenes-details-making-trivia/) of the original series. That being that a mysterious and enigmatic (https://vanyaland.com/2019/11/15/charlies-angels-review-maybe-its-time-to-let-the-old-ips-die/) billionaire employs three attractive women as private investigators.

But they attempted to make it out to be some sort of self (https://hivean.com/hive-166847/@gonklavez9/charlie-s-angels-2000-movie-review)-referential postmodern parody (https://reelrundown.com/movies/Should-I-Watch-Charlies-Angels-2000) of the TV series (https://christiananswers.net/spotlight/movies/2000/charliesangels.html), a la the Brady Bunch (https://blog.cinemaautopsy.com/2000/12/15/film-review-charlies-angels-2000/) movies from the '90s or the subsequent Starsky & Hutch (https://filmthreat.com/uncategorized/critic-doctor-is-in-do-stiller-and-wilson-match-up-to-starsky-hutch/), 21 Jump Street (https://screenrant.com/21-jump-street-movie-brie-larson-sequel-absence/), Baywatch (http://www.fthismovie.net/2017/08/heavy-action-charlies-angels.html), and CHiPs movies.

But because The Matrix (http://mauiwatch.com/2015/08/looking-back-charlies-angels-2000/) was a hugely popular movie of recent times, the movies had to ape (https://www.popmatters.com/129061-charlies-angels-2496159871.html) that too by emphasizing "bullet-time" (https://www.theguardian.com/film/2019/nov/12/charlies-angels-kristen-stewart-film-review) and "wire-fu" (https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:Tz3uJVyc8goJ:https://www.mcall.com/news/mc-xpm-2000-11-03-3334393-story.html+&cd=15&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us) effects.

Basically, what we get is if somebody like I said, took the basic concept of Charlie's Angels, placed the Angels in James Bond (https://www.irishtimes.com/news/angels-are-dumb-bonds-1.1116575) or Mission: Impossible (https://mutantreviewers.wordpress.com/2021/03/08/charlies-angels-2000-cleavage-and-karate-chops/)-like (https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:935mtkTQ1p0J:https://www.courant.com/news/connecticut/hc-xpm-2000-11-03-0011030770-story.html+&cd=28&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us) scenarios, used the goofy (http://basementrejects.com/review/charlies-angels-2000/) tone (https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2019/11/the-complicated-legacy-of-the-2000-charlies-angels) and feel (http://www.dvdmg.com/charliesangelssuperbit.shtml) of Spice World (https://www.avclub.com/charlies-angels-1798192520), the action sensibilities (https://products.kitsapsun.com/archive/2000/11-03/0071_movie_review___charlie_s_angels__.html) of Hong Kong (https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2000-nov-03-ca-46133-story.html) cinema, and the male gaze (https://flipscreened.com/2019/09/07/male-gaze-and-us-poor-gays-navigating-female-sexualisation-in-film-as-a-queer-feminist/) and hyper kinetic, glossy, music video editing and filming style (https://whatculture.com/film/10-directors-who-should-have-their-filmmaking-rights-revoked?page=2) of a Michael Bay (https://crookedmarquee.com/how-2000s-charlies-angels-made-silliness-smart/) movie.

The Charlie's Angels (https://screenrant.com/charlies-angels-elizabeth-banks-reboot-original-better-worse/) movies (https://collider.com/does-charlies-angels-hold-up/) of the 2000s (https://www.theringer.com/movies/2019/11/13/20961934/charlies-angels-2000s-movies-full-throttle) seems like what we would get if somebody took the basic, fundamental concept (https://screenrant.com/charlies-angels-movie-behind-scenes-details-making-trivia/) of the original series. That being that a mysterious and enigmatic (https://vanyaland.com/2019/11/15/charlies-angels-review-maybe-its-time-to-let-the-old-ips-die/) billionaire employs three attractive women as private investigators.

But they attempted to make it out to be some sort of self (https://hivean.com/hive-166847/@gonklavez9/charlie-s-angels-2000-movie-review)-referential postmodern parody (https://reelrundown.com/movies/Should-I-Watch-Charlies-Angels-2000) of the TV series (https://christiananswers.net/spotlight/movies/2000/charliesangels.html), a la the Brady Bunch (https://blog.cinemaautopsy.com/2000/12/15/film-review-charlies-angels-2000/) movies from the '90s or the subsequent Starsky & Hutch (https://filmthreat.com/uncategorized/critic-doctor-is-in-do-stiller-and-wilson-match-up-to-starsky-hutch/), 21 Jump Street (https://screenrant.com/21-jump-street-movie-brie-larson-sequel-absence/), Baywatch (http://www.fthismovie.net/2017/08/heavy-action-charlies-angels.html), and CHiPs movies.

But because The Matrix (http://mauiwatch.com/2015/08/looking-back-charlies-angels-2000/) was a hugely popular movie of recent times, the movies had to ape (https://www.popmatters.com/129061-charlies-angels-2496159871.html) that too by emphasizing "bullet-time" (https://www.theguardian.com/film/2019/nov/12/charlies-angels-kristen-stewart-film-review) and "wire-fu" (https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:Tz3uJVyc8goJ:https://www.mcall.com/news/mc-xpm-2000-11-03-3334393-story.html+&cd=15&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us) effects.

Basically, what we get is if somebody like I said, took the basic concept of Charlie's Angels, placed the Angels in James Bond (https://www.irishtimes.com/news/angels-are-dumb-bonds-1.1116575) or Mission: Impossible (https://mutantreviewers.wordpress.com/2021/03/08/charlies-angels-2000-cleavage-and-karate-chops/)-like (https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:935mtkTQ1p0J:https://www.courant.com/news/connecticut/hc-xpm-2000-11-03-0011030770-story.html+&cd=28&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us) scenarios, used the goofy (http://basementrejects.com/review/charlies-angels-2000/) tone (https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2019/11/the-complicated-legacy-of-the-2000-charlies-angels) and feel (http://www.dvdmg.com/charliesangelssuperbit.shtml) of Spice World (https://www.avclub.com/charlies-angels-1798192520), the action sensibilities (https://products.kitsapsun.com/archive/2000/11-03/0071_movie_review___charlie_s_angels__.html) of Hong Kong (https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2000-nov-03-ca-46133-story.html) cinema, and the male gaze (https://flipscreened.com/2019/09/07/male-gaze-and-us-poor-gays-navigating-female-sexualisation-in-film-as-a-queer-feminist/) and hyper kinetic, glossy, music video editing and filming style (https://whatculture.com/film/10-directors-who-should-have-their-filmmaking-rights-revoked?page=2) of a Michael Bay (https://crookedmarquee.com/how-2000s-charlies-angels-made-silliness-smart/) movie.

To add to this particular point, it appears that they wanted to make fun of how cheesy the original Charlie's Angels series was while at the same time, be reverent towards what it was. So in effect, we arguably got something that was made for everybody and nobody at the same time.

I've heard the suggestion that the original series was in itself, a "parody". In other words, writing tickets and being a school crossing guard was not exactly 'dangerous' work. But I would counter by saying that stuff like that was meant to illustrate that their value as police officers was being neglected simply because of their gender and the politics from within the police culture at the time.

You can actually argue that Charlie's Angels was actually pretty progressive and pro-feminist for its time. Even though they still worked for a man and took orders from him, Charlie Townsend, nonetheless, believed in them. And he placed the women in a scenario where unlike on the police force, they're allowed to do actual "dirty work".