User Score
6.3

Generally favorable reviews- based on 67 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 44 out of 67
  2. Negative: 13 out of 67

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Mar 2, 2011
    2
    This is the type of movie I rent to see with my friends and family so we can make fun of it. Its so bad...its good.
  2. Jan 2, 2013
    1
    What a bad production, the story is so lame and pointless, the acting performances are a shame, it was disappointing to see Lucy Liu in that stupid character she's better than that. No need to talk about Diaz and Barrymore it is known that they are not good actresses any way. If you want to see what were the real Charley's angels you need to watch the T.V. series.
  3. Jul 21, 2013
    3
    This was one of the first DVDs I owned, when I first watched it I was overwhelmed by the fast-paced action, the energetic characters and so on, but here I sit with a feeling of mind-numbing insecurity, it's a truly terrible film, but I still find it watchable.
    The film is one long advert, it promotes all sorts of sexualised comedy, with almost every scene consisting of a slow-motion clip
    of one these tightly clad Angels flipping their hair, carefully flexing behind or running from an impending explosion, it's big, dumb, sometimes fun but certainly not serious.
    Our three Angels are Natalie (Cameron Diaz), Dylan (Drew Barrymore) and Alex (Lucy Liu). They are tasked with retrieving the creator of expensive technology and the tech itself, but as the plot thickens, so does the script, with a soundtrack that you would work out to, perhaps that is the point of the film, an expensive workout routine, with many scenes present that you start to question why you are watching it, but then laugh about it at a later time.
    The angels on show are obviously pretty, they flaunt, flex and frolic across the screen, the film does no justice to the these three talented actresses, but the movie is tolerable for its sometimes comedic moments, particularly the use of sex appeal for the three stars, and the presence of Bill Murray, who really seems to be acting as himself in the picture, so no complaint necessary.
    While the action sequences are dramatic and over zealous, some of them work in an effective way
    The films many faults outweigh its better attributes, the talented cast, which also includes Sam Rockwell and Tim Curry, the chemistry between the three leads is also a highlight, but these aside, it's a one explosion at every corner flick, high on adrenaline and dumb fun, but low on everything else. McG has an eye for the glitz and exaggeration, but this mess of a film may truly be down to this approach. Its loud, silly and is easily forgettable, but at least it never took itself too seriously throughout, that would have been truly awkward indeed.
    Expand
Metascore
52

Mixed or average reviews - based on 34 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 15 out of 34
  2. Negative: 5 out of 34
  1. Too bad the action scenes rarely rise above standard kung-fu comedy, diluting the film's otherwise considerable entertainment value.
  2. 30
    Of course, it's terrible -- but did it have to be this bad?
  3. 50
    The movie's still thinner than a supermodel's waist. It's not just that the results are less than heavenly; it's that we don't know what the hell they are.