Appreciating Charlie's Angels

[Snarky Oracle!]

Maybe Kete will some day get to speak to Cheryl Ladd.

One of the producers said that Kate Jackson "derived great pleasure" from her own remoteness. And I don't think he was referring to her sense of privacy.

That said, once she was gone, ANGELS lost their wings and died.

 

[ClassyCo]

I'm too lazy to scroll back through the replies this morning, but have we ever toyed with the idea of Lynda Carter being one of the Angels? I mean, WONDER WOMAN was probably cancelled by CBS in time enough back in 1979 for Carter to succeed Kate Jackson on CHARLIE'S ANGELS.

Would Lynda have been "too identified" with Diana Prince to have been Tiffany Welles, or possibly another one of Spelling's creations?

This thought sprung into my mind this morning. I don't know if it would've worked -- and it probably wouldn't have -- but it's something to think about at least. At the very least, Carter could've maybe succeeded Shelley Hack instead of Tanya Roberts doing so in 1980.

What say you?

 

[rayray]

Great idea - but Lynda was too big a star for a show like Charlie's Angels by that point. She had a contract with CBS for variety specials and TV movies, and Charlie's Angels was on ABC. She was a Really Big Star who led her own series by the time of the Tanya casting...she'd never have wanted to become one of three stars in a show where the buzz was no one needed to act. Charlie's Angels was more of a showcase for relatively low-paid "discoveries", and Aaron Spelling would NEVER have paid what Lynda would require by that point.

 

[DallasFanForever]

I don't know if it would've worked -- and it probably wouldn't have -- but it's something to think about at least

I love the idea. I think it could’ve worked if all the stars aligned properly. I can visualize Lynda being a perfect fit as an Angel but ultimately she was just too big for it by that point.

 

[Jock Ewing Fan]

The first two movies were enjoyable, but nothing seemed to appeal to the audience after that.
Didn't see the Elizabeth Banks movie but it clearly didn't find an audience.
I think there were several attempts at a new tv series, but it was unsuccessful.
Sometimes, a project has just run its' course and there is no more story to tell.

The original series was fun, with an iconic cast, and can still be enjoyed

 

[Seaviewer]

I think maybe Lynda would have been better suited to replacing Jaclyn Smith in a potential sixth season.

 

[Jock Ewing Fan]

What about Morgan Fairchild as a CA with an agenda because she was also working for one of Charlie's adversaries?
Would have been an edgier show, but probably not what the audience wanted

 

[ClassyCo]

I think maybe Lynda would have been better suited to replacing Jaclyn Smith in a potential sixth season.

You know, that might've been a could way to go because Jaclyn had made it known (more or less) that she wasn't returning if there was going to be a sixth season. I've also heard Cheryl Ladd was done after season five, too.

What about Morgan Fairchild as a CA with an agenda because she was also working for one of Charlie's adversaries?
Would have been an edgier show, but probably not what the audience wanted

If CHARLIE'S ANGELS had been a show with more depth and backstory, it would've been nice to have seen Morgan as an ex-Angel, kinda like Demi Moore was in FULL THROTTLE.

 

[Jock Ewing Fan]

If my memory is accurate
In the first episode (Pilot?/2 hour tv movie?)
Kelly indicates that she is an orphan and she is searching for her Father.

I have a theory that Charlie is her Father.

Anyone have any thoughts?

 

[ClassyCo]

If my memory is accurate
In the first episode (Pilot?/2 hour tv movie?)
Kelly indicates that she is an orphan and she is searching for her Father.

I have a theory that Charlie is her Father.

Anyone have any thoughts?

That would've been a nice twist, but again, the original CHARLIE'S ANGELS never provided enough depth for that.

 

[lbf522]

True there not much depth to the show. I agree that ABC and Aaron Spelling would not have casted a non white actress to be an angel. I get that from his other Tv programs.

I did read once that they had originally planned on showing Charlie's face for the series finale but for some reason dropped the idea.

 

[DallasFanForever]

I did read once that they had originally planned on showing Charlie's face for the series finale but for some reason dropped the idea.

I can definitely see how they did toy with the idea in that final episode, but I’m glad they didn’t do it though. The whole mystery of Charlie and the fact that we never saw his face was what drove the show in my opinion. They always teased it well enough for the duration of the show but they never overdid it and I’m glad it remained that way.

 

[ClassyCo]

True there not much depth to the show

The original CHARLIE'S ANGELS -- and the movies, too, really -- never had a whole lot of depth.

It irritated Kate Jackson that the stories weren't more developed, and Farrah later rode the coat tails of that mindset, saying her reason for leaving was because her character lacked any significant backstory.

Shelley Hack also seemed a little miffed that the show wasn't better-written, but this sourness might've sprung from the decision of the producers to sideline her for much of the fourth season because they thought she couldn't act. Costume designer Nolan Miller didn't end up liking Hack (although he originally sung her praises to Aaron Spelling, begging him to hire her) because she was "fussy" about her wardrobe.

Jaclyn Smith and Cheryl Ladd were the only two that seems to have "gotten" the show and its cheesy campiness. I've heard Jaclyn say, "You know, the show wasn't Shakespeare," and about all Cheryl complained about was wearing too many bikinis. The two did agree about the stale repetitiveness of the show in its final two seasons as well.

The critics have never understood or even liked CHARLIE'S ANGELS. It is the type of show they like to rip to shreds. They have raked it over the coals since it was brand new back in '76.

But CHARLIE'S ANGELS was and will always a piece of pop culture bubblegum. If you don't take the show too seriously, you'll enjoy an episode or two here or there. Sure, some of the episodes are terribly slow, but there are honestly a few gems based on '70s cop show standards.

 

[DallasFanForever]

Jaclyn Smith and Cheryl Ladd were the only two that seems to have "gotten" the show and its cheesy campiness. I've heard Jaclyn say, "You know, the show wasn't Shakespeare,"

Like most 70s shows, we didn’t watch them for the great storylines. They were more for our entertainment purposes. Just about every show I loved back then really doesn’t hold up well now. Quite honestly I’m not sure they even held up well then but when you look at them in their own timeframe and just appreciate them for what they were then it’s easier to understand their appeal.

and about all Cheryl complained about was wearing too many bikinis.

Her complaint, not mine

But CHARLIE'S ANGELS was and will always a piece of pop culture bubblegum. If you don't take the show too seriously, you'll enjoy an episode or two here or there.

This perfectly sums it up for me. If you take it for what it is, it’s enjoyable enough.

 

[Seaviewer]

That would've been a nice twist, but again, the original CHARLIE'S ANGELS never provided enough depth for that.

The 2011 reboot series missed a great opportunity to give the concept a more modern Cagney & Lacy type feel, if you get my drift - but instead tried to resurrect the seventies which was never going to happen.

 

[lbf522]

Charlie being Kelly's biological father would have been a great twist. Shame we did not get into their backstories aside from we know that Jill was a race car driver and she has a younger sister and that Kelly was orphaned.

I know that Jaclyn Smith was in Charlie's Angels: Full Throttle and Charlie's Angels (2019) but I would like to know why the others did not do cameos in either film.

 

[Chris2]

The producers of the 2000 movie wanted the original trio to do a cameo together. Farrah said she would only do it if they showed that Jill was romantically involved with Charlie, instead of appearing with the two others. The producers said, fine, we’ll just get Cheryl Ladd instead. And Kate Jackson said she wouldn’t do the cameo if it was Cheryl there instead of Farrah. So the whole thing fell apart.

 

[Toni]

The producers of the 2000 movie wanted the original trio to do a cameo together. Farrah said she would only do it if they showed that Jill was romantically involved with Charlie, instead of appearing with the two others. The producers said, fine, we’ll just get Cheryl Ladd instead. And Kate Jackson said she wouldn’t do the cameo if it was Cheryl there instead of Farrah. So the whole thing fell apart.

I just gotta love sweet darling Katie!!

"Who the f*** is that blond midget? I hate her already!"​

 

[DallasFanForever]

The producers of the 2000 movie wanted the original trio to do a cameo together. Farrah said she would only do it if they showed that Jill was romantically involved with Charlie, instead of appearing with the two others. The producers said, fine, we’ll just get Cheryl Ladd instead. And Kate Jackson said she wouldn’t do the cameo if it was Cheryl there instead of Farrah. So the whole thing fell apart.

It’s a shame all of this got in the way because a cameo with the original trio was what I think most of us were waiting for. Even if it was something goofy I would’ve taken it.

 

[Jock Ewing Fan]

I liked Demi Moore as the adversary former Angel.. It probably wouldn't have happened in the TV series,
but it could have provided the show with some good stories, with Madison as a recurring character