To The Surprise Of No One, Kristen Stewart Says She “Hated Making” The 2019 ‘Charlie’s Angels’ Reboot

To the surprise of no one, actress and feminist icon Kristen Stewart didn’t enjoy making Elizabeth Banks‘ 2019 reboot of “Charlie’s Angels.” In fact, IndieWire reports (via Variety) that the actress loathed the film altogether.

READ MORE: ‘The Chronology Of Water’: Kristen Stewart Threatens To Stop Acting Until She Gets Funding For Her Directorial Debut

While playing Variety’s “Know Your Lines” games for a recent interview and cover story, Stewart spoke about her time on the action-comedy. The line that brought up “Charlie’s Angels?” One of Stewart’s opening lines in the film: “Did you know that it takes men an additional seven seconds to perceive a woman as a threat compared to a man?” To which the actress responded, “This was a mouthful at the time. I remember saying that. That was from a little film called “Charlie’s Angels.” We wanted a strong opener, you know? We wanted to really like broadcast what the movie was about. It was a good idea at the time.”

Then Stewart went for the jugular. “I hated making that movie,” she continued tersely. “I don’t know what else to say to you.” To be fair to Stewart (and Banks, as well as her cast mates Naomi Scott and Ella Balinska), the property they rebooted cast a large shadow on their project.  McG‘s two films in the 2000s were mega hits for stars Cameron Diaz, Lucy Liu, and Drew Barrymore. And then there’s the cult appeal of the original ’70s TV series. But Stewart knew going in that she and her co-stars would have a tough time superseding the films from 2000 and 2003.

“Honestly, the three … you can’t touch [that]. Cameron, Lucy and Drew … I love that movie. I love that movie! If that says anything,” Stewart said about the McG movies. The stars of Banks’ sophomore feature after “Pitch Perfect 2” (“Movie 43” was a group effort) didn’t have quite the same collective charisma as the 2000 threesome. And that’s part of the reason 2019’s “Charlie Angel’s” did so poorly at the box office. Most critics met the film with a shrug, and it barely broke even, making $73.3 million off a ~55 million budget.

.

And Banks wasn’t afraid to disclose her frustration making the film to The New York Times after the fact. The actress-diretor didn’t appreciate the film being pigeonholed as an action movie made for women only. “I wish that the movie had not been presented as just for girls, because I didn’t make it just for girls,” said Banks.” There was a disconnect on the marketing side of it for me. Let me say I’m proud of the movie. I loved Kristen Stewart being funny and light. I loved introducing Ella Balinska to the world. I loved working with Patrick Stewart. It was an incredible experience. It was very stressful, partly because when women do things in Hollywood it becomes this story. There was a story around “Charlie’s Angels” that I was creating some feminist manifesto. I was just making an action movie.”

Banks’ comments follow up similar ones she told the Herald Sun that if her 2019 didn’t do well at the box office, it “reinforces a stereotype in Hollywood that men don’t get see women do action movies” beyond male-dominated IPs like Marvel and DC superhero films. “There was not this gendered agenda” for “Charlie’s Angels” being a feminist manifesto,” claimed the actress-director.   But then Banks’ “Charlie’s Angels” wasn’t a female-directed “Mission: Impossible” movie either. It was kind of a blank, unimaginative nothingburger of a retread that couldn’t hold a candle to its 2000s predecessors.

And that’s probably why Kristen Stewart hated making the movie so much. The actress didn’t disclose anything further about “Charlie’s Angels” in her Variety interview, but considering she hasn’t done any similar movies since, that says everything, doesn’t it? Catch Stewart next in two films premiering at Sundance, “Love Me” and “Love Lies Bleeding.”