Jump to content

  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

The New Charlie's Angles TV Reboot!!

Jangler

By Jangler,
in Huddle Lounge

Recommended Posts

Jangler Newbie

Jangler

Posted
Posted

http://www.masslive.com/entertainment/index.ssf/2011/01/meet_the_new_charlies_angels.html

9229277-large.jpg

A pilot starring Minka Kelly (“Friday Night Light”) Rachael Taylor (“Transformers”) and Annie Ilonzeh ("General Hospital") is under consideration at ABC.

Deadline.com is reporting that Ilonzeh has already been signed and Kelly and Taylor are close to inking deals to portray the trio of sexy detectives. Robert Wagner would supply the voice of their never-seen boss, Charlie.

The pilot would be a reboot of the 1976-1981 TV series, which originally starred Farrah Fawcett, Jaclyn Smith and Kate Jackson. The original voice of Charlie was that of John Forsythe.

The pilot is being produced by Sony Pictures TV and Drew Barrymore's Flower Films.

Barrymore starred with Cameron Diaz and Lucy Liu is a 2000 big screen remake.

Unlike the original ABC series, the new version is reportedly set in Miami instead of Los Angeles. Production is expected to begin as early as next month.

Oh man!! Could T'n'A TV be making a come back?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Captroop Grand Master

Captroop

Posted
Posted

God Dammit. One original idea, Hollywood, ONE! I dare you, I double dare you, I triple dog dare you to come up with one original idea.

I mean for fug sake, how many 70's and 80's era shows have been rebooted now? Compounded with the "Sassy single female lawyer" shows, four billion CSI and Law and Order spinoffs, and 20 billion reality shows. God, if I didn't have AMC (or Fox when House is on), I'd never watch TV

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • DaveThePanther2008
      Panthers OLB Pat Jones II makes bold claim about team's defense

      By DaveThePanther2008 · Posted

      It's not impossible to go from worst to first.  We kept Evero because anyone in there right mind knew our defense was destroyed by injuries, not the scheme.  Evero has been given a plethora of talent between free agency and the draft, not to mention getting DB back. I fully expect our defense to be very good.  I have no reason to think Jones would say something like that unless he truly felt like that.   
    • PNW_PantherMan
      Canes vs Panthers Rd 3 Gm3 8pm

      By PNW_PantherMan · Posted

      We would’ve played Florida and lost in the 1st instead of the 3rd round.  Montreal would have been the 8 seed.
    • Icege
      PFF ranks the 2025 starting QBs

      By Icege · Posted

      I can't get behind a purely subjective re-draft as a method of defining "top-10 QB" status. That invites bias based on vibes/hypotheticals and can ignore actual on-field performance. You and others have said that Bryce has to be a top-10 QB to justify the pick. That's a high bar, which I'm not against, but we need a clear, consistent way to measure it. When I bring up metrics that Bryce has registered in the top-10 in like BTT%, P2S ratio, catchable deep ball rate, etc... they're waved off as either irrelevant or the expected baseline performance. Meanwhile, volume stats like passing yards or win-loss records, both of which depend heavily on roster talent, health, and coaching, are treated as definitive. That's where the inconsistency kicks in. If no performance metric ever counts in his favor and the answer is always going to be "he should be doing that," then we're not evaluating him... we're just holding him to a curve he can't win against. If this is really about performance standards, then let's define them. But if it's just about confirming prior takes based on height and weight, then let's call it what is it and stop pretending that this is a football analysis discussion.
×
×
  • Create New...