ABC is developing a new Charlie's Angels TV series

[Out Of My Vulcan Mind]

From Variety:

ABC is close to giving a pilot order to a modern version of the classic 1970s TV actioner "Charlie�'s Angels."Josh Friedman, who recently adapted the "Terminator" franchise for his Fox series "Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles," is onboard to write and exec produce the new "Angels."

Also involved are original "Charlie�s Angels" producer Leonard Goldberg, who launched the series with Aaron Spelling in 1976, as well as Drew Barrymore, who starred in and produced the 2000 film version and its sequel. Sony Pictures TV is the studio.

Insiders said that ABC Entertainment Group topper Steve McPherson is particularly high on this project.

Spelling attempted a revival in 1988, sealing a deal to produce a version called "Angels 88" for Fox. That show never got off the ground, but it eventually led to Spelling�s deal to produce the original "Beverly Hills 90210" (now also enjoying a revival, via the CW).

The franchise then lay dormant until 2000, when the McG-helmed "Charlie�s Angels" feature, starring Barrymore, Lucy Liu and Cameron Diaz, was a box office hit. Movie spawned a second edition, "Charlie�s Angels: Full Throttle."

It also led to an earlier attempt at a TV series revival, in 2004. That version was written for ABC (again, through Sony) by a pre-"Lost" Carlton Cuse and John Wirth and given a script-plus-penalty order but ultimately didn�'t go to pilot.

This time around, a pilot is expected to be greenlit. Friedman, Goldberg and Barrymore will exec produce with Nancy Juvonen.

 

[JustAFriend]

'Cause there's really so much that the first version didn't cover????

 

[Temis the Vorta]

What's with all the fonky ? diamonds?

At least they're more interesting than this yet-another-DOA series idea is...

'Cause there's really so much that the first version didn't cover????

The boobs jiggled up and down and side to side, but not so much in the diagonal direction. It's high time they addressed that glaring deficiency!

 

[Warp Coil]

The Bionic Woman. Knight Rider. 90210. Melrose Place. They're all reasons why network execs should be shying away from projects that are re-makes of other projects right now. Battlestar Galactica was a fluke. A rare success. It's obvious that it was the exception to the rule.

 

[BrotherBenny]

^I must concur with my esteemed colleague.

Or to put it another way...Are they f***ing nuts??!?!?!?

How about something original, or based on a novel? There are dozens of novel series which could be turned into television series. We don't need another rehash of another cheesy 80s show.

 

[FreezeC77]

If it was being developed for HBO or Showtime I might be interested, for reg network tv? pass.

 

[Mr. Adventure]

I don't think it's the worst property to develop, it will really come down to execution, though I suppose it usually does.

 

[Othello]

If they get at least two out of the three Angels in the cast that are GBOW thumbs up worthy and I'll watch no matter what. LOL

 

[RJDiogenes]

Given that Barrymore is involved, I wonder if this will be a continuation, rather than a reboot.

 

[BrotherBenny]

I don't think it's the worst property to develop, it will really come down to execution, though I suppose it usually does.

I think execution is the right word.

 

[slappy]

Given that Barrymore is involved, I wonder if this will be a continuation, rather than a reboot.

Why reboot? Even the Barrymore movies were subtlely mentioned as continuations. That's how it always should be.

Oh, but bring back the guns.

 

[JacksonArcher]

I would watch this if they brought back Bill Murray but I doubt that'll happen.

 

[nx1701g]

How about something original, or based on a novel? There are dozens of novel series which could be turned into television series. We don't need another rehash of another cheesy 80s show.

They tried that with Eastwick and it's cancelled.

 

[Obiwanshinobi]

Man how do you go from Terminator to Charlies Angels, You would think McG would get first crack at this, it's almost like the 2 traded franchises

 

[RJDiogenes]

Given that Barrymore is involved, I wonder if this will be a continuation, rather than a reboot.

Why reboot? Even the Barrymore movies were subtlely mentioned as continuations. That's how it always should be.

That's exactly what I'm saying. The movies were definitely continuations (although they introduced some Bosley problems in the second one), and I'd like to see them move on from there. My Rule: Continuations good, reboots bad.

 

[BrotherBenny]

How about something original, or based on a novel? There are dozens of novel series which could be turned into television series. We don't need another rehash of another cheesy 80s show.

They tried that with Eastwick and it's cancelled.

nx1701g, read my post carefully, I said novel series--not "single novel".

 

[Out Of My Vulcan Mind]

That's exactly what I'm saying. The movies were definitely continuations (although they introduced some Bosley problems in the second one), and I'd like to see them move on from there. My Rule: Continuations good, reboots bad.

Another quote from the Variety article:

The new "Charlie’s Angels" is expected to be geared toward a new generation while paying homage to the past.

That's a little vague, but it most likely means that it's a new team of Angels within the same continuity.

 

[RJDiogenes]

Sweet. I'd be willing to give that a try.

 

[Mr. Adventure]

What's the difference between a continuation and a reboot? Are people that worried that the adventures of Sabrina and Jill are still canon?

 

[Out Of My Vulcan Mind]

It wouldn't make that much difference to me, but a reboot isn't necessary given that the concept allows for a new team of Angels. And if it's a continuation you could have guest appearances by some of the prior Angels, which would be nice for fans of the original series.

I agree with Slappy that they should bring back the guns. Don't know if they will with Barrymore being involved, though (she was the one adamantly opposed to having guns in the movies).