The objectifying role Angelina Jolie turned down: “The idea has absolutely no appeal”
In the late 1990s, Angelina Jolie caught the eye of every big studio in Hollywood with her captivating performances in the TV movies Gia and George Wallace. Then, within a year, she broke out as a potential superstar in The Bone Collector, delivered an Oscar-nominated performance in Girl, Interrupted, and signed up for her first action movie, Gone in 60 Seconds.
With these roles, Jolie portrayed a young police officer helping a paraplegic detective hunt a serial killer, a psychologically cruel sociopath confined to a mental asylum, and a bleached-blonde dreadlock-sporting mechanic who moonlights as a bartender. These performances perfectly displayed Jolie’s range and star quality in a variety of parts. However, one thing they most certainly didn’t do was trade on her sexuality, as Jolie was wary of her obvious good looks being used to objectify her on-screen.
Hollywood is Hollywood, though, and as soon as she achieved any level of fame, the industry decided it was time to make Jolie a sex symbol. To that end, she was sent a script for an upcoming big-budget adaptation of an old TV show that was synonymous with badass chicks kicking ass: Charlie’s Angels. Columbia Pictures even gave her the hard sell, with Jolie revealing to the Calgary Sun that the executives told her, “There hadn’t been really good, strong roles for women; that it would make me a big star; and that I would have a fun time doing it.”
To the studio’s surprise, Jolie rejected the chance to star in the movie, even though she acknowledged the script was “cute and clever.” For starters, she was rankled by the suggestion there weren’t any strong roles around for women at the time, especially considering she’d just played three parts she felt fit that bill perfectly. Secondly, the promise of becoming a “big star” was neither here nor there for a young actor who cared more about finding great roles than achieving fame. “The idea of being a big star has absolutely no appeal to me,” she dismissively mused.
Most of all, though, Jolie had no desire to “run around in high heels chasing bad guys and flipping my hair” in order to appeal to the leering male gaze that dominates so much of Hollywood’s output. She knew Charlie’s Angels would be primarily sold on the sex appeal of its three stars, two of whom had already been cast: Cameron Diaz and Drew Barrymore. However, she argued that both of them were “already celebrities, and they’re going to have great fun spoofing their images,” and that’s something she couldn’t bring to the role at that early point in her career.
Interestingly, the third Angel proved exceedingly difficult for director McG to cast. After Jolie said “No thanks,” Jennifer Lopez and Salma Hayek were considered, and Thandiwe Newton was cast before dropping out at the 11th hour. She was a lot more blunt about her reason for walking away than Jolie, too, telling Vulture that when she, Diaz, and Barrymore were pencilled in for a sexy Vogue cover shoot, she knew her conscience wouldn’t allow it. “I just couldn’t do it,” she admitted. “I didn’t want to be put in a position where I was objectified. That just didn’t feel good.”
Ultimately, Lucy Liu was cast as the third Angel, and the movie was an enormous success, spawning one sequel in 2003. In the interim, Jolie’s star went supernova, although the 2001 film that made her a bankable leading lady is a bit of a headscratcher, given her reasons for turning down Charlie’s Angels. After all, what was Lara Croft: Tomb Raider if not the poster child for Hollywood objectification? Weird.
