Perhaps Charlie's Angels didn't do as well as expected because U.S. moviegoers are becoming increasingly fickle.

My primary proof is that Charlie's Angels continues to do well internationally, while seriously lagging behind domestically. I admit that comparing box office revenue of CA to FVF is akin to comparing apples and oranges--but I'm not the one who started this comparison--entertainment statisticians, writers, reviewers and moviegoers often compare films that are released on the same date for various reasons even though oftentimes these films are not created equal. For example, like I mentioned in my OP, FVF has a production budget that is twice as much as CA, so obviously, its box office revenue should be higher. And it should be stated that we live in a day and age where most medium budget films struggle to do well at the box office.

That being said, CA nearly caught up to Ford V FVF a couple of days ago in terms of international box office, but FVF had a big surge in overseas ticket sales since then.

The good news is CA is continuing to do well internationally, with a gross of $29.6 million. Added to its domestic take of $13.94 million, the total worldwide gross currently stands at $43.54 million: https://www.the-numbers.com/movie/Charlies-Angels-(2019)#tab=international

So although CA did not meet box office projections here in the U.S., worldwide, it earned a huge chunk of its production budget of $48 million in just two weeks of theatrical release and should easily pass this mark over the course of this coming week.

Going back to the example of comparing apples to oranges, Charlie's Angels: Full Throttle (2003) was a big budget film with a production budget of $120 million ($166.6 million in 2019 dollars)--which is over 3 times that of the CA reboot in 2019 dollars. Even though many on this board claim the originals were much better than the reboot, CAFT didn't do as well as some on this board erroneously claim, as it made $100 million domestic, which was $20 million less than the production budget.

And lastly, here is an example of what I mean by U.S. moviegoers becoming increasingly fickle while international moviegoers continue to embrace and reward entertaining films: Alita: Battle Angel, released earlier this year, which bombed here in the United States. ABA had a domestic gross of just $85.7 million which is a little more than half of its $170 million production budget.

In my humble opinion, this is by far the best action adventure film released so far in 2019--yes, including movies from the Marvel Cinematic Universe and DC Extended Universe. With a stellar cast led by Christoph Waltz, Mahershala Ali, Jennifer Connelly, Ed Skrein, and relative newcomer Rosa Salazar, along with Robert Rodriguez as director, James Cameron as producer and screenwriter, and Bill Pope as cinematographer. It did not disappoint, despite this film getting mixed reviews by critics. Fortunately, this films did much better overseas, with an international gross of $319 million, bringing the total worldwide gross to a more than respectable $404.8 million. Because ABA proved to be a box office success around the world, a sequel is planned with Edward Norton and hopefully Michelle Rodriguez, to add more star power to this franchise.

In short, U.S. moviegoers who criticize Hollywood for churning out mostly recycled ideas via sequels, prequels, re-imaginings, spinoffs, reboots, etc., need to put their money where their mouth is and support relatively original films like Alita: Battle Angel.