Bridget jones diary… what are ur thoughts????

[Emblue1981]

So over Christmas I watched Bridget Jones for the first time.. yes I know, where have I been for the past 20 years.

Anyway, all my friends love the book/ films so I decided to give it a go and can’t believe how disappointed I was. In summary she’s sexually harassed at her work place (Hugh Grant character) which subsequently leads to her leaving her job, she's portrayed as stupid ( political scenes) fat shamed ( she weighs 9 and a half stone for goodness sake !) not to mention the creepy uncle who continuously makes sexual comments to Bridget.

In 2022 do people still really like this movie or is it more a case that, it had its place at the time but let’s move on???

Well the plot is Pride and Prejudice. As the book constantly reminds us!

I wouldn't have called Bridget in the film 'fat' - just normal, rather than Zellweger's usual Hollywood thin.

Anyone surprised by Grant playing a nasty man in this film hasn't seen An Awfully Big Adventure - made just before Four Weddings and a Funeral but released a little after. The latter unfairly typecast him for a while - people mistakenly thought he was drippy Charles.

It's a modern Sense and Sensibilty with Colin Firth playing Mr Darcey.
Although can certainly see OPs point

Well mostly I think the same as when there was an identical thread 3 weeks ago www.mumsnet.com/Talk/_chat/4377093-Bridget-Jones-watched-it-last-night-erm-it-s-aged-a-bit

If you think it's celebrating sexual harassment, laughing at her because she's stupid, or in agreement that she is fat, then you are abjectly missing the point. She is not being held up as a model for women to emulate, she is being used as a mirror to reflect and show how some young women at the time - and frankly now - might experience external pressures that influence them in an unhealthy and negative way, and uses humour to illuminate the unfairness of calling someone stupid because they're not interested in big weighty boring topics, or thinking a woman must always try to be skinnier or is a moral outrage, or saying that women should expect to be treated badly by men because that's what men do.

I mean - the bit where Perpetua, who Bridget sees as basically an enemy, turns round and calls Daniel out for how he's treated Bridget - THAT IS THE POINT. Not that "being sexually harassed and treated like shit is what a woman should aspire to".

It boils down to - Bridget is fine as she is, and the fact she believes the social messages saying she needs a boyfriend, she needs to lose weight, she needs a serious career, she needs to be able to discuss politics at dinner parties - creates the conflict that drives the humour. Don't watch it if you want social realism.

I'm 50 this year. I've always been fond of Bridget Jones.

Believe me, in the early 90's everyone I knew was reading self-help books like 'Men are from Mars, Women from Venus', making lists about their perfect man, then being told it was bad to make lists, you didn't need a boyfriend but everything was geared around couples. Literally everyone I knew was always obsessing over looking fat (when they weren't). We all used to meet up constantly in the pub and discuss our relationship problems over and over.

I find Bridget Jones in part, a pretty accurate reflection of that pressure we all felt. The satire is, that there's absolutely nothing wrong with Bridget. She's in fact perfect 'just the way she is'.

I won't lie. When I'm relaxing and the film comes in it makes me feel happy. It's nothing deeper than that.

Read the book!

@Floisme

I thought the book was fab and the film was dire. The book had me laughing with Bridget. I couldn't believe it when I saw the film and realised I was expected to laugh at her. I think it's one of the worst, most cloth eared adaptations I've ever seen.

Totally agree. Bridget Jones is in my top 10 books ever.

So - I am not sure I'd say she was fat in the films. She was a little heavier than Bridget in the books, but I think also we notice the contrast with Hollywood expectations which are kind of abnormal.

It can be difficult to translate some things to film.

@RoyalCorgi

Sorry, I just saw that bookworm made exactly the same point about Bridget losing weight.

It infuriated me that the films made her fat.

Yes she was 9 stone in the books!!

I've got to say, I really hate this trend of judging things from the past by today's standards. Plus not everything is supposed to be a beacon of virtue! That's what makes an interesting book or film. There's enough in the present to get me worked up, haven't got time to worry about an old film

Blue string soup.... First time I saw that I was laughing til I cried.

Not every film has to be deep and meaningful, sometimes it is nice to have fun

I like both the book and film (and I think both Renee Zellweger and Hugh Grant have their career-best performances in the film).

I think it captures lots of real social phenomena really well, in a heightened, comic kind of way. The smug marrieds dinner party cracks me up every time. And Bridget is meant to be a sort of middle class 90s Everywoman - neither a figure of virtue nor of contempt.

And if the obsession with finding a boyfriend seems a little old fashioned, well, the plot is lifted wholesale from Pride and Prejudice, what else do you expect? (tbf this is more obvious in the book)

I was a little obsessed with finding a boyfriend too when I was young, free and single , is that not allowed anymore?

And yes the joke in the book re weight is the gap between her perception of herself and the reality that the reader can see in how much she actually weighs. It's very much in keeping with the Austen homage - it's a direct parallel with how consistently faulty Elizabeth Bennett's perceptions and judgements are in P&P. In Bridget (in the book at least) it manifests in completely misjudging both Mark and Daniel, but also having a faulty perception of herself.

In the book, shazzer is a total feminist icon! Talking about Backlash, emotionalfuckwittage and smug marrieds. I love her.

@55HerewardTheWoke

I like both the book and film (and I think both Renee Zellweger and Hugh Grant have their career-best performances in the film).

I disagree. Paddington 2 was most definitely Hugh Grant's career best.

Ah, I do love the book. I was the right age for it when it was first published and it spoke to me. The film, however, has Richard Curtis' grubby paws all over it - girl wants boyfriend; after series of misunderstandings, girl gets boyfriend. Which rather missed the point, I feel.

I thought the friends had a much bigger role in the book than the film. That really reflected my life at the time, my friends were such a big part of my life and we endlessly analysed every event.
I don't think young women are less interested in finding a man these days are they? Dating apps would definitely suggest there is an interest.

I think film and tv today is like Sesame Street for grown ups. We’re spoon fed storylines and expected to learn a moral lesson by the end of it.
I’d rather watch something and decide for myself if I find it upsetting, offensive, rude, crude, misogynistic than have it sanitised or be told what I’m supposed to think and feel.
It’s completely infantilising.

Who doesn't love marmalade and blue soup 🤷🏼‍♀️

@AutisticLegoLover

Who doesn't love marmalade and blue soup 🤷🏼‍♀️

And congealed green gunge caper berry gravy!

It's of it's time. Started as a weekly paper column thing.
Then the books.

As pp said diaries are internal life, feelings etc. Having a rant to get things out system.

They tracked her constant efforts to drink less, lose weight in that sort of I ought to but well never stick to it for more than a few days because friends work life enjoy having fun. Which I'm sure lots of women in general can easily relate to.

Her seeing other women at work and thinking they're no much more elegant, attractive, together than me.

Her thoughts about colleagues esp when had bad day and sometimes they turned out to be nice really and sometimes not.

Her hilarious embarrassing stuff was from her cringing POV and we always think things were much worse than others with that stuff.

Written it was v funny. And clearly she was attractive, successful, had plenty friends etc. It was how she saw herself. The whole point was that it wasn't accurate documentary writing. It was about insecurities, confidence, secret worries.

As pp said that really doesn't translate well to film.

Well except peep show comedy genius

The films are of their time of course as so much stuff is. They have dated a lot. Not just these films!

I think if never seen then wtf yes.
If remember from time and enjoyed then way more likely to enjoy now even if being yikes sometimes!

I mean people still watch carry on camping etc... And over Xmas seasonal channel had Benny hill on FFS!

[quote StrictlyAFemaleFemale]@55HerewardTheWoke

I like both the book and film (and I think both Renee Zellweger and Hugh Grant have their career-best performances in the film).

I disagree. Paddington 2 was most definitely Hugh Grant's career best.[/quote]
I can't tell you how much I loathe Hugh Grant so it pains me to say that he should have been nominated for Paddington and deserved to win. He was beyond good right down to the ruffles and flares on his pink prison uniform. 😂
Ugh. I feel tainted saying it but truth must out.

Who doesn't love marmalade and blue soup 🤷🏼‍♀️

And congealed green gunge caper berry gravy!

Oh, just stir it Una.

Bridget Jones 's Baby might be making history as the second female-directed movie trilogy ever made (Lana and Lilly Wachowski directed The Matrix series)…

But the Wachowski siblings were still officially brothers at the time they made their trilogy. And surely “female” (unlike “woman”) is still allowed to mean what it’s always meant? So on both grounds, the Bridget Jones films were indisputably the first female-directed trilogy.