Reno
⭐ 7/10 December 24, 2016
**This is a two-man job!**
Unlike the first two films, this was not based on the book. Instead, it is an original screenplay that fills the gap between the second and the third book. So reading the third book before watching this film is a spoiler. Most importantly the fourth film is on, only officially have to be announced.
The original director returned to this, but I appreciate the story and the screenplay and people behind it. I did not… read the rest.
**This is a two-man job!**
Unlike the first two films, this was not based on the book. Instead, it is an original screenplay that fills the gap between the second and the third book. So reading the third book before watching this film is a spoiler. Most importantly the fourth film is on, only officially have to be announced.
The original director returned to this, but I appreciate the story and the screenplay and people behind it. I did not think this sequel would work, but it exceeded my expectation. A simple story and very familiar settings, but developed so well. There's no Bridget's diary in this, instead an iPad.
Renee Zellweger was totally unrecognisable. Actually, I said that in my 'The Whole Truth' review. But she was good to return as Bridget. Colin Firth looks too older than his actual age, but was great in his part. No Hugh Grant, but a new competitor was introduced which is none other than Patrick Dempsey.
This is not the same kind of narration that we saw a decade ago. Because all the characters are aged, so according to the situation this story takes place. It's a two hour long film, but it had some good jokes. Those who enjoyed the first two would surely enjoy it as well. So choosing it to watch is not a bad idea.
_7/10_
show less
r96sk
⭐ 7/10 February 3, 2025
<em>'Bridget Jones’s Baby'</em> is a good sequel, a much better movie than the 2004 follow-up without a doubt. This one has an actual plot, for one, and is a much more rounded effort - the ending is rather cute too. Despite being the longest entry of the trilogy, this is paced well.
Renée Zellweger and Colin Firth reprise well, while Patrick Dempsey is a good addition. The films merges the new characters with the old (minus one obvious absente… read the rest.
<em>'Bridget Jones’s Baby'</em> is a good sequel, a much better movie than the 2004 follow-up without a doubt. This one has an actual plot, for one, and is a much more rounded effort - the ending is rather cute too. Despite being the longest entry of the trilogy, this is paced well.
Renée Zellweger and Colin Firth reprise well, while Patrick Dempsey is a good addition. The films merges the new characters with the old (minus one obvious absentee) positively, e.g. Sarah Solemani is one of the better supports from any of the three flicks. The musician cameo is amusing too.
You have to wonder where they are going to go with 2025's <em>'Bridget Jones: Mad About the Boy'</em>, kinda mad they've managed to create four of these to be honest - two (one?) would've sufficed. Still, this 2016 release is, all in all, a good one; if still narrowly shy of the original, naturally.
show less
CinemaSerf
⭐ 6/10 November 20, 2025
Perhaps it is her looking forty-third birthday? Perhaps it’s the fact that she has just been to the funeral of the dreaded “Daniel” - presumed dead after a plane crash? It might even be because her mother (Gemma Jones) has reminded her about her body clock, but in any case “Bridget” (Renée Zellweger) is even more hormonal than usual when she encounters the dashing American “Jack” (Patrick Dempsey). Now she had hoped to just knuckle down at work, … read the rest.
Perhaps it is her looking forty-third birthday? Perhaps it’s the fact that she has just been to the funeral of the dreaded “Daniel” - presumed dead after a plane crash? It might even be because her mother (Gemma Jones) has reminded her about her body clock, but in any case “Bridget” (Renée Zellweger) is even more hormonal than usual when she encounters the dashing American “Jack” (Patrick Dempsey). Now she had hoped to just knuckle down at work, but he gives her the collywobbles and distracts her to the point that the new management decide she no longer fits the bill. Just to add to her complications, she also meets up with her ex, the newly re-married “Mark” (Colin Firth). Next thing, she is having a bit of morning sickness and only has half an idea who might be the cause. “Bridget” is a different woman now, though. She is stronger and more independently minded woman but she wants to be in love - just with whom? This has lost little of the honesty of Helen Fielding’s original concept and as her character gets older, wiser - and rounder, Zellweger has made it a very real character whom it’s quite possible (even for a bloke) to empathise with. She mixes a stoic charm with a practical haplessness in an engaging enough fashion and with Firth delivering reliably enough and Dempsey proving some eye-candy, the saga for “Bridget” can go on pretty much as before. It does miss Hugh Grant though, and the passive/aggressive humour that he and she engender through their hate to love relationship. Also, there’s just no getting away from the fact that though it does have realistic elements to it, it also revisits one or two themes we have maybe already done once too often. Neil Pearson as boss “Finch” is largely relegated now and we just don’t get enough of the generous pearls of wisdom from parents Jones and the underused Jim Broadbent. This is a perfectly watchable addition to the family, but it’s lost much of it’s lustre and at just over the two hours, I found myself just a little disinterested by the end. It’s still entertaining enough, but not what it was.
show less
CinemaSerf
⭐ 6/10 November 20, 2025
Perhaps it is her looming forty-third birthday? Perhaps it’s the fact that she has just been to the funeral of the dreaded “Daniel” - presumed dead after a plane crash? It might even be because her mother (Gemma Jones) has reminded her about her body clock, but in any case “Bridget” (Renée Zellweger) is even more hormonal than usual when she encounters the dashing American “Jack” (Patrick Dempsey). Now she had hoped to just knuckle down at work, … read the rest.
Perhaps it is her looming forty-third birthday? Perhaps it’s the fact that she has just been to the funeral of the dreaded “Daniel” - presumed dead after a plane crash? It might even be because her mother (Gemma Jones) has reminded her about her body clock, but in any case “Bridget” (Renée Zellweger) is even more hormonal than usual when she encounters the dashing American “Jack” (Patrick Dempsey). Now she had hoped to just knuckle down at work, but he gives her the collywobbles and distracts her to the point where the new management decide she no longer fits the bill. Just to add to her complications, she also hooks up with her ex, the newly re-married, about to be divorced “Mark” (Colin Firth). Next thing, she is having a bit of morning sickness and only has half an idea when or who might be the cause. “Bridget” is a different woman now, though. She is stronger and more independently minded but she still wants to be in love - just with whom? This has lost little of the honesty of Helen Fielding’s original concept and as her character gets older, wiser - and rounder, Zellweger has made it a very real persona whom it’s quite possible (even for a bloke) to empathise with. She mixes a stoic charm with a practical haplessness in an engaging enough fashion and with Firth delivering reliably enough and Dempsey providing some eye-candy, the crater-strewn saga for “Bridget” can go on pretty much as before. That said, it does miss Hugh Grant though and the passive/aggressive humour that he and she engendered through their hate to love relationship. Also, there’s just no getting away from the fact that though it does have realistic elements to it, it also revisits one or two themes we have maybe already done once too often. Neil Pearson as boss “Finch” is largely relegated now and we just don’t get enough of the generous pearls of wisdom from parents Jones and the underused Jim Broadbent. This is a perfectly watchable addition to the family, but it’s lost much of it’s lustre and at just over the two hours, I found myself just a little disinterested by the end. It’s still entertaining enough, but not as fresh or funny as it was.
show less
