‘I’m a Bridget Jones superfan – but Mad About The Boy is cringe and clumsy’

Bridget Jones has made a triumphant return, reigning supreme at the box office as fans flocked to cinemas for another glimpse of Renée Zellweger in the iconic role.

As an ardent admirer of Helen Fielding’s contemporary heroine, I eagerly anticipated her fourth adventure, despite feeling that the third instalment – Bridget Jones’s Baby – provided the perfect conclusion to her tale.

Consequently, I joined the throng of British rom-com enthusiasts rushing to see the film and spend another few hours with the endearingly neurotic and clumsy Bridget.

Imagine my dismay when I left the cinema thinking Bridget Jones: Mad About The Boy was a real letdown, questioning what had been done to the character herself.

I should preface this by acknowledging that I may not be the film’s intended demographic – 23 and without children. The movie centres on Bridget navigating the challenges of single motherhood following the death of her husband.

However, as a British woman residing in London and working in journalism, I still find aspects of Bridget Jones’s character relatable, particularly in the first two original films. A central theme woven throughout this fourth film was grief, specifically following the loss of Mark Darcy and Bridget’s father.

This element, I felt, was portrayed exquisitely and brought me to tears on several occasions, as mentioned in .

However, the rest of the film lacked the quintessential “Bridgetness”. Instead, Zellweger is seen wandering around with a vacant smile, devoid of discernible thought.

The Bridget we cherished was a heavy drinker and a chain smoker. She stood her ground when necessary and was certainly not proficient at her job. Ironically, in a film series that revolves around a feminist icon, the standout roles were played by men: Hugh Grant and Leo Woodall.

Grant returns as Daniel Cleaver, injecting wit and a dash of cynicism into an otherwise mushy narrative.

Surprisingly, the age-gap romance with Woodall’s character Roxster, despite the unfortunate name, wasn’t as awkward as I had feared. There was palpable chemistry between him and Zellweger, and one of the film’s funniest moments was when he discovered a Barbie doll under the covers after their intimate encounter.

His line: “How did that happen? I used protection,” sent the cinema into fits of laughter. This scene, along with another classic Bridget moment where she misinterprets a male cashier’s invitation for a drink as part of a meal deal, were the undeniable highlights.

However, the remainder of the film was somewhat chaotic. Those scenes felt so authentically Bridget Jones to me, and I wished there were more of them and fewer forced, inauthentic moments.

Clocking in at just over two hours, the film felt hastily assembled and rushed, as if the scriptwriters were cramming in gags wherever possible without any real necessity. It appeared that they prioritised this over a coherent plot and dialogue that remained true to Bridget’s character.

Frequently, she found herself in situations that seemed incredibly implausible, even for her. Alternatively, many scenes consisted of what appeared to be lazy writing that was glaringly obvious.

For instance, I don’t know a single British child (who isn’t just learning to speak) who calls their mother ‘mama’, or a checkout assistant who would verbally list every item in a customer’s basket. Not to mention, the multiple packs of condoms Bridget purchases in a frenzy would have totalled around £70.

Another example was when Mr Wallaker, portrayed by Chiwetel Ejiofor, removed his shirt in front of the children on a school trip. This inappropriate incident would never occur in reality, and it seemed like the creators hadn’t considered these minor but significant details.

The fleeting romance between Bridget and “the boy” abruptly ended when he ghosted her, only to return later to declare he was finally ready to be with her. Instead of Bridget delivering her typical tongue-in-cheek, assertive response, she appeared overly tearful.

She tearfully tells him it doesn’t matter and ultimately it was never going to work because she also wished she “had a time machine”. Immediately after, she enters a relationship with her children’s teacher despite there being no significant connection or character development on his part.

Then, suddenly, it’s Christmas. They find themselves at a school play, where her son unexpectedly performs, directed by Mr Wallaker.

Following this clichéd Love Actually-style scene, they confess their feelings for each other. Echoing the iconic Bridget Jones moment where she kisses Darcy amid falling snowflakes, they too share their first kiss in the snow.

This parallel seems intentional, but considering the recent loss of her husband and Bridget’s fresh start, it comes across as distasteful. Nonetheless, it’s heartwarming to see Bridget find joy once more, and I’m cheering for her all the way.

I plan to give the film another watch, hoping it will endear itself to me as the others have. But for now, it’s an overload of awkwardness and lacks the charm of the Bridget we cherished.