Bridget Jones: L'âge de raison

Having seen the first version, I was looking forward to a good laugh. However this movie really failed to live up to it. Actually perhaps the movie cannot be blamed for it since the storyline itself is quite ridiculous, There was no reason for the Darcy- Bridget split in the first place. Nor the absurd antics with Hugh Grant (the prostitute was in pretty poor taste). The mid-life crisis which is so refreshing in the first movie sounds boring and repetitive.

Renee Zelwegger, looks haggard and unattractive. Also she seems to be overly neurotic - a trait that begins to grate on the nerves. Darcy is passable. Only Hugh Grant shines - he plays the role of the scoundrel with aplomb.

The only high point of the movie is the reprise of the Firth-Grant fisticuff. It is as ludicrous as the first - perhaps even better.

Sometimes sequels to a very good movie do not work as well, and this one unfortunately is one that does not work as well as its original. One person in our party watching this movie in fact called it "painful".

The original Bridget Jones Diary worked very well, at least in my opinion. It worked well not only because of a good story line, great casting and great acting, but the script and direction made the film also both witty and fun. In a sequel, often we are promised just part of that formula – the basic story line and a similar cast. Yes, this film does have a similar story line and a similar cast, but the script and the direction fall far short of the original. Hence instead of a witty fast paced fun movie where we laugh along with Bridget Jones, we have a slow moving non-funny movie that mostly seems to laugh at Bridget Jones and not with her.

The movie seems to lack the new elements that would make a sequel like this interesting. Instead it seems to fall back and simply exaggerate some of the elements of the first movie. It is "Over the Top" as one in Britain might say. Unfortunately this exaggeration tends to make things less funny and not funnier. In the first movie businessman Hugh Grant is mostly a businessman but is occasionally selfish and occasionally sexually selfish. In the second movie he spends less time as a businessman and more time just seeming out for himself. In the first movie, Bridget sometimes has low self-confidence. In the second movie, she almost always has low self-confidence. In the second movie, the Colin Firth character seems to try to be even more nerdy than in the first movie. In the first movie Bridget is plump. In the second movie, she is plumper. Now, I could afford to lose a few pound myself, but hopefully you get the idea. The second movie exaggerates the first trying for more laughs. But on the path it loses itself and is much less witty and funny.

Now, one cannot blame the actresses and actors for this. I felt that Renee Zellweger, Hugh Grant, and Colin Firth did their usual great jobs. For that reason alone, this movie may be well worth watching for you. It was because of the actresses and actors that I wished to see it. To make the movie great, however, it needed a script and direction to match.

'Bridget Jones's Diary' was an immensely enjoyable film. It had a lot going for it, and succeeded on almost every level. It didn't cover much new ground and didn't break any conventions, but it was warm, charming, hugely funny and sometimes poignant, with a great cast.

When hearing that there was a sequel, there were mixed feelings. Admittedly, did question the point of it and was worried as to whether it would be as good considering the general reputation of sequels (though there are a lot of exceptions that are as good and nearly better). On the other hand, was more than willing to give 'Bridget Jones: The Edge of Reason' the benefit of the doubt, considering the same people were on board, cast and crew, who did such a great job in 'Bridget Jones's' Diary.

My feelings after 'Bridget Jones: The Edge of Reason' were that of real disappointment. It is not as terrible as many have said and there are far worse sequels around, at least it has things that salvage it from being worse, but what worked so well in 'Bridget Jones's' Diary' didn't here. Always try and judge sequels on their own terms and try not to compare, but it is hard not to when there is such a significant drop in quality, of which 'Bridget Jones: The Edge of Reason' is a big step down.

There are redeeming qualities. 'Bridget Jones: The Edge of Reason' is attractive visually in a film that doesn't require epic sweeping cinematography or opulence, but still manages to be beautifully shot, cohesively edited and have striking locations. There are a few amusing moments, but they are too far and between.

Regarding the cast, they do do well with what they are given, although their material is nowhere near as good they are hardly slumming it and do try to be true to how they were previously. Renee Zellwegger's performance is not as good here, but her accent is still game and she does try to bring out the funny, adorably awkward and sympathetic sides of her character when the material allows it. Hugh Grant still plays his caddish character with smarmy charm, while Colin Firth is understated and likable in a role tailor-made for him, practically as if it was written with him in mind.

However, Bridget is far too much of a parody and a butt of the joke here, making it, for all of Zellwegger's good efforts, difficult to feel sorry for or feel pity towards her. The jokes are too recycled and more of the same, with more contrivance and ridiculous silliness than fun or sparkle, and a lot of the script is very weak with lines this time round that makes one cringe. Whereas there was a perfect balance before of the extremely funny and the slightly tiresome this balance goes way too far in the latter.

Story is just as problematic, the situations are much more contrived and reek of predictability without any freshness or charm. It's more tedious than bright and breezy, and fails as a comedy, drama and romance. The comedy is too far and between and feels too much of before without any of the things that worked so well in 'Bridget Jones's' Diary'. The drama is too sentimentalised and lacks any poignancy and the romantic parts are severely lacking in warmth.

Despite it not being the case, being the same director as the previous film except then it was hard to believe it was a debut, you'd think that it was the opposite here because the direction actually felt inexperienced. The music doesn't work here, too randomly placed, the songs not as well chosen and inferior in quality and actually feeling annoying.

Overall, disappointing and a big step down but not without its redeeming merits. 4/10 Bethany Cox

First, the positives – Colin and Hugh are still hitting their marks. Even though he might not know why, Mark positively adores Bridget. Colin gets that and twinkles, melts and warms in all the right places. Same goes for Daniel– he's drawn to his Bridge for some inexplicable reason. Hugh Grant really ought to be looking for a patent for that mojo he works so well. All of the original actors are back as Bridget's parents and her "dating war command" of pals and all have a natural, easy chemistry that works. But, the negatives, they are a-plenty.

Biggest problem here was the complete tone change. In the first film, we were on the ride with Bridget...seeing things through her eyes, groaning as she put her foot in her mouth again and cheering for her to finally get it right. However, in this movie, it feels like someone stuck her up on a stage and spent 2 hours throwing pies and tomatoes at her cause it seemed real cool. She's not in on the joke here, she IS the joke. Her few extra pounds are no longer just a part of the package – they are the end-all of her worth as a person. It feels like the folks behind this film don't even LIKE the character – they just think it's real cool to humiliate her as often as possible. It doesn't even look like they bothered to send Renee to makeup or wardrobe – she (as Bridget) was pleasantly plump in the first film, but never dowdy. The character is downright frumpy in this movie with a perpetual case of bed head and clothes that look like castoffs from Mayberry. And Renee plays into it with her acting choices – Bridget was frazzled in the first movie but still retained her dignity most of the time. She's a perpetual victim in this one, though, and even though Renee is still cute as a button and incredibly endearing, some of Bridget's spark is gone.

What happens after the happy ending? Couple realizes that they are each real, flawed people. And the movie makes it seem like Mark is at that point – never tries to change Bridget, never gets angry and her constant mishaps amuse more than annoy. But, as each of Bridget's tantrums unfolded, I kept asking myself why in the WORLD the man was still there. Bridget's keen on him but doesn't trust him. She likes to be with him but is suspicious of his actions without any real cause. Now, we know she's an insecure character and feels like she's not classy enough to fit into his world. And if the movie built from that, maybe we'd have a different story. But the obstacles they face are external. The characters never make decisions on their own – something or someone else makes them feel a certain way or forces them into a course of action that decides what will happen next. And Bridget's reactions almost make it seem like somehow, over the course of the last 'six weeks', she's regressed to a girl in the schoolyard stomping her feet when her boyfriend does something she doesn't like.

Another problem – the utter lack of subtlety. Why include one fat joke when 3 or 4 plus a butt shot can fit into the scene? Why spend most of the movie dropping hints about a reveal when you can beat the audience over the head with it in one of the final scenes? Why have Daniel make one joke about stealing Mark's wife when he can drop another one 30 minutes later? Oh look, matching Christmas jumpers – how cute. Most of the funny in this movie comes from certain 'episodes' as opposed to the dialogue. I loved the ski trip and Bridget's 'magic mushrooms' in Thailand. But, when the characters are actually talking to each other, they just aren't that funny. Most of the jokes are reruns from the first movie that feel stale. The naughty jokes are kicked up a notch but everyone in my packed theater, including me, either grimaced or sat stone-faced through most of them. Note to filmmakers: dirty has to actually BE funny to be funny.

This feels like a movie about a woman made by men who think wet clothes, girl-on-girl action and butt close-ups get it done. I read some interviews that said that Renee would only do a second film if it took care of Bridget and held up the standards of the first. I almost wonder if someone slid her this script on the first day of shooting as a rewrite once she'd already signed on the dotted line. This felt like a bleached, harsher version of the first– the warmth is gone. I know there was a different director and I really don't think the new kid gets why Bridget was/is such a phenomenon. As much as I was looking forward to this film, I wish they'd never done it.

Oh, and also, as a P.S. – if I was a Thai woman right now, I'd be suing Working Title and Miramax for defamation of character for their version of 'Fun with Stereotypes'.

I saw the first Bridget Jones movie and thought it was around average. My Mum loved it, and when the DVD for Bridget Jones:The Edge Of Reason came out on DVD, she went i bought it right away. So, without much hope or agenda, I decided to watch it.

This film is absolutely AWFUL. The story bares no resemblance to the book, and the story was unbelievable. Poor acting all around. Why didn't they get the director from the first film back? She was marginally better.

Do yourself a favor, and just read the book, which is actually witty and well-written.