The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
I went to see Bridget Jones’s Diary the other day, expecting to see a modern classic after reading a number of reviews praising the film. Instead, what I saw was a film, containing just about everything I could hate about a film. If given the choice of whether to watch it again or be cast into a sandstorm after having my eyelids cut off, I’d opt for the latter.
First of all there’s Rene Zellwegger. I’ve seen her in other films and she has proven to be a reasonable actress, but she spends most of her time in this film with a permanently pained expression on her face. Perhaps the reason for this lies behind her exaggerated British accent, which on a number of occasions sounded like she’d been taking lessons from an ex BBC news presenter from the 60’s. It could be that Zellwegger felt uncomfortable playing an unbelievably dumb character, which is what Bridget seems to come across as, although the film is based upon a real person’s diary. I’m sure they could have easily found a talented British actress (there are many) to play the part and perhaps give them their big break. But no, this would be too much of a financial risk wouldn’t it? Better to cast a popular American actress in the role, so as to increase the chance of earning money. You don’t get American films with the same worries, casting British actors and actresses. We should be more proud of our films and encourage the development of our own great actors and actresses.
What about the plot? Well, it’s the usual romantic plot shenanigans, which I don’t mind as long as something new, original or inventive is done to it so as to make it seem fresh. In this case, however, nothing much of this sort is done, and you almost feel you’ve been blessed with some kind of psychic gift as you easily predict the events that unfold in front of you. Also, the fact that little is done makes the film feel uninvolving and hollow, which is further emphasised by the poor attempts to make it interesting, such as an American style fight towards the end. There’s an amusing but pointless and undeveloped sub-plot regarding Bridget’s parents, which I’m not quite sure is there, except to emphasise the saccharine sweet idea that people are destined to love only certain people.
The one thing I will say is well done in the film is the humorous moments, but these aren’t enough to save it. In fact the film is basically a series of sketches, with too little serious moments, and closely resembles a cheap British sitcom in several ways. For example, Bridget’s parents, their friends and her friends all feel like they’ve been plucked straight out of a sitcom. They’re all thin characters provided with certain catch phrases or ways behaving that they repeat throughout the film, such as the uncle, the journalist friend and the gay friend.
As for the soundtrack, well think of at least ten of the most obvious romantic songs you can, and I bet most of them are in this film.
There’s also the way in which London is portrayed as some kind of romantic winter wonderland and the countryside as a place always sunny. However, I feel enough has been said about this in other reviews I’ve read.
I could probably go on for many more pages about what I disliked about this film, although I’d doubt anyone would read it. All I can say is that this film really disappointed me, representing a prime example of why the British film industry is creatively struggling at the moment (we didn’t even get a nomination for Cannes). I don’t often beg, but please, please, please can we see some original and great films produced in the future – you know the kind we have proven capable of in the past.
First of all there’s Rene Zellwegger. I’ve seen her in other films and she has proven to be a reasonable actress, but she spends most of her time in this film with a permanently pained expression on her face. Perhaps the reason for this lies behind her exaggerated British accent, which on a number of occasions sounded like she’d been taking lessons from an ex BBC news presenter from the 60’s. It could be that Zellwegger felt uncomfortable playing an unbelievably dumb character, which is what Bridget seems to come across as, although the film is based upon a real person’s diary. I’m sure they could have easily found a talented British actress (there are many) to play the part and perhaps give them their big break. But no, this would be too much of a financial risk wouldn’t it? Better to cast a popular American actress in the role, so as to increase the chance of earning money. You don’t get American films with the same worries, casting British actors and actresses. We should be more proud of our films and encourage the development of our own great actors and actresses.
What about the plot? Well, it’s the usual romantic plot shenanigans, which I don’t mind as long as something new, original or inventive is done to it so as to make it seem fresh. In this case, however, nothing much of this sort is done, and you almost feel you’ve been blessed with some kind of psychic gift as you easily predict the events that unfold in front of you. Also, the fact that little is done makes the film feel uninvolving and hollow, which is further emphasised by the poor attempts to make it interesting, such as an American style fight towards the end. There’s an amusing but pointless and undeveloped sub-plot regarding Bridget’s parents, which I’m not quite sure is there, except to emphasise the saccharine sweet idea that people are destined to love only certain people.
The one thing I will say is well done in the film is the humorous moments, but these aren’t enough to save it. In fact the film is basically a series of sketches, with too little serious moments, and closely resembles a cheap British sitcom in several ways. For example, Bridget’s parents, their friends and her friends all feel like they’ve been plucked straight out of a sitcom. They’re all thin characters provided with certain catch phrases or ways behaving that they repeat throughout the film, such as the uncle, the journalist friend and the gay friend.
As for the soundtrack, well think of at least ten of the most obvious romantic songs you can, and I bet most of them are in this film.
There’s also the way in which London is portrayed as some kind of romantic winter wonderland and the countryside as a place always sunny. However, I feel enough has been said about this in other reviews I’ve read.
I could probably go on for many more pages about what I disliked about this film, although I’d doubt anyone would read it. All I can say is that this film really disappointed me, representing a prime example of why the British film industry is creatively struggling at the moment (we didn’t even get a nomination for Cannes). I don’t often beg, but please, please, please can we see some original and great films produced in the future – you know the kind we have proven capable of in the past.
i havnt wathed the film but i agree that they shouldnt have used an american to play a english role. it never happens the other way round does it?
No, you're wrong.
I went to see Bridget Jones’s Diary the other day, expecting to see a modern classic after reading a number of reviews praising the film. Instead, what I saw was a film, containing just about everything I could hate about a film. If given the choice of whether to watch it again or be cast into a sandstorm after having my eyelids cut off, I’d opt for the latter.
First of all there’s Rene Zellwegger. I’ve seen her in other films and she has proven to be a reasonable actress, but she spends most of her time in this film with a permanently pained expression on her face. Perhaps the reason for this lies behind her exaggerated British accent, which on a number of occasions sounded like she’d been taking lessons from an ex BBC news presenter from the 60’s. It could be that Zellwegger felt uncomfortable playing an unbelievably dumb character, which is what Bridget seems to come across as, although the film is based upon a real person’s diary. I’m sure they could have easily found a talented British actress (there are many) to play the part and perhaps give them their big break. But no, this would be too much of a financial risk wouldn’t it? Better to cast a popular American actress in the role, so as to increase the chance of earning money. You don’t get American films with the same worries, casting British actors and actresses. We should be more proud of our films and encourage the development of our own great actors and actresses.
What about the plot? Well, it’s the usual romantic plot shenanigans, which I don’t mind as long as something new, original or inventive is done to it so as to make it seem fresh. In this case, however, nothing much of this sort is done, and you almost feel you’ve been blessed with some kind of psychic gift as you easily predict the events that unfold in front of you. Also, the fact that little is done makes the film feel uninvolving and hollow, which is further emphasised by the poor attempts to make it interesting, such as an American style fight towards the end. There’s an amusing but pointless and undeveloped sub-plot regarding Bridget’s parents, which I’m not quite sure is there, except to emphasise the saccharine sweet idea that people are destined to love only certain people.
The one thing I will say is well done in the film is the humorous moments, but these aren’t enough to save it. In fact the film is basically a series of sketches, with too little serious moments, and closely resembles a cheap British sitcom in several ways. For example, Bridget’s parents, their friends and her friends all feel like they’ve been plucked straight out of a sitcom. They’re all thin characters provided with certain catch phrases or ways behaving that they repeat throughout the film, such as the uncle, the journalist friend and the gay friend.
As for the soundtrack, well think of at least ten of the most obvious romantic songs you can, and I bet most of them are in this film.
There’s also the way in which London is portrayed as some kind of romantic winter wonderland and the countryside as a place always sunny. However, I feel enough has been said about this in other reviews I’ve read.
I could probably go on for many more pages about what I disliked about this film, although I’d doubt anyone would read it. All I can say is that this film really disappointed me, representing a prime example of why the British film industry is creatively struggling at the moment (we didn’t even get a nomination for Cannes). I don’t often beg, but please, please, please can we see some original and great films produced in the future – you know the kind we have proven capable of in the past.
First of all there’s Rene Zellwegger. I’ve seen her in other films and she has proven to be a reasonable actress, but she spends most of her time in this film with a permanently pained expression on her face. Perhaps the reason for this lies behind her exaggerated British accent, which on a number of occasions sounded like she’d been taking lessons from an ex BBC news presenter from the 60’s. It could be that Zellwegger felt uncomfortable playing an unbelievably dumb character, which is what Bridget seems to come across as, although the film is based upon a real person’s diary. I’m sure they could have easily found a talented British actress (there are many) to play the part and perhaps give them their big break. But no, this would be too much of a financial risk wouldn’t it? Better to cast a popular American actress in the role, so as to increase the chance of earning money. You don’t get American films with the same worries, casting British actors and actresses. We should be more proud of our films and encourage the development of our own great actors and actresses.
What about the plot? Well, it’s the usual romantic plot shenanigans, which I don’t mind as long as something new, original or inventive is done to it so as to make it seem fresh. In this case, however, nothing much of this sort is done, and you almost feel you’ve been blessed with some kind of psychic gift as you easily predict the events that unfold in front of you. Also, the fact that little is done makes the film feel uninvolving and hollow, which is further emphasised by the poor attempts to make it interesting, such as an American style fight towards the end. There’s an amusing but pointless and undeveloped sub-plot regarding Bridget’s parents, which I’m not quite sure is there, except to emphasise the saccharine sweet idea that people are destined to love only certain people.
The one thing I will say is well done in the film is the humorous moments, but these aren’t enough to save it. In fact the film is basically a series of sketches, with too little serious moments, and closely resembles a cheap British sitcom in several ways. For example, Bridget’s parents, their friends and her friends all feel like they’ve been plucked straight out of a sitcom. They’re all thin characters provided with certain catch phrases or ways behaving that they repeat throughout the film, such as the uncle, the journalist friend and the gay friend.
As for the soundtrack, well think of at least ten of the most obvious romantic songs you can, and I bet most of them are in this film.
There’s also the way in which London is portrayed as some kind of romantic winter wonderland and the countryside as a place always sunny. However, I feel enough has been said about this in other reviews I’ve read.
I could probably go on for many more pages about what I disliked about this film, although I’d doubt anyone would read it. All I can say is that this film really disappointed me, representing a prime example of why the British film industry is creatively struggling at the moment (we didn’t even get a nomination for Cannes). I don’t often beg, but please, please, please can we see some original and great films produced in the future – you know the kind we have proven capable of in the past.