Bridget Jones Baby

  • Thread starter Thread starter Anglewannabe
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
A

Anglewannabe

Guest
I went to see Bridget Jones Baby last night mainly to get out of the house. And honestly, it was a disappointment. I saw the first movie Bridget Jones Diary and I remember liking it. I can’t help but think the more I grow in faith, the more I see things differently. Here are my complaints

1-) I see nothing comedic about a women not knowing who the father of her baby is

2-) As much as I believe in forgiveness and reconciliation, I don’t think when a man finds out he is not the father, it is healthy for him to become friends with the father (spoiler)

3-) It gives women a VERY unrealistic view of men ie that they are supportive when they know they may not be the father. Come on, wouldn’t a real man feel betrayed and no matter what be mad at the woman?

4-) Bridget had a lot of ‘supportive’ friends and family which IMO is not really support. A supportive friend would not excuse her behavior as ‘everyone does it’. A supportive friend would encourage her to go to confession and seek God’s forgiveness and healing and encourage her to repent.

So, I guess I just got another lesson in how following Jesus means not fitting in with the world

Angie
 
Ugh!

This is why I don’t like chick flicks.

So vapid and condescending.

Even the ad for this movie is cringeworthy.
 
I remember reading an interview with the author of the books that she deliberately chose (in the sequels) to not let Bridget “live happily ever after” because that was unrealistic.

:rolleyes: Kind of ruined the whole hopeful part of the books and the film, don’t you think? That despite our flaws we can find someone who loves us for who we are, that good intentions matter even if not executed to perfection?

The author’s other books are not very good, IMO. I don’t know if this sequel was taken directly from one of her books or not, but it has that same kind of pessimism. I was appalled just seeing the ads as well and will skip the movie.

In my mind, Bridget and Mark end up together, stay together, the end. Maybe have kids, maybe not, I don’t know. But they certainly don’t keep on acting like the worst teenagers and early 20-somethings well into their 40s (or 50s!) I’m really, really confused by movies that continue to glorify this kind of behavior. (In the first film, wasn’t it a major flaw of the Hugh Grant character?)
 
pensmama87 said:
I remember reading an interview with the author of the books that she deliberately chose (in the sequels) to not let Bridget “live happily ever after” because that was unrealistic.

:rolleyes: Kind of ruined the whole hopeful part of the books and the film, don’t you think? That despite our flaws we can find someone who loves us for who we are, that good intentions matter even if not executed to perfection?

The author’s other books are not very good, IMO. I don’t know if this sequel was taken directly from one of her books or not, but it has that same kind of pessimism. I was appalled just seeing the ads as well and will skip the movie.

In my mind, Bridget and Mark end up together, stay together, the end. Maybe have kids, maybe not, I don’t know. But they certainly don’t keep on acting like the worst teenagers and early 20-somethings well into their 40s (or 50s!) I’m really, really confused by movies that continue to glorify this kind of behavior. (In the first film, wasn’t it a major flaw of the Hugh Grant character?)
Click to expand...
Exactly. It’s a “do what you want whenever you want and everything will be ok and others have to just lump it” kind of movie that negatively forms our children. IT"S HORRIBLE.
 
Anglewannabe said:
I went to see Bridget Jones Baby last night mainly to get out of the house. And honestly, it was a disappointment. I saw the first movie Bridget Jones Diary and I remember liking it. I can’t help but think the more I grow in faith, the more I see things differently. Here are my complaints

1-) I see nothing comedic about a women not knowing who the father of her baby is

2-) As much as I believe in forgiveness and reconciliation, I don’t think when a man finds out he is not the father, it is healthy for him to become friends with the father (spoiler)

3-) It gives women a VERY unrealistic view of men ie that they are supportive when they know they may not be the father. Come on, wouldn’t a real man feel betrayed and no matter what be mad at the woman?

4-) Bridget had a lot of ‘supportive’ friends and family which IMO is not really support. A supportive friend would not excuse her behavior as ‘everyone does it’. A supportive friend would encourage her to go to confession and seek God’s forgiveness and healing and encourage her to repent.

So, I guess I just got another lesson in how following Jesus means not fitting in with the world

Angie
Click to expand...
The first two movies also were sinful for Catholics to watch:
Promoting and glorifying worldly vices of fornication, foul language, immodesty, impurity
 
The whole modern world believes: “Do whatever makes you happy.”

However, parents spend their whole lives teaching their children, “You can’t just do whatever you want and not face consequences. Sometimes wants are wrong. Sometimes the right thing is difficult to do, but that doesn’t mean you should not do the right thing.”

Jesus came to set us free,
“My Commandments are wide and easy for those who love Me.”

Jesus said, “He who sins is a slave to sin”.
Sin is very addictive like any substance.
It’s a person seeking the wrong kind of escape.
 
Looks exactly like “Mamma Mia.” Same exact plot.

Isn’t the movie pro-life? I’m not aware of too many movies where an ultrasound is prominently featured in the previews and choosing life is seen as a viable option. That’s bad? :confused:

Single mothers who choose life – even after sinful circumstances – SHOULD be supported. That’s what it means to be pro-life – at all stages of life. Whether it’s a good or bad movie is one thing. But shouldn’t choosing life be celebrated?
 
randomuser said:
Isn’t the movie pro-life?
Click to expand...
Yes, in it’s own subtle way, I think it is. The movie may be a “Sheep in wolf’s clothing” 🙂 (Note - that’s not a typo - that’s the opposite of a "Wolf in sheep’s clothing :)).
 
randomuser said:
Looks exactly like “Mamma Mia.” Same exact plot.

Isn’t the movie pro-life? I’m not aware of too many movies where an ultrasound is prominently featured in the previews and choosing life is seen as a viable option. That’s bad? :confused:

Single mothers who choose life – even after sinful circumstances – SHOULD be supported. That’s what it means to be pro-life – at all stages of life. Whether it’s a good or bad movie is one thing. But shouldn’t choosing life be celebrated?
Click to expand...
Well, tat’s a stretch. If she didn’t “keep” the baby, then there would be no plot. :rolleyes:
 
randomuser said:
Looks exactly like “Mamma Mia.” Same exact plot.

Isn’t the movie pro-life? I’m not aware of too many movies where an ultrasound is prominently featured in the previews and choosing life is seen as a viable option. That’s bad? :confused:

Single mothers who choose life – even after sinful circumstances – SHOULD be supported. That’s what it means to be pro-life – at all stages of life. Whether it’s a good or bad movie is one thing. But shouldn’t choosing life be celebrated?
Click to expand...
‘Bridget Jones’s Abortion’ probably has limited commercial appeal. The fact she kept the baby doesn’t salvage this dreck.
 
CthgeDelendaEst said:
‘Bridget Jones’s Abortion’ probably has limited commercial appeal. The fact she kept the baby doesn’t salvage this dreck.
Click to expand...
Exactly,

The Bible says, “One cannot do evil to do good.”
(the other content in the movie cannot make the whole movie “good”,… The glorification and promotion of worldly vices of fornication, immodesty and bad foul language.
 
Any other females out there besides me really despise how movies like this are thought of as “chick flicks”, and therefore are supposedly representative to society of your sex?

Saw the trailer, I don’t know how any woman could find the plot funny, or the character of Bridget Jones likable. In fact, the idea of the plot made me feel sick. It’s supposedly “funny” to screw around, get pregnant and not know who the father is? That’s a nightmare.
 
randomuser said:
Single mothers who choose life – even after sinful circumstances – SHOULD be supported. That’s what it means to be pro-life – at all stages of life. Whether it’s a good or bad movie is one thing. But shouldn’t choosing life be celebrated?
Click to expand...
If you read my original post, I clearly said the type of support these women need is to go to confession and be encouraged to repent. That type of support was NOT in the movie
 
AnneElizabeth said:
Any other females out there besides me really despise how movies like this are thought of as “chick flicks”, and therefore are supposedly representative to society of your sex?

Saw the trailer, I don’t know how any woman could find the plot funny, or the character of Bridget Jones likable. In fact, the idea of the plot made me feel sick. It’s supposedly “funny” to screw around, get pregnant and not know who the father is? That’s a nightmare.
Click to expand...
Yes, you are spot on.
 
AnneElizabeth said:
Any other females out there besides me really despise how movies like this are thought of as “chick flicks”, and therefore are supposedly representative to society of your sex?

Saw the trailer, I don’t know how any woman could find the plot funny, or the character of Bridget Jones likable. In fact, the idea of the plot made me feel sick. It’s supposedly “funny” to screw around, get pregnant and not know who the father is? That’s a nightmare.
Click to expand...
Yes, I feel exactly the same thing. The reality of this situation would indeed be a nightmare.
 
According to Life Site News, a pro-life website, Planned Parenthood was very disappointed that Bridget did not consider abortion in the movie, it was not an option offered in the movie. I would say that yes, the movie is pro-life. Thanks be to God.
 
AnneElizabeth said:
Any other females out there besides me really despise how movies like this are thought of as “chick flicks”, and therefore are supposedly representative to society of your sex?

Saw the trailer, I don’t know how any woman could find the plot funny, or the character of Bridget Jones likable. In fact, the idea of the plot made me feel sick. It’s supposedly “funny” to screw around, get pregnant and not know who the father is? That’s a nightmare.
Click to expand...
Yes, but luckily this movie appeared to bomb in the US, earning only 8 million, falling way behind Sully.
 
pensmama87 said:
I remember reading an interview with the author of the books that she deliberately chose (in the sequels) to not let Bridget “live happily ever after” because that was unrealistic.

:rolleyes: Kind of ruined the whole hopeful part of the books and the film, don’t you think? That despite our flaws we can find someone who loves us for who we are, that good intentions matter even if not executed to perfection?

The author’s other books are not very good, IMO. I don’t know if this sequel was taken directly from one of her books or not, but it has that same kind of pessimism. I was appalled just seeing the ads as well and will skip the movie.

In my mind, Bridget and Mark end up together, stay together, the end. Maybe have kids, maybe not, I don’t know. But they certainly don’t keep on acting like the worst teenagers and early 20-somethings well into their 40s (or 50s!) I’m really, really confused by movies that continue to glorify this kind of behavior. (In the first film, wasn’t it a major flaw of the Hugh Grant character?)
Click to expand...
I agree. In my mind the other two films don’t exist at all.

It’s funny, the first film came out before my oldest was born. Bridget is supposed to be my age (47) we were the same age in the first film. 😉

Poor Mark. He should have ended up with Aurelia in “Love Actually” (my favorite proposal scene when he goes to Portugal to ask for her hand). :love:
 
MaryHelp777 said:
The first two movies also were sinful for Catholics to watch:
Promoting and glorifying worldly vices of fornication, foul language, immodesty, impurity
Click to expand...
I didn’t know that watching any movie was sinful (apart from pornography “movie”)?
If that is the case,then Catholics would be very limited in what we can watch.
Like,we could only watch Disney and some other kids movie as most movies today contain non married sex,foul language etc.Even old movies would be “out” as they often contain themes around lust or having affairs (eg:Marilyn Monroe movies)…

Generally speaking,I havn’t seen the latest Bridget Jones but from the ones I saw I would choose Mark over Hugh Grants character any day;)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top