Jeanskynebu the audience applauded

Ketrivie It isn't all that great, actually. Really cheesy and very predicable of how certain scenes are gonna turn play out. However, I guess that's the charm of it all, because I would consider this one of my guilty pleasures.

StyleSk8r At first rather annoying in its heavy emphasis on reenactments, this movie ultimately proves fascinating, simply because the complicated, highly dramatic tale it tells still almost defies belief.

Phillipa Strong acting helps the film overcome an uncertain premise and create characters that hold our attention absolutely.

daoldiges I hardly know where to begin to write a review of this film. To me this film fell short on so many levels that I cannot help but conclude that even the writers and craftspeople who worked on it didn't really care about it. I mean really care about it. I think the original was such a big hit that they all just went through the motions here hoping for a 'goodwill' paycheck. Therefor I refuse to spend for time on this review than the artists did on this project. As such I will just say that the script was extremely cliched, misogynistic, predictable, and dated.

Howlin Wolf People who think 'use-by-dates' on condoms don't mean anything are why we have a population problem!In the past, it was easy enough to cheer for Bridget, because she was positioned as the 'plucky underdog' - but I don't ever remember her being as dumb as in her first visit to the doctor's office... If you're 43 and you don't understand the finer points of conception (or how foetal alcohol syndrome works, for that matter), you're less of an underdog, and more of a simpleton! No wonder the biggest comedic weapon that Emma Thompson employs here is to roll her eyes... she's mirroring what the reaction of every right-thinking audience member should be.It's strange when Richard Curtis writes Bridget better for the screen than her own creator does!Having said all of this in criticism, if you treasure Bridget Jones as a character, then I don't think any of this will bother you. She has to work harder to win my sympathy, though, and this time - in contrast to the previous two films - she didn't get much of it.

stevecramer-27727 Hate this movie. How dare it steal my life, time and money.I really liked the actors but the writers and director are hacks and are squarely the blame. Sharon Maguire and Helen Fielding are horrid: truly.This pile of cellophane hit it's mark on opening week-end...its target market saw it and that was the end of that.Sorry but the British culture and language really is insufferably bad and 50 years of trying to understand British humor is a useless excise.Being a British woman's movie aside, Renée Zellweger was lovely as always and the men in the movie were simply left with little to say or do; it's a criminally bad deal for all the men characters, sorry to say. It might of helped the movie but I question that. Its very hard to come up with a worse movie to compare it with...so I gave up; I hated this movie and mad I paid money and my time to witness it.

single_in_in With this movie we get a since of closers you did not with the last one and adding a baby in always makes things alittle bette. Bridget has grown I mean it's been years since the first movie has come out. We now find one character is no longer in the movie and Ben replaced with a much better looking and younger fella. And there is familiar faces as well. I loved this one just as much if not more than the first 2.