Bridget Jones: The Edge of Reason is about as pointless as bicycle tires on an SUV.
Tools:
Recommend review to a friend »
Here is yet another prime example of the Hollywood cash cow. If the first film was a big success, given any particular audience, then it is an absolute must to make a second movie regardless if the story had nowhere else to go. Personally, I enjoyed the first film, "Bridget Jones´s Diary"; however, the second film, "Bridget Jones: The Edge of Reason" is about as pointless as bicycle tires on an SUV. In all fairness, I think the filmmakers had to be on the edge of reason to think it was feasible to make a sequel. After all, the first film had a warm ending, it closed all its plot holes, and pretty much ended up being your average, generic romantic comedy. Not that the first film in being average is a bad thing; it´s just that making a continuing story on an average romantic comedy is beyond reason.
"Bridget Jones: The Edge of Reason" picks up its story six weeks after the first film where Mark Darcy (Colin Firth) commits himself to a relationship with Bridget Jones (Renee Zellweger). As in the first film, Bridget is constantly narrating her diary throughout the film. She still works as a television journalist and her colleagues still manage to find predicaments that portray Ms. Jones as a comedy of errors. It is true that Bridget is the comic relief of the film all on her own; however, the jokes are mainly reruns that we saw in the first film. This is not to say that there are not some warm moments through the story, and some of them are moderately delightful; but for the most part, it is nothing original because it just rehashes what we already experienced in the first film.
As the film moves on, you begin to realize that it feels more like an elongated, extended ending to the first film and not a second film by any means. A second film should at least offer a substantially different plot and possibly a completely different approach to the film´s outcome; instead, we just get more of the same. As it is, many of us know the rule in a Hollywood sequel, and that is for the sequel to be bigger, brighter, louder, and far more convincing than the first. Unfortunately, this sequel is about as bland as milk toast. You get a few warm and laughable moments, but you soon realize the substance is as dull as taking out the kitchen trash.
As with the first film, we have the same group of characters including Daniel Cleaver (Hugh Grant). Daniel is still about as sneaky and underhanded as he was in the first film and almost manages to get Bridget in his bed while on a journalist assignment in Thailand. What´s even funnier is Daniel and Mark wind up getting into another fight as they did in the first movie. This time the fight is a bit longer, but it still winds up being nothing we have not already seen before. Again, the story offers nothing new or fresh, just a repeat of the same plot with a few new locations. In fact, the only new element is the character of Rebecca (Jacinda Barrett), who plays as an intrusive character between Bridget and Mark. Bridget begins to form a sense of jealousy as she assumes Mark is having an affair with Rebecca, and rightfully so because Rebecca is by far a more stunning woman than Ms. Jones is.
Had this film been keener on delivering a story with a different twist, or at least something original to offer to the previous plot, we may have had a winner. Instead, it is just a giant, dull continuation of what was offered before. There are a few warm moments, a few laughs, but, unfortunately, you may find yourself as I did looking at your watch after thirty-minutes into the movie. Granted, the film is based off of Bridget Jones´s diary, but that is no excuse for the filmmakers at least to tell Bridget her story ended in the first film. I think it would have been easier to make this movie the same time the first film was made, and then wait years later to release it as a version with an extended ending. Nevertheless, I think it´s a film its fan base will get enough out of and easy enough for them to enjoy, but they won´t feel anything is new and improved. Fact is, the film is an example of a movie that was simply made for the pure draw of the dollars. It offers nothing fresh and is about as rewarding as a television rerun of any given sitcom.
Average user rating (1-5):
[release]14627[/release]