Actually, it’s the plot of the third book, and there is a reason why they didn’t go with the third book for the third movie. Probably should have scrapped that storyline altogether.
- Status
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
I know, I debated whether to call it the third book or the fourth book as the ‘Mad about the Boy’ /‘BJ’s Baby’ timeline is a mess!
I read ‘Mad about the Boy’ then got incredibly confused by the premise of the third film (and the book that was written as a tie-in but after the film
), so I think of the third book as the fourth book/instalment in terms of chronology otherwise we’re into the realms of time travel!Exactly! If I remember correctly, Helen Fielding lost her husband (it might have been cancer), and her way of dealing with that was to kill Mark Darcy. But fans absolutely hated it.
In a previous incarnation, were you Mysterious Mystery, the ageing glamour model who knew (and had shagged) everyone from Hollyoaks to Hollywood? And claimed to be Tom Hiddlestone’s fuckbuddy?Sounds like me on Tattle ...
---
Also like me on Tattle ...
---
Oh snap!!!The good old days of hmmmm (I was convinced).
Tattle had our own hmmmmm, Tom hiddlestone, page 3 model, Angelina Jolie's lover (i was not convinced - probably just an Alan the accounts assistant)
Geez, I couldn’t keep up! So many stars, parties and NDAs
Because it was tit. The thing with the original books was BJ was a relatable, if dim, single woman with a tit job who struggles to get a boyfriend (most women have been there at some point). Fine to kill Darcy off, but because he’s a ‘top international human rights lawyer’, he leaves Bridget loaded so she doesn’t have to worry about money and she can solely fret about the kids getting nits (fair enough) and how to cook spag bol (if you can’t boil a pan of spaghetti in your 40’s just lie down and give it up, you fuckwit). There’s also about 4 or 5 alternative timelines, one of where the baby is Daniel’s. It’s like the MCU, but for middle class white women who shop at Joules and Boden and piss about painting antique furniture with Annie Sloane while the kids are with the nanny.
---
.
I remember reading it and chronologically it didn’t make sense. Her kids were primary school age and she was mid 40s which meant she would have waited approximately 6 years before starting a family. I just don’t think a woman in her mid 30s would risk waiting so long before starting a family. Just my opinion though and it was a ridiculous storyline.
I know it’s a harsh, but when an author has been through some sort of trauma, and they try and incorporate it soon after into one of their novels, the resulting work is usually a bit tit. I’m sure it’s cathartic for them, but it needs a bit of distance and thought to do it properly. Marian Keyes did it with one of her Walsh sisters books and it was bleeping terrible. The character was completely different to previous books and the storyline was almost non existent.
Was that the sequel to Rachel’s holiday? I couldn’t get into that at all but I loved the first book.
No it was Helen’s story, where she’s a private detective with depression. I think it was her first book after she’d taken a break after having severe depression and suicidal urges. Hate to say it, but her books have really declined in quality since then. I also loved Rachel’s Holiday, but the sequel was just ‘meh’.
Definitely not an ex-glamour model. If I took my top off, it would look more like this (ha ha - I wish) ...
I was so looking forward to a book about Helen as she was such a great character in the other Walsh books, but I don't think I even made it past the first few chapters
Same! She totally changed the character of Helen to something unrecognisable! I would have rather had no book about her than that one.
I felt the same about Rachel. I wish she’d not written a sequel because it ruined the first book in a way.
I stopped reading the sequel to Rachel’s holiday. I rarely give up on a book, I thought it was rubbish.
The 2nd film is my favourite! The third was absolute plop to me.
I never watched the third because I had no interest in a film where Bridget and Mark hadn’t kept their happy ending!
re Walsh sisters, I love all the books and I love Marian but right from the start she’s always struggled to keep the same personality in each sister’s book as what she has given them previously. They always have the same voice and vibe, you could put chapters from one sister’s book into another and not know.
I love Anna’s book, for instance, but she doesn’t feel like the Anna we knew from earlier books.
You're right. It seems like she's got a team of writers working on them and they're not talking to each other.
I think the Bridget Jones books were very much of their time and have aged quite badly. I'm not sure they'll be literary classics. The same with the films. I won't be bothering with this next one. Anyway, all I see when I see Hugh Grant these days is an Oompa Loompa.
I hated Bridget Jones from the get-go. Really badly written, full of cliches and just dull as tit.
- Status