So different from film I saw ages ago. Nether I thought I will read the book.

My thoughts are, why the hell she is feeling fat when she is just 56kg. Probably crazy 90's and the cult of models. Thank God I was too young to live that craziness.

I loved the dedication, meaning not having the mother Brigit had, crazy woman.

All in all very enjoyable reading and loved it.

pretty much on par with how i felt for the movie, really enjoyed it. i enjoy love triangles so much because the drama is good. the angst and jealousy this has!! bridget is also a really entertaining protagonist. daniel is a piece of shit that i love to hate and i kinda need mark… you guys know i love a nerdy man that basically has a stick up his ass. fun read! don’t think i’ll continue though cus im not about to read about a 10 year love triangle like that’s just insane.

*Listened to via audiobook on BorrowBox!*

This took me a lot longer than anticipated to finish but I loved the narrator, her pitch and accent really brought Bridget's character to life. This was one of those books that I used to see pop up so much when I used to be a charity shop books volunteer. Written in diary format, Bridget notes her life living in her thirties and struggling with romance, working jobs, social communications and her annoyance in particular towards her Mum. If anything, this book had a mix of cigarettes, wine and a number of encounters with a certain Mark Darcy. Even though the listen was fun, I couldn't relate a lot to the characters or story-line. If the series however does get better, I may carry on just to see what happens next!

კითხვის დროს დავლიე 5 ჭიქა ყავა (ჯამში). მოვწიე 3 კოლოფი სიგარეტი (კითხვის დროს გამოწვეულ სევდას ვგუდავდი), და ვიფიქრე ათას დებილობაზე, რაც კი შეიძლებოდა. (მაგალითად, ბრიჯიტის მესამე ფილმი რა ყლეობაა.)

პ.ს. ალალად უნდა ვთქვა, რომ ეს ის შემთხვევაა, როცა წიგნი ფილმთან ახლოსაც ვერ მივა. :(

Hmm. Think will cross last bit out as contains mild accusation of sexual harassment whereas v. much enjoying being sexually harassed by Daniel Cleaver.

For one of my book challenges, I needed to read a Jane Austin-inspired book. I remember enjoying Bridget Jones’s Diary, a book I read when it first came out 25 years ago. So I decided to reread it, and see whether or not it holds up a generation later.

Sadly no. No, it does not.

There are some parts of Bridget Jones’s Diary that still work. The judgment and frustration that “singletons” feel at the hands of their “smug married” friends and family is pretty timeliness. Her wild flights of imagination are amusing. And there are some parts that are almost still funny—no one knows how to program their VCR—even though they feel trapped in amber from a 1990s Seinfeld episode.

But most of Bridget Jones’s Diary is hopelessly dated and often cringey. Her obsession with her weight is unhealthy. Her lists of her weight, alcohol, cigarettes, and calories consumed gets old. This book may have originated the gay best friend trope, but it’s jarring every single time she calls him a “homosexual” like he’s some exotic creature. The plot line involving Bridget’s mother and Julio is just odd. Worst of all, like many good romcoms there’s a love triangle here, but this one sucks. The best parts of  Pride and Prejudice is the banter between Elizabeth and Mr. Darcy, but Mark Darcy is rarely in this book until the final third. Instead, Bridget spends most of her time obsessing over her relationship with her boss, Daniel. Daniel is all class, using the work e-mail to call her a “frigid cow,” and tell her “I like your tits in that top.” Instead of going to HR about his sexual harassment, she STARTS sleeping with him.

Regular readers of my reviews know that I’m always on the lookout for that rare situation: the movie that’s better than the book. I keep a running list of them (there aren’t many) on my profile page. But onto that list I now add Bridget Jones’s Diary, a flawed book that was made into a better movie thanks to great performances by Renée Zellweger, Colin Firth, and Hugh Grant. Bridget Jones’s Diary helped reinvigorated the romcom book genre. But that genre has grown and evolved and passed this book by. It’s just so vapid and cringey that I struggle to remember what I liked about it the first time. Not recommended.

Original rating: 4 stars
Rating I really want to give it: 2 stars
New rating: averaged to 3 stars

Might be more of a 3.5 stars? I read this because I am COMPLETELY OBSESSED with the movies and decided I should probably read the book if I want to be a ~tRuE fAn~ and this was very cute! Bridget's voice was hiiiiiilarious and the boys were mega dreamy. However, I did find myself to be a bit underwhelmed by this just because I kept comparing it to the movie. So maybe read this before seeing the movie if you can help it. Other than that though mega cute!

This was an interesting book. I like when you are able to see something right from the narrators point of view. I think some things in the book were a little hard to understand. I think that all the words should have been written out, I know it's supposed to be a Diary, but I think that everyone writes differently. This made it a little hard to follow at times.

“I will not fall for any of the following: alcoholics, workaholics, commitment phobics, people with girlfriends or wives, misogynists, megalomanics, chauvists, emotional fuckwits or freeloaders, perverts.”

Days it took to read the book: 1 (v.g), Times I laughed out loud: 7, times I re-watched the lake scene from Pride and Prejudice: 5, Times I thought maybe I should get my colors done: 2

I read this book for the first time back in 2009 and since the new movie (thankfully not based on the terrible, terrible "Bridget Jones: Mad about the boy" book) came out, I thought I'd give it a re-read.

Bridget is a 30-something Singleton with a few extra pounds, a mother going through a mid-life crisis, and a bunch of dysfunctional friends who are looking for love, a better career, and the perfect diet. Let me start by saying how much I love Bridget Jones. She is more on the ditzy side, always losing her things and forever lost in daydreaming but still comes out as a genuinely nice person. I think this is the important thing with characters like Bridget (or Becky from the shopaholic series). They might appear selfish, shallow, and deluded at first glance, but they are loyal friends, witty and funny in their own way, and just plain nice.

The structure of the book is loosely based on Pride and Prejudice and I really like how Fielding adapted in modern times Jane Austen's formula of girl meeting douchy guy and falling for him, girl realizing that douchy guy is very douchy, girl finding better looking, richer, nicer guy and staying together forever. Daniel was the right amount of sleazy and charming and Mark Darcy was an adorable dork with very poor social skills, just like I would expect Mr. Darcy to be today.

This is the perfect beach book meant to be enjoyed while drinking a bloody Mary.

I read this book a number of years ago after it was recommended to me by a friend and ever since that moment I have been wishing that I could go back in time and smack her over the head and tell her to take the book and shove it.

I found the book to be deeply irritating with a central character that was nether funny nor likable. In any way shape or form. In fact Bridget Jones has got to be one of the worst literary characters I have ever come across as she is in turns a moaning, whiny, boring, inane, deeply shallow, smug and extremely tedious individual.

In the course of reading this book I found myself not caring about her or her irritating 'problems' and at many points I simply rolled my eyes at her stupid behaviour which in turn made me unable to warm to any of the other characters (although I think that was also down to the fact that they don't have an original bone in their fictional bodies) in a story that is essentially nothing more than girl meets boy, girl has difficulty getting boy, has a dalliance with someone else and then eventually get's the boy. With a lot of unnecessary profanity, naval gazing and whinging along the way.

It's chick lit of the worst kind and how anyone can hold it up as a book about the difficulties faced by modern (feminist) women is beyond me. If I ever came across a 'Bridget' in real life then I would be deeply concerned for the human race as all the book is concerned about is appearance, getting a man, swearing and sex.

Completely devoid of humanity substance and totally misses the point about the troubles of dealing with the difficulties faced by real modern women in everyday life. Best avoided!

Το αρχέτυπο της chic-lit, η ταινία ήταν μάλλον καλύτερη από το βιβλίο, αν και σιγά την ταινία, εθνικό σκάνδαλο που πήραν μια Αμερικανίδα να υποδυθεί μια σχεδόν εθνική-Αγγλίδα-ηρωίδα, λες και χάθηκαν οι ξενέρωτες, ανέραστες Αγγλίδες, στην χειρότερη περίπτωση, θα μπορούσε να την υποδυθεί η Ματίνα Μανταρινάκη που ήταν πολύ καλή ως Lady Petoula Rufingstone που θυμίζει εμφανισιακά Αγγλίδα ("ε βέβαια, γιατί όλες οι Αγγλίδες είναι σαν γεροντοκόρες"), και μιλάει σωστά Αγγλικά, με το σωστό accent ("ε βέβαια, από μικρή ήταν σπασικάκι"). Μπορεί το βιβλίο να μην ήταν "excellent, marvelous, absolutely fabulous", αλλά κανά δυο χάχανα, μια ανασφαλής κεντρική ηρωίδα (overeater, μανιώδης καπνίστρια, οριακά αλκοολική, αλλά δυο-δυο τους χτυπούσε τους γκόμενους, ο ένας το αφεντικό της, ο άλλος από καλή οικογένεια/δικηγόρος), οριακά παίρνει 3αρι.

I must confess I watched the Bridget Jones films before reading the books.
This was light hearted amusement for me.
I could relate to a lot of Bridget's thoughts and habits, but I wouldn't say it was groundbreaking. If anything it was probably a bit too close to home for me to really enjoy - I prefer books with more escapism or surrealism.
But if you are looking for something that won't strain your brain too much and will offer you a few chuckles then this book is all you need.
Still gonna read the other two though as I own them so I might as well.

Not my cuppa tea.

I love reading Pride and Prejudice variations, and I picked this up because it's touted as a P&P modernization. While I see the parallels in the plot, Bridget Jones (the character) is no Elizabeth Bennet.

In fact, all of the characters in this book seem to act like 16-year-olds, including Bridget's parents and their friends. The lone exception is Mark Darcy, a wealthy and successful barrister, who is the only responsible adult in sight. I had trouble liking any of the rest of them, including Bridget herself.

She's a whiny flake, a chain-smoking, insecure adolescent emotionally (in her thirties chronologically) who is obsessed with her weight and with having a boyfriend. (Of course, considering her nightmare of a mother, it's no wonder she's a psychological mess.) Fitzwilliam Darcy's fascination with Elizabeth makes sense at the end of P&P, but Mark's interest in Bridget defies explanation.

I admit that Bridget's writing style in her "diary" is witty. She has a way with phrasing that is creative and revealing. You can understand why she could work for a publishing company. While it doesn't matter, it's actually not plausible as a true diary. The timing of some entries are only 1-2 minutes apart (in less time than it would take to write them), and her drunken entries are phonetically garbled as if she were speaking rather than writing. It's an interesting and effective narrative device, and perhaps that's the reason for the book's appeal.

But I cringed as often as I chuckled at her antics. She's careless. She drinks too much. She makes unrealistic resolutions and then goes into crushing self-flagellation when she fails. She seeks her friends' advice about everything. She plays childish games to get her boss's attention, even after it's obvious he's an ass. This is a grown woman??

This was first published in 1996 and, while it was a contemporary novel then, it seems dated to me now, 20 years later. It's also veddy, veddy British with references that a Yank like myself can't fully appreciate. I admit that I was never an unattached thirty-something, so perhaps I can't relate to the desperation people in that age group felt in 1996 (and perhaps still do).

I had not cared for the movie (well, aside from looking at Colin Firth and Hugh Grant), which I saw many years ago, but I know movies are often very different from and virtually never as good as the books they're based on, so I was willing to give this a chance. Sorry. I just don't get it.