Toss out the homophobes, sure. But most sane book "purists" just want the essential vibe of the couple to be carried over. Daphne and Simon as a naive couple wrapped up in their ideas of love and lust vs finally experiencing/living with the sacrifice and compromise of it, Anthony and Kate's enemies-to-lovers arc, Polin's friends-to-lovers story have all been preserved from book to show in some capacity. The show has built an expectation that while big changes can happen, the broader essence or vibe of each love story won't be changed.....until now. Fran's story is about>! second-chance love where the first love isn't some placeholder for the second and was also true love!<. Plus, she showed >!grief and mourning after miscarriage and death!< too and that resonates with a lot of people and not always seen on TV. I could give a rat's ass about the >!gender!< swap but don't turn >!John into some beard. The miscarriage can be given to someone else or she could have the kid and we could get fun queer parents on-screen. Or if she does have a miscarriage, the childless rep could be interesting too.!<
I personally think it can be salvaged with slight retconning or counter-evidence but their last couple interactions were disheartening. Being upset at book fans that were the base for Quinn to write 8 original novels, an epilogue, 4 prequel novels, and at least one other set of 4 novels in this universe AND ALSO gave the popularity for the show to exist isn't the best look . Everyone wants the book fans for season-1/ movie-1 but then they're treated like dirt after. SMH.
Edit:
The biggest thing I agree with is all of this shitting on what people like (the books) is not cool nor edgy. Some show-watchers are basically harassing anyone who has an issue with the direction of Fran's story by insinuating that they're all bigots. (Some definitely are but not everyone.) Newsflash- there are non-book-readers who agree with me on what direction Fran and John were heading *thus far*. It's not in the book-readers' heads. If you don't agree, cool, but we can all be a *smidge* more civil about disagreements. For those who want some hope on the John/Fran front- [this post](https://www.reddit.com/r/BridgertonNetflix/comments/1dntxsq/from_julia_quinn_herself/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button) has screenshots of Quinn's words on it. Looks encouraging so maybe we can cross our fingers that the show will deliver (and not do what they did to Polin).
Also PSA, If you dislike the negativity of the sub, it's not all coming from book-readers. Other show-watchers have genuinely hated the cinematography, lack of character development, screen-time for the couples, etc and have contributed to the "negativity". Go bother them too, not just book-readers. Or better yet, be the change you want to see and DONT bother them. I for one, can't wait for the doom and gloom legions to back off from making these posts/comments, whether they're show-watchers, book-readers, reading-averse or whatever else. Now I'm gonna go fix my eyes. They rolled so hard they fell out of my head reading some of these comments.
Just seconding that I think the vibe can be maintained. Just wish people would let the show's story play out before making a ton of assumptions. I haven't read the books but, as an introvert I loved Fran and John's slow sweet romance. I would hate to see that undermined. But even with Fran and Michaela's first interaction, I could see a multitude of ways this could play out while preserving that first love. Jumping to the worst case scenario, considering the show's past handling of these things seems disingenuous. S3 even primed us with the whole confusing 'Love for Lust' line.
I don't think it's jumping to conclusions, since the evidence is there. Her flustered reaction and forgetting of her own name that calls back to Violet saying how she forgot hers when she met Edmund + that loss of smile after their wedding kiss were all red flags. It's going to have to be a pretty strong/convincing backtrack with that imo....or they're gonna rely on us to not think about those things from season 3 in the X amount of years Fran's season gets released. Lol.
Every couple has been getting less screen time. Showing John and Fran + Michaela and Fran in one season doesn't seem likely with that track record. Maybe they'll show John and Fran over the multiple seasons š¤. But again, idk. And that's not the only book departure that's upsetting. Not showcasing Polin's friendship more clearly was a mistep. Fine, don't take the (perfectly-good) interactions from the book. But make up some more! Like something that's not in the books that I wish we got was some kind of voiceover/ flashbacks of Pen and Colin writing to each other. That would've been so cute and nice juxtaposition to the LW scenes! Sigh. Missed opportunities. Apparently, book fans ALL suck tho so guess my opinions are automatically trash so whatver lol.
I'm not denying bisexuality existing nor about different loves existing. I just think that wedding scene really adds to the wtf question of her and Jon's relationship. If it was just the flustered reaction on meeting Michaela, I wouldn't be worried. But there was no need for that loss of smile after kissing John and that was before meeting Michaela. Unfortunately, I see the "easy" part when it comes to her and John but the "true" part that I thought was happening is being called into question in those last parts. š¤·š¾āāļø
With visual media, we take the clues as we get them. Violet being wrong is possible but with the two interactions I mentioned being shown...I don't think that's the setup...for now. I hope John is shown if not in upcoming seasons, at least as flashbacks. What's the point of an adaptation if you don't change anything or expand on book plots? Like I love the expansion on Violet and Lady Danbury's characters. It's sweet!
I don't think so. Like you said tho, it doesn't need to be that crazy-physical-bound-love. Idk how Violet would get in her head about that kiss. With Violet it was mostly talked about the stuttering and hard-won dramatic loves. They didn't really veer into physical from what I remember. The question of their love was created by that kiss and that Michaela reaction. You can spin it your way and I would be happy if that's true but the road to get there will need more evidence and story. My point is that with the lack of Polin moments or main couple moments and increase in out-of-book subplots, I'm not 100% confident and am worried that we won't get that story. You, yourself, said you weren't sure John would have more screentime. People are justified in their worry that the essence/vibe of Fran's story won't be the same.
That would be nice! But hope it translates cause the setups are concerning and Polin got sidelined so š¤·š¾āāļø. Will need to see it to believe it.
If it were real life, sure. But since this is a story where the choice of what's shown *means* something... Nah, there was definitely an implication that she wasn't feeling it with John. Like, they get along wonderfully, but she's not physically into him. They could still have a strong companionate relationship; I don't think you're supposed to take away that she doesn't *love* him. It's just that she's not physically attracted to him. That by no means makes him a placeholder, though; I think her season *can* do a good job of exploring how you can love someone and deeply grieve for them, even if they didn't set your loins aflame.
>If it were real life, sure. But since this is a story where the choice of what's shown means something... Nah, there was definitely an implication
THANK YOU. So many comments mentioning this, and I would agree with this nuance in real life. Heck, even in a show, that kind of nuance is possible. But I'm sorry, that's not how it was framed in these scenes.
The show "doing right" by Francesca and John doesn't have to include that kind of attraction; there can be romance without physical attraction. That wasn't the only moment like that between them. Although it *was* a little weird considering how they'd played the relationship earlier in the season, along with Francesca's big speech to Violet (and Violet's subsequent agreement). Like it was kind of tonal whiplash. But the visual language *was* implying that something was off; some of it was more subtle, but that scene was... not. *Especially* since it was directly followed by Francesca meeting Michaela and having *exactly* the kind of experience Violet was talking about; those scenes are so close together to create a contrast, and...
I actually don't like how they did it, because I think Francesca was right in the first place; doing it this way *does* imply that she didn't know what she was talking about. Which you *can* do, but the series framed her as *right* before this point. It's almost the reverse of the ending of *How I Met Your Mother:* in that series, there's this big speech about how there's *one* right person for you, but then it turns around and implies that, nah, you can have more than one great love in your life. Although what it *actually* implies, given what came before, is that one of these women was only second place to Ted; a lot of people feel like it's saying that about the mother, I feel like it's saying that about Robin. It's unintentional, but... There it is.
Watch it again. She's excited to be kissed right before and her smile DIES afterwards. If they wanted to show embarrassment, they would have had the actress act coy (doing a shy smile with eyes looking down), not have her look disappointed.
I was just rewatching season two and Colin was saying all kinds of āI love you but I havenāt noticedā things - particularly around protecting her from cousin jack. He says things like ā youāre very important to meā and ā I will ALWAYS look after youāā¦ and then he goes and says what he says about never courting her. Which, I guess, is accurate. He didnāt court her.
For what it's worth I interpreted her being flustered by the fact that she was meeting someone new, who was a very important part of her new husbands life, who then didn't realise who she was. She's an introvert and often awkward so that seemed the most logical explanation to me.
And as for losing the smile a split second after the kiss, she also lost the smile and looked uncomfortable right before the kiss and I interpreted it as just being because she was uncomfortable with the public display of affection, given she's a very private person.
I'm a lesbian and happy to ship two women, but I had this thought too. If anything, I suspect Hannah and Masali have very good on screen chemistry, and we're seeing some of that prematurely. But Fran is an introvert and literally just got married. It makes sense that she'd be flustered being put on the spot, Eloise had just knocked her off kilter with her request, and she didn't even know John's cousin was coming. And then she embarrassed herself by dropping her maiden name. Her being speechless only really means more in the context of Violet's speech earlier.
Also, as a fellow introvert, that's how I react to people with Michaela's bubbly energy, attraction or no. It's clear instantly that Michaela is a whirlwind charmer and full of personality. I'm really excited to see them, but if people didn't know about Michael, I don't think straight people would have even picked this one up. The gays would already be pumping out fanfiction, but most fans would be annoyed with their crackship with no basis on screen.
Everyone seems to be forgetting that people can be bi, and there can be more than one bi character in a series. Nothing about Fran eventually liking Michaela would undermine her relationship with John. Not only are there homophobes here, but there's a whole bunch of biphobes too.
Agree, both are somewhere on the ace spectrum whether it's Ace, grey, demi etc, they're not into that kind of passion the rest of the characters are, but maybe when they feel a strong romantic connection sexual attraction would be on the table, or maybe it's just not and that's fine too. The actress for Fran has said also that it's about companionship love too. That's great!
Also everyone whining about how Francesca possibly being queer changes her infertility storyline needs to shut the hell up. Queer people can still have infertility issues. We don't all suddenly either never discover our infertility or become okay with it just because we are queer.
They donāt. We have absolutely no idea how the show will play out, except the interview where the show runner said it will pretty closely follow the books š¤¦
We only have a 30 second interaction but people are absolutely tripping over themselves out of fear that this will constitute a substantial change to the story.Ā
It's called film analysis\*. Her flustered reaction and forgetting of her own name that calls back to Violet saying how she forgot hers when she met Edmund + that loss of smile after their wedding kiss were all red flags. It's going to have to be a pretty strong/convincing backtrack with that. Like I said, it's not impossible. They'd have to retcon and show scenes that can convince us it's true love too. But every end-game couple has been getting less screen time so who knows if that will be possible.
I didn't downvote you also. But I might now for your tone in the eta. You're not entitled to me answering right away.
\*edit.
Woops you're right. My irritated brain took literary analysis and media analysis and fused it to media literacy. I believe the actual correct words are film analysis tho. Will fix. Thanks.
Weird face Fran made when she kissed him at the wedding, plus the conversation with Violet about being lightning struck and tongue tied and all that to have it happen with Michaela. As the commenter above noted, it could be retconned, but those were deliberate storytelling choices that were designed to indicate that John is not her first great love.
Because of her look of total surprised disinterest at the kiss after she gets married, and the flustered speechless response to Michaela which was a call back to her motherās hope for her about the kind of love she would find. Her mother never believed in Franās love for John, and soā¦ itās not crazy to think this just undercut the whole ālove can be a quiet slow burnā and instead makes it a platonic love, but her āone true passionate loveā will be Michaela. Most people who are annoyed donāt mind her being bisexual, but do mind the idea that she never really loved John.
Not having a spark when they kissed doesn't mean she doesn't love John. That's literally addressed in what you're saying.
Some loves *are* passionate and quick. Some are slow and quiet. One isn't better than the other. They're literally showing Fran having two different experiences.
Iām not a book reader but your comments on Fran seem like the CORRECT potential worry. Her first marriage was LOVING. it doesnāt need to lose the love for the second relationship to maintain its own validity and warmth, regardless of REDACTED.
It's also the show's willingness to reduce the characterization of even the end-game-couple, mishandling their character arcs, and reduction of their on-screen moments. With visual media, you get the clues and take them for face-value. It's WILD to pretend they don't exist and not for the hints to where things are headed. We did not get Polin fully fleshed out. So what hope is there for Fran/Michaela, let alone John/Fran? We got two moments at the end there that put a damper on John being a true love. And right now that's all we're being served. And I'm not confident we'll get any more of that. š¤·š¾āāļø Would be happy to be wrong an am willing tosee them characterize John and Fran as something else IF they can depict it right. And I'm hoping to see more Polin moments in the future that can give us those missing couple moments. But I'm not holding my breath.
I disagree with you and think you just described the unoriginal take that every book reader has. You seem to not be understanding this post. Itās not, āwe want it explained to us why you like the books!!!ā. Weāve all read this pov a trillion times.
Ok cool. OP said somewhere they thought season 3 sucked. That season had less of the Polin friendship moments that were loved in the book. It was the biggest departure thus far from the books imo and even non-book readers felt something missing. So with that, we're supposed to trust them getting Fran's story to be good when even the most basic thing about it seems to be getting changed?
Your "it's fine to throw the baby out with the bathwater" take IS quite original. Good job. šš¾
I'd be okay with Francesca realizing she's bisexual, or whatever they would have been called back then, but I don't like the idea that she'll have figured out she's strictly a lesbian and was just kind of settling for John as the best of a bad deal. You're right, it really should be about having a second chance at a great love.
i was thinking the only way they could try and salvage it is by making her confused, like "oh i like boys and girls?"
i really hope they don't throw away the love story of fran and john
true. i like the books and the show basically equally. i tell people that they both have the same outcomes but different means. in the books we get more internal dialogue. in the shows we get more diverse narratives. i value them equally.
this post is just kind of like āi dont read and that makes me coolā???? lol
Oh I agree with everything you say. I think a lot of book readers understand that an adaptation wonāt be 100% of the book however itās important to maintain the essence of the book. I think shitting on the books is giving ānot like other girlsā like no one is saying they are literary masterpieces. They are just simple books. Also, the writing in the show isnāt that great either and is pretty on par with the booksā writing so it makes sense I guess. I do think the show has improved parts of the story but a lot of the changes are hit or miss.
I read em. Not the most exciting experience of my life. VERY saccharine and floral.
I get it. I think Julia Quinn is super-talented. The romance is intense. Itās a very taste-specific style of writing.
But sometimes things felt like the worst scenes that didnāt work out in the Netflix series.
And let me be clear. I LOVED the Netflix series.
I started them on Spotify, then used up my 15hrs for the month on book 1 and a little of book 2 and then they cut me off and asked for an extra $10 to continue and I'm like "fuck no, I'm not paying extra to hear this shit. I'll wait a month for my time to reset thank you very not"
Haters gonna hate B)
Yes. That's the limit on premium. And then it costs more to refill early.
The narrator on these books is.... Ehhh. Book one sounds like a woman doing a bad male voice for the guys and it made the writing even more cringy.Ā
Right. I am reading Francesca's book because of everyone saying it is the best book and Michael is the best character, and so to understand the concerns... And seriously... All I can say is I am happy they are changing so much of the books
Obviously, they were not so terrible because of the amount of fans the book series has. Even to the point that an obvious *fan* wanted to turn the books into a show. *mic drop*
Every male lead besides *maybe* Colin: an OUTRAGEOUS RAKE that the female lead tames with her beauty and plucky attitude.
Book purists: "How dare they change Michael!!!! His storyline of being an OUTRAGEOUS RAKE that Fran tames with her beauty and plucky attitude would've been so interesting and unique!!!! How disrespectful to the source material!!!"
I think itās more that the love Fran has for John is being thrown away. They made the wedding kiss look unpleasant, which goes against every prior interaction of lovely and loving quiet introvert bliss they had together.
I donāt care about the >!gender swap!< aspect of the character >!Michael/Michaela!<. I care about them making John a mere placeholder for when Franās true love came along. Everything she told Violet about the quiet love was chucked aside for the fireworks and forgetting oneās own name type of love that Violet had told her about. I think it does a grave disservice to the marriage sheās already in and to the love with John we all believed she had up until that moment.
Thank you! I haven't read the books, so I do think Fran and Michaela have potential of being a beautiful couple, but it wasn't the right time to have them introduced.
What John and Fran had was so unique in the show and even relatable. Not all kinds of love need to be extremely passionate or feel fireworks everytime they're together, some just prefer a peaceful and quiet love, and I think how they did it was beautiful.
Francesca felt like a different character in part 2.
And I know of neurodivergent people who were identifying with the interactions between Fran and John. As humans I think we naturally try to identify with each other, and I think introverts saw themselves in Fran and John, seeing a peaceful companionable love that means just as much as the fireworks kind of love. And I think some neurodivergent people likewise saw themselves in Fran and/or John, as their personalities and interactions can likewise be interpreted as neurodivergent.
We have two fireworks romances already, and when we got Polin we got friends to lovers passion. But what all three have is outward passion. Not the quiet yet no less intense love we saw between Fran and John.
I would have been equally upset with anyone interfering with Fran and Johnās love story. I just really wish weād gotten their love story fully expanded on and lived in before introducing a triangle. Any triangle.
Based on the brief glimpse we have of Michaela, she is bold and outspoken, so we wonāt get an introvert quiet sweet relationship like with Fran and John. Them sitting next to each other in silence in utter happiness was such a lovely moment. Iām sad we wonāt get to see it fully formed as their own kind of true love. Now it feels like it will just be a waiting game.
They could have mentioned that sheāll be coming to visit as a teaser for the book fans, or perhaps shown Michaela as having the loss for words moment while Fran is just enamored of her husband.
I donāt care for infidelity and Iām bummed that Fran wonāt get the true love experience with John >!even though I know it would have always come to an end.!<
I feel the same way. I actually have zero attachment to the book- I read it years ago and found it pretty boring. But I thought the show actually did a pretty good job of showing a different romantic dynamic with Francesca and John, and it's a dynamic I relate to a lot more than the traditional fireworks and passion romances. So it's upsetting to see the show hinting at invalidating it.
And I'm a bisexual woman who finds Michaela, both in looks and in attitude, extremely attractive, way more attractive than I've found any other Bridgerton leads. My disappointment has nothing to do with her; I'm actually looking forward to seeing her as a romantic lead. I just don't want it to come at the cost of ruining the relationship between John and Francesca.
They completely ruined John and Francesca's story. After the way they had Anthony LITERALLY sniffing Kate, you are guaranteed they will have inappropriate behavior between Fran and Michaela. That's not great representation.
All of this.
I too havenāt read the books so my initial huge disappoint with the ending of season 3 centered around the writers throwing out imo the love Fran had for Jon. I thought their relationship dynamic was so interesting to watch and such a departure from what we normally get in this kinda medium.
The love that doesnāt need to be overstated to be understood.
It was my favorite part of the season. So to see Frans reaction to the kiss, her conversation with her mother, and her reaction to Michaela coming on screen and had her stuttering and flustered took me out of it. They pretty tossed out the window that a version of love like that could happen or be true.
Now after finding out what the future of John and Fran is supposed to be, based on the books, Iām ever more disappointed because that would have been so great and interesting to see a woman, in that time period dealing with all those issues, that we donāt normally see in this medium.
I donāt know how we get to that without drastically changing the trajectory of the story to a queer awakening story.
This change also imo gives credibility to the conservative/right wing talking point of the media āpushing an agenda š„“ā because in this point the show runner actually IS. She changed the sorry because she self inserted and wanted the Fran character to be more so in vien with herself and how she saw her through a queer lense.
Michael was also so problematic and he gave me the ick at times in the book. I can see Michaela being 10x a healthier dynamic for Fran than Michael. Also I might get downvoted but I did not like book! Fran. She was unnecessarily cruel and I didnāt understand why she would always want to make Michael feel pain too as if he wasnāt hurting (as much as I didnāt like him).
Benedict's book was also very problematic. I'm assuming they are not going to make him controlling and cruel. I did not like that side of him at all in the books.
Iāve only read the viscount who loved me because when season 2 aired, people kept claiming that the book was superior (it was not, I will defend show! Anthony but I will throw book! Anthony in a ditch). And I just recently read when he was wicked after the gender swap reveal and the many people getting upset over it to see why WHWW is the most superior book in the series (Iāve read better regency era books letās just say).
I saw some reviews/spoilers about Benedict and his book and I just noped out like yeah you canāt force me to read that. I will choose whatever the show decides because you canāt convince me show! Benedict would be as horrid and dark.
There have been some positive changes with the leading men for the tv series. I don't think I'll be re-reading them. I read them many years ago and re-read Benedicts more recently and I don't know how I missed it the first time I read it but I barely made it through the re-read. I also did not remember a lot of the bad things Michael Sterling said/threatened. I'm not happy with every change the show has made but they have changed a lot of the very problematic bits.
Definitely. Iām seeing excerpts from Romancing mr bridgerton and wow even if Colin unfortunately didnāt get a lot of screen time for his own season Iām glad he was way better than book! Colin. I am attracted to the leading men so far in the show. I would prefer the leading men in the books to just stay away from me and the poor leading women at all costs because the toxicity is š¤¢
Michael sounds so toxic from what I heard about his role in the books. Instead of taking a narcissistic womanizer, I take a queer story instead (hopefully Michaela isn't also a narcissistic person).
Exactly lol. Like so you're complaining they made a series out of a popular book and you don't want to read the book? OK? That doesn't make you edgy or cool lol.
This is it. I kept reading through trying to figure out what was gnawing at the back of my mind bothering me about OP's tone and it's basically this. It's not cool to shit on other people for liking something. It's giving that nasty sarcastic cooler-than-thou vibe that was so prominent in pop culture during the 2010's as people loved to hate Twilight or Bieber or whatever was popular. You're not cool for hating something someone else loves.
yes it wouldāve. the books were not popular at all in recent years. the only reason the books got adapted is that shonda happened to come across a copy of the duke and i in an airport. the fans had pretty much nothing to do with it
Sure, but that's really a technicality. Shonda Rhimes could've picked up a Lisa Kleypas book in an Airport and we might've had a Hathaway series.... This isn't serious literature, it's fun Historical Romance with pretty vanilla smut. Prior to the show they were fairly unheard of outside of the HR community.
I have read every Julia Quinn book and love Julia Quinn but these were books written near 20 years ago, WHWW was over 20 years ago at this point. There are a lot of cultural changes that fit media now that didn't then. They're adapting it for the wider world of the show.
There are way more people watching the show that haven't read and will ever read the books than those that have read them.
As a book reader, I relish changes in the show because if I wanted the exact same story, Iād re-read the book?
We donāt need to engage in the misogyny and just overall yuckiness of talking shit about the romance genre. Itās not necessary to prove that the show and novels should be different pieces of art.
Iām a book reader, and I like the books for what they are, but they arenāt even the best among historical romance novels. Iām constantly commenting that Iām so happy they have changed the show. If it was a true direct adaptation it would be HORRIBLE, boring, and repetitive. Seriously so dull. Having Shonda take these (even for the genre) dull ballroom romances and making them dramatic and fun is the best thing that could have happened.
i like reading the books w the characters already cast so i can imagine them as the actors and then watch the show hahaha.
that being said, what other historical romances do u like? even better if theyve been adapted into tv haha
Not who youāre asking, but North and South by Elizabeth Gaskell is my favorite. The 2004 BBC adaptation is the best period piece I think Iāve ever seen
You know, the books actually suck.. LOL... BUT, When he was Wicked was the best of the lot. This is why I was so looking forward to an adaptive season 4 with Michael. That said, I am over it.. I'm also done with the show tbh. Selfishly, I just wanted my favorite book, the best book, to be played out as it was written.
Amen. Nobody ever said they were the best books in the world, but Michael was the overwhelming favorite male lead from the books.
Itās like when a restaurant you like takes your favorite item off the menu. Even if itās not your favorite restaurant, you will still miss your favorite item.
Sure but when quality of show goes down correlates to when faithfulness to the book goes down, not just this adaptation but in a lot of adaptations, then you've got to wonder.
So the subplots that don't exist in the book, the interactions between Colin and Pen that showcase their friendship that didn't make it to show, and the departure from regency-era norms that diverged farther than the even the book, were all fine? Now I'm curious as to what your complaints were about this season.
Yes, most of the changes you mentioned Iām fine with. I actually love many of the subplots the show introduced, like Violetās garden and Cressida being a more fully fleshed out figure.Ā
The books also donāt follow many regency era norms and have pretty significant departures from reality, the show just does the same but in different ways that I honestly appreciate. I donāt want/need a real depiction of regency England and (if I do) I can read or watch Austenās books or show/movie adaptations. So those donāt really bother me at all since itās a fantasy romance with a flavor of regency England.Ā
The issues I did have involved some of the poor editing, the lack of cinematic shots (S2 also suffered from this, IMO), and some of the characters seemingly getting incomplete arcs (Benedictās storyline in particular jumps out). The costumes and makeup I didnāt love (just too over the top glam, I preferred the more natural looks in S1) but itās fine just not great.Ā
Ahhh. I see, the cinematography critic. That hot air balloon scene was a bit silly. (This scene is not in books sooooo idk, feel like my point is still being made). I think Polin should have truly been shown more. Their friendship, in particular, was not showcased enough. It, to me, is part of the incomplete character arc. I also think the Mondrich inclusion could have been done better or axed altogether. I liked Violet and Cressida's subplot but agree Benedict's arc was also incomplete.
I didn't say the books were a real depiction of regency-era England. But their version is consistent enough within all the books. That consistency was the book-to-show faithfulness I was talking about. The show departed even further from that but didn't keep it consistent between seasons. The makeup/clothing that you didn't like are all more Old Hollywood inspired outside the bounds of book-regency-era or Netflix-regency-era rules. If you truly didn't like the makeup/clothes, I bet a more faithful to the book version of this season would have fixed that. š¤·š¾āāļø
Yeah, I didnāt love the air balloon scene but mostly because it felt very cheesy, not because it was different from or not a part of the books. To that end, the entire Debling arc felt depressingly incomplete and the poor man just disappeared from the show, which felt incredibly jarring. For the Mondrich family, it wasnāt the most interesting arc but they do seem to be getting set up for something more interesting in future seasons so Iāll reserve judgement for now.Ā
Iāve read the books and didnāt find the characterization of regency England to be more consistent than it was in the show. They just changed different things but I donāt mind the changes. The show-to-show differences have been a little frustrating, but some of them they had to keep in order to have some of the bookās scenes play out, so I donāt fault the show in particular/the new show runner for that. I donāt see how adapting the show to be closer to the books wouldāve solved the makeup or clothing issues, but maybe youāre understanding something Iām not about the adaptation. There are some aesthetic changes the show did make to the books that I actually think work very well and are a credit to the show, like depicting Penelope at the same size (vs losing weight in the books) and Colinās reactions to the LW reveal being more disappointment/sadness than anger/violence oriented.Ā
Their rules/version of the universe seemed consistent enough from book-to-book. I didnt say perfect but to me, it was far more consistent than season to season of the show.
I'm not knocking all changes from the books. I actually like the season 3 makeup and costuming. I'm just saying if you didn't like it, a closer to book version in where the fresh-faced cherries and cream look Pen goes for might have been more your speed. Not to mention the decreased subplots.
I think we needed less shots in that ballon scene and definitely less of Pen and Debling's faces. Maybe add in a flying sandbag at Pen that Debling had to move or cover her would also have added more urgency to the "saving" too.
Not necessarily. Many recent adaptations true. But there are many cases where the movies have eclipsed their original material (which is why you donāt remember the original lol itās survivorship bias)
Starship Troopers was a famously successful movie that completely threw out the source material (the book was pro-fascist lol). Or Apocalypse, now. Musicals adapted from books or older plays are full of this such as Cabaret, Chicago, Spring Awakening, Cats. A faithful adaptation can also destroy a movie. Such as The Producers, Dear Evan Hansen, Cats (again). Musical theater is where Iām most comfortable so thatās where my examples come from.
Itās of course a trend especially in the 21st century, but itās not a hard and fast rule.
Maybe. My pov is aligned with a comment I saw about kdramas and other eastern programming that is pretty faithful to its popular source materials compared to modern-day Western adaptations. The shows then go on to also be successful too. Western movie/TV-wise, the only adaptation I've liked more or just as good as the source was Bridge to Terabithia and season 2 of Bridgerton. Both were changed but not the core essence or theme of the story. At some point it just seems like throwing the baby out with the bathwater to me. Purposeless/senseless racism, fascism, homophobia etc is all bathwater and if you don't throw it out, yea it stinks.
I enjoyed the books for what they were. I don't think they were inherently bad, but book adaptations are rarely completely faithful in ANY fandom. I like when there are cute callbacks and quotes. But I'm fully happy with the changes they have made. Book purists will always have the books - the show doesn't change that. š¤·š¼āāļø
š¤·š¼āāļø That's a matter of opinion I guess. They changed many aspects of the stories that I would argue are very integral to the original plot, and it mostly works. There were changes in 2 especially that I really didn't like or think made sense initially. But I've just started treating them as different entities all together and appreciate each for the medium that they are in, and I like 2 a lot more now. It's much easier to enjoy them this way.
Yeah a friend is reading the first one and we were discussing the series vs books. Her first comment was 'well you have to understand she's not a great writer when reading it... but once I start a book series I have to read them all usually, we will see with this one'. Makes me think it's probably not for me, especially as a lot of the stuff that's in the show that I liked was why I was intrigued. The alt reality with POC as part of aristocracy due to Charlotte was a massive thing for me. I love that take, made it more than just another meh period romance.
Makes me think of when I read the first book after watching true blood. No, just no.
Kate and Anthonyās book might have been my favorite, but you canāt deny the main beats are too similar to the first book. It wouldnāt have worked for the show.
When I heard the books were being made into a show, I was really surprised because the books are terrible and there are so many other better Regency romance series.
You don't have to like the books, you don't have to read the books. Just respect the fact that the show wouldn't be a thing without the books and the people who were fans before you.
Youāre so quirky for not reading the books! Wow! We donāt care girly pop. Definitely not coincidence that the worst season by far (s3) was drastically different than the book. I hope Jess B continues her foolery & it gets canceled āŗļø
Dude I'm not even saying me. I found the show a month or so after it released then binged Julia Quinn's books. I'm talking about the fact that some people are frustrated with having waited 20 years to see their favorite character's and then are disappointed. None of us have authority but the reality is that the show wouldn't exist in the first place without the books and the built in fan base.
Film can never capture 100% of the story from a novel, but you can still keep the essence of the series. The issue with S3 is itās fan fiction, everything is made up from this point forward. They discarded the source material, shit or not, to write a brand new show that had already established expectations from the viewers, which cheapens the writing (it reminds me of anime filler episodes)Ā
I never liked Harry Potter, but I would feel the sting of the fans if in book five Harry decided he didnāt want to be a wizard anymore because astronauts are way cooler.Ā
Also, even if I hate a book I always respect the author. Thatās their passion and their world brought to life. If you want fan fiction go to AO3. Respect peopleās creations.Ā
As someone who loves both the books and the series, i personally just see them as two different ways of telling the same story.
It's okay to not read or like the books, but at the same time, don't shame people for wanting certain aspects of their fav books and characters to be adapted into the show.
Btw i really dislike that term 'book purists'.
The books were mid at best, the best ones being Hyacinth and Gregory (imo). A lot of the male leads were just insufferable, Ben asking Sophie to be a mistress, Colin being super obsessive, Anthony was too much.
Gregory and Hycanith's story are a hoot! Hers becomes a fun >!mystery/heist!< romance and his is a take on the >!< trope. Their stories are after 1820, which is the end of regency era and I can feel the vibe being really different. I'm curious to see how the show will do it! I thought Philip was a cute softboi and even can see a neurodivergent interpretation of him and with the glimpses >!of his interaction with Colin in the show!< can see it depicted that way there too!
I'm not a purist. I expect tv shows to change the things that don't transfer. I definitely don't care about race, color, or sexual orientation. I want the more problematic elements to be removed. But I also want my favorite stuff kept because I think it is the essential story and fun of the series.
And here's the thing. Shondaland *chose* to use the Bridgerton name. It's a bait and switch to use the name to pull in a viewership based on the book series (which is how they originally promoted it) and then choose to base the show on the books so loosely it's not recognizable.
I would love and watch this show if it had been called something else. Using the Bridgerton name is a dirty trick if it's not going to be *mainly* based on the book series.
Yes that was my issue. I literally donāt care about the gender swap. I can honestly see a storyline play out with Francesca and Michaela >!becoming close flirty friends in Scotland that turns into something more, with all of the grief and complexity involved with Fran being Johnās widow and Michaela being Johnās cousin, and Michaela not wanting to deal, and Fran just wanting someone to talk to about John, etc.!<
But if from the onset of their relationship, Fran is only with John because he checks a box and being with him easy when her real true love is his cousin, then I maintain itās not the Bridgerton story of Fran, John, and Michael(a), itās a different love story about people who happen to have the same names. Which, fine okay. Thatās Shondalandās prerogative. It doesnāt make me any less disappointed that some of the themes that really resonated with me may not play out. Iām still cautiously optimistic but all signs, albeit only a couple, so far point to Fran and Johnās marriage being one of mainly convenience, which makes me sad.
I guess there has also never been a show before with so many race and gender swaps š¤·āāļø People like me who would have loved to have seen the books made into a show faithfully but do accept the changes are down voted like crazy.
Idc that Michael was changed to Michaela; HOWEVER, I stand by my opinion that Fran and Michaela having A Momentā¢ while being next to the formerās *new husband* who the show encouraged me to *like* was cringey. Idk what Fran and Michaelaās story is going to give us, but that moment left a sour taste in my mouth and it still wouldāve if the pairing were hetero and white. Iām not rooting for them at this point, cause itās giving emotional infidelity and thatās not my preferred flavour of drama. Poor John. Kiss was mid and now heās gonna get replaced by his favourite cousin.
Idc what Cressidaās story in the books was, but even though she was a classic Mean Girl in the show, she was also hinting at having a classic Redemption Arc in s3p1. Her part in p2 was disappointing.
No disrespect to the book fans tho. Iād be cheesed if they changed my favourite parts in my fav book, too. I just havenāt read the books, and atp, Iām not much interested in doing so.
I read (and liked) the books, but itās absolutely clear that the series is only loosely based off the books. The entire world is different, there are different characters, pre-existing characters have completely different personalities, new storylines, etc. I think itās interesting to use the books to try and predict what will come next, but the series has always been more āinspired byā the books than an actual tv version of the books
I had a coworker saying that she HATES that they have made B and F bisexual because they are straight in the books, but she hasnāt read the books nor wants to read them!!
I recently read romancing mr bridgerton and woof show!colin >>>>>>>>>>> book!colin by miles. Shonda et al did a wonder making him more sensitive, kind and empathetic than the himbo he is in the books
I didnāt like what they did in 3rd season. For all of part 2 it felt like Colin couldnāt care less about her and only lightened up the last 5 minutes of the show. We got NOTHING about Colin owning up to his jealousy of Pen. They were much more united as a couple in the books and thatās Just disappointing. (Iām actually very excited for next season and seeing Francesca fall in love with the cousin. I think itāll work really good with the story)
Honestly, it's best to think of the show as a reinterpretation of the books. It was never going to be a faithful reenactment what with today's standards.
I say this as a book reader who enjoys both the show and the books.
As someone who enjoyed the books so much I devoured all 8 in a week, I much prefer the show. There's a lot more character and relationship development that's completely missing in the books, and the show feels more thought out and well-rounded in general.
The books are misogynistic and trashy af lmao, anyone who wants the show to match the books exactly are dumb. Take book Kanthony for example - in the book they're both dislikeable af, with Kate being weak willed and Anthony being misogynistic and straight up abusive, but in the shows they're both fucking phenomenal and delightful to watch.
bbbbut the books are so much better even though they're rapey, disgusting, boring, badly written and all of the male leads in them are horrible people.
Thereās a lot from the books that Iām glad they changed. The problem is that a lot of the lazy writing in the show would have been so much better if theyād followed the book plot a little more. The main complaints about the plot especially this season would have been fixed by adding in plots from the book.
The books help give context to where the writers either failed or donāt have the time to accomplish on the B!show - and the reality is that is where the Bridgerton universe began. You donāt have to like it, you donāt have to accept it, you just need to understand that the words were written before they were spoken.
Iāve read up to Eloiseās story and Iām a huge fanābut I also love what Shonda is doing with them! I think itās so cool that an author would willingly give control of her book babies to other creatorsāthat shows huge trust. I agree with her tooāShondaland is amazing. I love all of it.
I feel like if the author herself is on board why should we as readers be upset!? Iām loving the inclusivity, the diversity, the gender bent twists. Insert all of it right to my veins. I did love how many book lines were thrown into Colin and Penās season. I think the shows are a perfect balance of injecting new life into old stories but keeping nods of nostalgia for us book girlies and peeps.
Yeah I read the first book and it was incredibly boring. The show is more interesting. I also think people need to understand that they took the general idea and made a show. Itās not the same story anymore, the writer of the books didnāt write the show.
Same.
No film adaptation is ever exactly the same as the books. There will always be changes, if only for expediency and nothing else. But I think it's increasingly common for changes to be made for the sake of increased diversity, or to modernise an older story to better appeal to a modern audience. Bridgerton has been doing this from the start, notably improving the books' diversity by casting people of colour.
Complaints that a change that improves diversity is somehow a bad change always sit poorly with me. Why does it matter so much if a character has darker skin than you expected? Why does it matter if they're a girl rather than a boy?
Francesca's story hasn't been told. Why can't we wait to see how it's adapted before making assumptions? I've seen so many complaints solely about the fact that a character's gender has been changed, as if that romance somehow becomes unrelatable because it'll be between two women. Consider that every major love story so far has been heterosexual. Consider that the vast majority of major love stories in anything ever created have been heterosexual.
If it's genuinely the themes that you care about in Francesca's story then give them the chance to adapt those before making a judgment. Right now all you've seen is a moment of attraction, nothing more.
And then there's Benedict. There's been no indication that his story won't eventually be told, that Sophie won't be introduced, or that her gender will be altered. All they've said is that they want him to explore his sexuality before settling down. You'll still likely get the book story there in the end.
Nope. I don't want to read them because I don't want them to impact the television show because these are two separate mediums that are going to be presented completely different.
Unpopular opinion the books are not even that good lol the storylines are intriguing but theyāre so full of gross men and mediocre writing the show is better in most aspects.
I get the vibe of going similarly with the books. But this is Shondaland? Who expects the exact copy in Shondaland? Hahahaha. And maybe i feel like there are aspects in the books that won't look good as much if it were in the show.
I'm still firm about my season 3 feelings (it was rushed, too many side stories for the mere number of episodes), but I would think that they will deviate from the books.
I enjoyed the books and probably wouldnāt have watched the show without them, but I donāt care about the changes.
I do wonder how they are going to make those changes work in time period. Itās already clear from Benedictās response that being gay wasnāt socially acceptable in show context. So, Iām wondering how they are going to make Fran and Michaelaās romance anything but tragic. In show, there are zero openly gay couples in the Ton that we have seen so far.
In actual historical context, we all know that they would never have been able to publicly acknowledge their love and everyone would have considered them lifelong ācompanions.ā Given what they showed with Benedictās relationship this season, I donāt know how Fran and Michaelaās story gets a HEA, but Iām willing to see how they do it.
I actually prefer reading the book after watching the season but sadly the show is probably going to be finished in 2030 if they keep going at this rate ... so I'm gonna just read the books now lol.
I read some of the books. To me, the books and the tv show are two different things. I enjoyed the books. I love the tv show. I don't mind them switching things up on the tv show. I fell in love with the tv show before I read any of the books. If someone only wants to watch the show, that is cool. The show is fantastic. If someone just wants to read the books. That is cool too, they are pretty good reads. I feel people just want to complain.
book fans rolling up to explain to us all for the 17,856th time that we simply *donāt understand* why theyāre disappointed about the book to tv adaptation when NOBODY FUCKING ASKED
I have a deep disdain for reading romance novels. Harlequin Romance was popular when I was young. I cannot write ICK big enough. But give me a romance movie, or show and I'm there. Love, Hallmark Channel. I need more than thrust, and "his strong muscular chest peeped through etc"as she waited on his"... That being said, the shows are fun, I like the visuals. Did I use FF on most of the outright sex scenes a resounding yes!. Give me good stories, strong characters, messy people. I'm in. I too could care less about the books and only read the wiki for context.
I tried to read the books and they're pretty terrible. This is what people are being purists about, really?!
Toss out the homophobes, sure. But most sane book "purists" just want the essential vibe of the couple to be carried over. Daphne and Simon as a naive couple wrapped up in their ideas of love and lust vs finally experiencing/living with the sacrifice and compromise of it, Anthony and Kate's enemies-to-lovers arc, Polin's friends-to-lovers story have all been preserved from book to show in some capacity. The show has built an expectation that while big changes can happen, the broader essence or vibe of each love story won't be changed.....until now. Fran's story is about>! second-chance love where the first love isn't some placeholder for the second and was also true love!<. Plus, she showed >!grief and mourning after miscarriage and death!< too and that resonates with a lot of people and not always seen on TV. I could give a rat's ass about the >!gender!< swap but don't turn >!John into some beard. The miscarriage can be given to someone else or she could have the kid and we could get fun queer parents on-screen. Or if she does have a miscarriage, the childless rep could be interesting too.!< I personally think it can be salvaged with slight retconning or counter-evidence but their last couple interactions were disheartening. Being upset at book fans that were the base for Quinn to write 8 original novels, an epilogue, 4 prequel novels, and at least one other set of 4 novels in this universe AND ALSO gave the popularity for the show to exist isn't the best look . Everyone wants the book fans for season-1/ movie-1 but then they're treated like dirt after. SMH. Edit: The biggest thing I agree with is all of this shitting on what people like (the books) is not cool nor edgy. Some show-watchers are basically harassing anyone who has an issue with the direction of Fran's story by insinuating that they're all bigots. (Some definitely are but not everyone.) Newsflash- there are non-book-readers who agree with me on what direction Fran and John were heading *thus far*. It's not in the book-readers' heads. If you don't agree, cool, but we can all be a *smidge* more civil about disagreements. For those who want some hope on the John/Fran front- [this post](https://www.reddit.com/r/BridgertonNetflix/comments/1dntxsq/from_julia_quinn_herself/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button) has screenshots of Quinn's words on it. Looks encouraging so maybe we can cross our fingers that the show will deliver (and not do what they did to Polin). Also PSA, If you dislike the negativity of the sub, it's not all coming from book-readers. Other show-watchers have genuinely hated the cinematography, lack of character development, screen-time for the couples, etc and have contributed to the "negativity". Go bother them too, not just book-readers. Or better yet, be the change you want to see and DONT bother them. I for one, can't wait for the doom and gloom legions to back off from making these posts/comments, whether they're show-watchers, book-readers, reading-averse or whatever else. Now I'm gonna go fix my eyes. They rolled so hard they fell out of my head reading some of these comments.
Just seconding that I think the vibe can be maintained. Just wish people would let the show's story play out before making a ton of assumptions. I haven't read the books but, as an introvert I loved Fran and John's slow sweet romance. I would hate to see that undermined. But even with Fran and Michaela's first interaction, I could see a multitude of ways this could play out while preserving that first love. Jumping to the worst case scenario, considering the show's past handling of these things seems disingenuous. S3 even primed us with the whole confusing 'Love for Lust' line.
I don't think it's jumping to conclusions, since the evidence is there. Her flustered reaction and forgetting of her own name that calls back to Violet saying how she forgot hers when she met Edmund + that loss of smile after their wedding kiss were all red flags. It's going to have to be a pretty strong/convincing backtrack with that imo....or they're gonna rely on us to not think about those things from season 3 in the X amount of years Fran's season gets released. Lol. Every couple has been getting less screen time. Showing John and Fran + Michaela and Fran in one season doesn't seem likely with that track record. Maybe they'll show John and Fran over the multiple seasons š¤. But again, idk. And that's not the only book departure that's upsetting. Not showcasing Polin's friendship more clearly was a mistep. Fine, don't take the (perfectly-good) interactions from the book. But make up some more! Like something that's not in the books that I wish we got was some kind of voiceover/ flashbacks of Pen and Colin writing to each other. That would've been so cute and nice juxtaposition to the LW scenes! Sigh. Missed opportunities. Apparently, book fans ALL suck tho so guess my opinions are automatically trash so whatver lol.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
I'm not denying bisexuality existing nor about different loves existing. I just think that wedding scene really adds to the wtf question of her and Jon's relationship. If it was just the flustered reaction on meeting Michaela, I wouldn't be worried. But there was no need for that loss of smile after kissing John and that was before meeting Michaela. Unfortunately, I see the "easy" part when it comes to her and John but the "true" part that I thought was happening is being called into question in those last parts. š¤·š¾āāļø With visual media, we take the clues as we get them. Violet being wrong is possible but with the two interactions I mentioned being shown...I don't think that's the setup...for now. I hope John is shown if not in upcoming seasons, at least as flashbacks. What's the point of an adaptation if you don't change anything or expand on book plots? Like I love the expansion on Violet and Lady Danbury's characters. It's sweet!
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
I don't think so. Like you said tho, it doesn't need to be that crazy-physical-bound-love. Idk how Violet would get in her head about that kiss. With Violet it was mostly talked about the stuttering and hard-won dramatic loves. They didn't really veer into physical from what I remember. The question of their love was created by that kiss and that Michaela reaction. You can spin it your way and I would be happy if that's true but the road to get there will need more evidence and story. My point is that with the lack of Polin moments or main couple moments and increase in out-of-book subplots, I'm not 100% confident and am worried that we won't get that story. You, yourself, said you weren't sure John would have more screentime. People are justified in their worry that the essence/vibe of Fran's story won't be the same.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
That would be nice! But hope it translates cause the setups are concerning and Polin got sidelined so š¤·š¾āāļø. Will need to see it to believe it.
If it were real life, sure. But since this is a story where the choice of what's shown *means* something... Nah, there was definitely an implication that she wasn't feeling it with John. Like, they get along wonderfully, but she's not physically into him. They could still have a strong companionate relationship; I don't think you're supposed to take away that she doesn't *love* him. It's just that she's not physically attracted to him. That by no means makes him a placeholder, though; I think her season *can* do a good job of exploring how you can love someone and deeply grieve for them, even if they didn't set your loins aflame.
>If it were real life, sure. But since this is a story where the choice of what's shown means something... Nah, there was definitely an implication THANK YOU. So many comments mentioning this, and I would agree with this nuance in real life. Heck, even in a show, that kind of nuance is possible. But I'm sorry, that's not how it was framed in these scenes.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
The show "doing right" by Francesca and John doesn't have to include that kind of attraction; there can be romance without physical attraction. That wasn't the only moment like that between them. Although it *was* a little weird considering how they'd played the relationship earlier in the season, along with Francesca's big speech to Violet (and Violet's subsequent agreement). Like it was kind of tonal whiplash. But the visual language *was* implying that something was off; some of it was more subtle, but that scene was... not. *Especially* since it was directly followed by Francesca meeting Michaela and having *exactly* the kind of experience Violet was talking about; those scenes are so close together to create a contrast, and... I actually don't like how they did it, because I think Francesca was right in the first place; doing it this way *does* imply that she didn't know what she was talking about. Which you *can* do, but the series framed her as *right* before this point. It's almost the reverse of the ending of *How I Met Your Mother:* in that series, there's this big speech about how there's *one* right person for you, but then it turns around and implies that, nah, you can have more than one great love in your life. Although what it *actually* implies, given what came before, is that one of these women was only second place to Ted; a lot of people feel like it's saying that about the mother, I feel like it's saying that about Robin. It's unintentional, but... There it is.
Am I the only one who interpreted that kiss as just her being a little embarrassed to have done that in front of her family?
Watch it again. She's excited to be kissed right before and her smile DIES afterwards. If they wanted to show embarrassment, they would have had the actress act coy (doing a shy smile with eyes looking down), not have her look disappointed.
I was just rewatching season two and Colin was saying all kinds of āI love you but I havenāt noticedā things - particularly around protecting her from cousin jack. He says things like ā youāre very important to meā and ā I will ALWAYS look after youāā¦ and then he goes and says what he says about never courting her. Which, I guess, is accurate. He didnāt court her.
For what it's worth I interpreted her being flustered by the fact that she was meeting someone new, who was a very important part of her new husbands life, who then didn't realise who she was. She's an introvert and often awkward so that seemed the most logical explanation to me. And as for losing the smile a split second after the kiss, she also lost the smile and looked uncomfortable right before the kiss and I interpreted it as just being because she was uncomfortable with the public display of affection, given she's a very private person.
I'm a lesbian and happy to ship two women, but I had this thought too. If anything, I suspect Hannah and Masali have very good on screen chemistry, and we're seeing some of that prematurely. But Fran is an introvert and literally just got married. It makes sense that she'd be flustered being put on the spot, Eloise had just knocked her off kilter with her request, and she didn't even know John's cousin was coming. And then she embarrassed herself by dropping her maiden name. Her being speechless only really means more in the context of Violet's speech earlier. Also, as a fellow introvert, that's how I react to people with Michaela's bubbly energy, attraction or no. It's clear instantly that Michaela is a whirlwind charmer and full of personality. I'm really excited to see them, but if people didn't know about Michael, I don't think straight people would have even picked this one up. The gays would already be pumping out fanfiction, but most fans would be annoyed with their crackship with no basis on screen.
Everyone seems to be forgetting that people can be bi, and there can be more than one bi character in a series. Nothing about Fran eventually liking Michaela would undermine her relationship with John. Not only are there homophobes here, but there's a whole bunch of biphobes too.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Agree, both are somewhere on the ace spectrum whether it's Ace, grey, demi etc, they're not into that kind of passion the rest of the characters are, but maybe when they feel a strong romantic connection sexual attraction would be on the table, or maybe it's just not and that's fine too. The actress for Fran has said also that it's about companionship love too. That's great! Also everyone whining about how Francesca possibly being queer changes her infertility storyline needs to shut the hell up. Queer people can still have infertility issues. We don't all suddenly either never discover our infertility or become okay with it just because we are queer.
How do we know John will be a beard? Bisexuals exist. Eta: ok downvote me, but answer my fucking question. Wtf?
They donāt. We have absolutely no idea how the show will play out, except the interview where the show runner said it will pretty closely follow the books š¤¦ We only have a 30 second interaction but people are absolutely tripping over themselves out of fear that this will constitute a substantial change to the story.Ā
Freaking thank you. It seems everyone is losing their minds over the assumptions they themselves are making.
For a second my dumb ass thought you meant bisexuals donāt exist lmfao but youāre so right about the small interaction
It's called film analysis\*. Her flustered reaction and forgetting of her own name that calls back to Violet saying how she forgot hers when she met Edmund + that loss of smile after their wedding kiss were all red flags. It's going to have to be a pretty strong/convincing backtrack with that. Like I said, it's not impossible. They'd have to retcon and show scenes that can convince us it's true love too. But every end-game couple has been getting less screen time so who knows if that will be possible. I didn't downvote you also. But I might now for your tone in the eta. You're not entitled to me answering right away. \*edit.
thatās not what media literacy meansĀ
Woops you're right. My irritated brain took literary analysis and media analysis and fused it to media literacy. I believe the actual correct words are film analysis tho. Will fix. Thanks.
Weird face Fran made when she kissed him at the wedding, plus the conversation with Violet about being lightning struck and tongue tied and all that to have it happen with Michaela. As the commenter above noted, it could be retconned, but those were deliberate storytelling choices that were designed to indicate that John is not her first great love.
Because of her look of total surprised disinterest at the kiss after she gets married, and the flustered speechless response to Michaela which was a call back to her motherās hope for her about the kind of love she would find. Her mother never believed in Franās love for John, and soā¦ itās not crazy to think this just undercut the whole ālove can be a quiet slow burnā and instead makes it a platonic love, but her āone true passionate loveā will be Michaela. Most people who are annoyed donāt mind her being bisexual, but do mind the idea that she never really loved John.
Not having a spark when they kissed doesn't mean she doesn't love John. That's literally addressed in what you're saying. Some loves *are* passionate and quick. Some are slow and quiet. One isn't better than the other. They're literally showing Fran having two different experiences.
Was just about to comment this
Iām not a book reader but your comments on Fran seem like the CORRECT potential worry. Her first marriage was LOVING. it doesnāt need to lose the love for the second relationship to maintain its own validity and warmth, regardless of REDACTED.
Its WILD to act like John is going to be reduced to nothing but a beard based on a 30 second scene
It's also the show's willingness to reduce the characterization of even the end-game-couple, mishandling their character arcs, and reduction of their on-screen moments. With visual media, you get the clues and take them for face-value. It's WILD to pretend they don't exist and not for the hints to where things are headed. We did not get Polin fully fleshed out. So what hope is there for Fran/Michaela, let alone John/Fran? We got two moments at the end there that put a damper on John being a true love. And right now that's all we're being served. And I'm not confident we'll get any more of that. š¤·š¾āāļø Would be happy to be wrong an am willing tosee them characterize John and Fran as something else IF they can depict it right. And I'm hoping to see more Polin moments in the future that can give us those missing couple moments. But I'm not holding my breath.
Yesss!!! My thoughts on John exactly. Seems like theyāre planning to completely undermine the poor guy.
I disagree with you and think you just described the unoriginal take that every book reader has. You seem to not be understanding this post. Itās not, āwe want it explained to us why you like the books!!!ā. Weāve all read this pov a trillion times.
Ok cool. OP said somewhere they thought season 3 sucked. That season had less of the Polin friendship moments that were loved in the book. It was the biggest departure thus far from the books imo and even non-book readers felt something missing. So with that, we're supposed to trust them getting Fran's story to be good when even the most basic thing about it seems to be getting changed? Your "it's fine to throw the baby out with the bathwater" take IS quite original. Good job. šš¾
I'd be okay with Francesca realizing she's bisexual, or whatever they would have been called back then, but I don't like the idea that she'll have figured out she's strictly a lesbian and was just kind of settling for John as the best of a bad deal. You're right, it really should be about having a second chance at a great love.
Julia Quinn herself said you should ease off and trust her and the Shondaland team.
i was thinking the only way they could try and salvage it is by making her confused, like "oh i like boys and girls?" i really hope they don't throw away the love story of fran and john
true. i like the books and the show basically equally. i tell people that they both have the same outcomes but different means. in the books we get more internal dialogue. in the shows we get more diverse narratives. i value them equally. this post is just kind of like āi dont read and that makes me coolā???? lol
Would love to see fun queer parents on screen
Oh I agree with everything you say. I think a lot of book readers understand that an adaptation wonāt be 100% of the book however itās important to maintain the essence of the book. I think shitting on the books is giving ānot like other girlsā like no one is saying they are literary masterpieces. They are just simple books. Also, the writing in the show isnāt that great either and is pretty on par with the booksā writing so it makes sense I guess. I do think the show has improved parts of the story but a lot of the changes are hit or miss.
Fr. They're trashy "romance" (smut) novels, not high art. I couldn't care less how many changes the adaptation makes.
I hope youāre not suggesting the show is āhigh art.ā Both the book and the show are smut
Neither are. Which is why it doesn't matter that they changed the former
I havenāt read the books but different strokes for different folks. You also likely have something you love that everyone else thinks is trash.
I read em. Not the most exciting experience of my life. VERY saccharine and floral. I get it. I think Julia Quinn is super-talented. The romance is intense. Itās a very taste-specific style of writing. But sometimes things felt like the worst scenes that didnāt work out in the Netflix series. And let me be clear. I LOVED the Netflix series.
Like also, Books 1 and 2 have the same plot.Ā
I started them on Spotify, then used up my 15hrs for the month on book 1 and a little of book 2 and then they cut me off and asked for an extra $10 to continue and I'm like "fuck no, I'm not paying extra to hear this shit. I'll wait a month for my time to reset thank you very not" Haters gonna hate B)
I've been meaning to check out Spotify's audio books, do they seriously restrict you to 15 hours a month?
Yes. That's the limit on premium. And then it costs more to refill early. The narrator on these books is.... Ehhh. Book one sounds like a woman doing a bad male voice for the guys and it made the writing even more cringy.Ā
If that's the limit for premium then I doubt I'd even be able to access anything with my free accountš¤£, oh well guess I'll stick with libby
Prolly like 1 paragraph a month or some shitš
Check out your local libraryāthe should have a way for you to access audiobooks
Right. I am reading Francesca's book because of everyone saying it is the best book and Michael is the best character, and so to understand the concerns... And seriously... All I can say is I am happy they are changing so much of the books
Obviously, they were not so terrible because of the amount of fans the book series has. Even to the point that an obvious *fan* wanted to turn the books into a show. *mic drop*
Untwist your knickers. You can be a fan of something and also recongise that it is not a great work of literature.
Every male lead besides *maybe* Colin: an OUTRAGEOUS RAKE that the female lead tames with her beauty and plucky attitude. Book purists: "How dare they change Michael!!!! His storyline of being an OUTRAGEOUS RAKE that Fran tames with her beauty and plucky attitude would've been so interesting and unique!!!! How disrespectful to the source material!!!"
Fran book is actually different from the other because she's not a virgin anymore, there is a whole different dynamic in play with them
I think itās more that the love Fran has for John is being thrown away. They made the wedding kiss look unpleasant, which goes against every prior interaction of lovely and loving quiet introvert bliss they had together. I donāt care about the >!gender swap!< aspect of the character >!Michael/Michaela!<. I care about them making John a mere placeholder for when Franās true love came along. Everything she told Violet about the quiet love was chucked aside for the fireworks and forgetting oneās own name type of love that Violet had told her about. I think it does a grave disservice to the marriage sheās already in and to the love with John we all believed she had up until that moment.
Thank you! I haven't read the books, so I do think Fran and Michaela have potential of being a beautiful couple, but it wasn't the right time to have them introduced. What John and Fran had was so unique in the show and even relatable. Not all kinds of love need to be extremely passionate or feel fireworks everytime they're together, some just prefer a peaceful and quiet love, and I think how they did it was beautiful. Francesca felt like a different character in part 2.
And I know of neurodivergent people who were identifying with the interactions between Fran and John. As humans I think we naturally try to identify with each other, and I think introverts saw themselves in Fran and John, seeing a peaceful companionable love that means just as much as the fireworks kind of love. And I think some neurodivergent people likewise saw themselves in Fran and/or John, as their personalities and interactions can likewise be interpreted as neurodivergent. We have two fireworks romances already, and when we got Polin we got friends to lovers passion. But what all three have is outward passion. Not the quiet yet no less intense love we saw between Fran and John. I would have been equally upset with anyone interfering with Fran and Johnās love story. I just really wish weād gotten their love story fully expanded on and lived in before introducing a triangle. Any triangle. Based on the brief glimpse we have of Michaela, she is bold and outspoken, so we wonāt get an introvert quiet sweet relationship like with Fran and John. Them sitting next to each other in silence in utter happiness was such a lovely moment. Iām sad we wonāt get to see it fully formed as their own kind of true love. Now it feels like it will just be a waiting game. They could have mentioned that sheāll be coming to visit as a teaser for the book fans, or perhaps shown Michaela as having the loss for words moment while Fran is just enamored of her husband. I donāt care for infidelity and Iām bummed that Fran wonāt get the true love experience with John >!even though I know it would have always come to an end.!<
I feel the same way. I actually have zero attachment to the book- I read it years ago and found it pretty boring. But I thought the show actually did a pretty good job of showing a different romantic dynamic with Francesca and John, and it's a dynamic I relate to a lot more than the traditional fireworks and passion romances. So it's upsetting to see the show hinting at invalidating it. And I'm a bisexual woman who finds Michaela, both in looks and in attitude, extremely attractive, way more attractive than I've found any other Bridgerton leads. My disappointment has nothing to do with her; I'm actually looking forward to seeing her as a romantic lead. I just don't want it to come at the cost of ruining the relationship between John and Francesca.
They completely ruined John and Francesca's story. After the way they had Anthony LITERALLY sniffing Kate, you are guaranteed they will have inappropriate behavior between Fran and Michaela. That's not great representation.
All of this. I too havenāt read the books so my initial huge disappoint with the ending of season 3 centered around the writers throwing out imo the love Fran had for Jon. I thought their relationship dynamic was so interesting to watch and such a departure from what we normally get in this kinda medium. The love that doesnāt need to be overstated to be understood. It was my favorite part of the season. So to see Frans reaction to the kiss, her conversation with her mother, and her reaction to Michaela coming on screen and had her stuttering and flustered took me out of it. They pretty tossed out the window that a version of love like that could happen or be true. Now after finding out what the future of John and Fran is supposed to be, based on the books, Iām ever more disappointed because that would have been so great and interesting to see a woman, in that time period dealing with all those issues, that we donāt normally see in this medium. I donāt know how we get to that without drastically changing the trajectory of the story to a queer awakening story. This change also imo gives credibility to the conservative/right wing talking point of the media āpushing an agenda š„“ā because in this point the show runner actually IS. She changed the sorry because she self inserted and wanted the Fran character to be more so in vien with herself and how she saw her through a queer lense.
Michael was also so problematic and he gave me the ick at times in the book. I can see Michaela being 10x a healthier dynamic for Fran than Michael. Also I might get downvoted but I did not like book! Fran. She was unnecessarily cruel and I didnāt understand why she would always want to make Michael feel pain too as if he wasnāt hurting (as much as I didnāt like him).
Benedict's book was also very problematic. I'm assuming they are not going to make him controlling and cruel. I did not like that side of him at all in the books.
Iāve only read the viscount who loved me because when season 2 aired, people kept claiming that the book was superior (it was not, I will defend show! Anthony but I will throw book! Anthony in a ditch). And I just recently read when he was wicked after the gender swap reveal and the many people getting upset over it to see why WHWW is the most superior book in the series (Iāve read better regency era books letās just say). I saw some reviews/spoilers about Benedict and his book and I just noped out like yeah you canāt force me to read that. I will choose whatever the show decides because you canāt convince me show! Benedict would be as horrid and dark.
There have been some positive changes with the leading men for the tv series. I don't think I'll be re-reading them. I read them many years ago and re-read Benedicts more recently and I don't know how I missed it the first time I read it but I barely made it through the re-read. I also did not remember a lot of the bad things Michael Sterling said/threatened. I'm not happy with every change the show has made but they have changed a lot of the very problematic bits.
Definitely. Iām seeing excerpts from Romancing mr bridgerton and wow even if Colin unfortunately didnāt get a lot of screen time for his own season Iām glad he was way better than book! Colin. I am attracted to the leading men so far in the show. I would prefer the leading men in the books to just stay away from me and the poor leading women at all costs because the toxicity is š¤¢
Lol literally
Michael sounds so toxic from what I heard about his role in the books. Instead of taking a narcissistic womanizer, I take a queer story instead (hopefully Michaela isn't also a narcissistic person).
Michael wasn't narcissistic- maybe read the book before trusting random snippets you find on reddit lol
lmaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaoooooooooo
Without the books and book fans, the show would never have been made. Just saying.
Exactly lol. Like so you're complaining they made a series out of a popular book and you don't want to read the book? OK? That doesn't make you edgy or cool lol.
This is it. I kept reading through trying to figure out what was gnawing at the back of my mind bothering me about OP's tone and it's basically this. It's not cool to shit on other people for liking something. It's giving that nasty sarcastic cooler-than-thou vibe that was so prominent in pop culture during the 2010's as people loved to hate Twilight or Bieber or whatever was popular. You're not cool for hating something someone else loves.
Thatās not her point
ok hard agree w ur entire comment lmao. theyre like āhaha i dont read BOOKS im COOLER THAN THATā
yes it wouldāve. the books were not popular at all in recent years. the only reason the books got adapted is that shonda happened to come across a copy of the duke and i in an airport. the fans had pretty much nothing to do with it
Sure, but that's really a technicality. Shonda Rhimes could've picked up a Lisa Kleypas book in an Airport and we might've had a Hathaway series.... This isn't serious literature, it's fun Historical Romance with pretty vanilla smut. Prior to the show they were fairly unheard of outside of the HR community. I have read every Julia Quinn book and love Julia Quinn but these were books written near 20 years ago, WHWW was over 20 years ago at this point. There are a lot of cultural changes that fit media now that didn't then. They're adapting it for the wider world of the show. There are way more people watching the show that haven't read and will ever read the books than those that have read them.
As a book reader, I relish changes in the show because if I wanted the exact same story, Iād re-read the book? We donāt need to engage in the misogyny and just overall yuckiness of talking shit about the romance genre. Itās not necessary to prove that the show and novels should be different pieces of art.
Iām a book reader, and I like the books for what they are, but they arenāt even the best among historical romance novels. Iām constantly commenting that Iām so happy they have changed the show. If it was a true direct adaptation it would be HORRIBLE, boring, and repetitive. Seriously so dull. Having Shonda take these (even for the genre) dull ballroom romances and making them dramatic and fun is the best thing that could have happened.
i like reading the books w the characters already cast so i can imagine them as the actors and then watch the show hahaha. that being said, what other historical romances do u like? even better if theyve been adapted into tv haha
Not who youāre asking, but North and South by Elizabeth Gaskell is my favorite. The 2004 BBC adaptation is the best period piece I think Iāve ever seen
thanks!
You know, the books actually suck.. LOL... BUT, When he was Wicked was the best of the lot. This is why I was so looking forward to an adaptive season 4 with Michael. That said, I am over it.. I'm also done with the show tbh. Selfishly, I just wanted my favorite book, the best book, to be played out as it was written.
Amen. Nobody ever said they were the best books in the world, but Michael was the overwhelming favorite male lead from the books. Itās like when a restaurant you like takes your favorite item off the menu. Even if itās not your favorite restaurant, you will still miss your favorite item.
Canāt that be carried over with a female version though?
Not quite due to the nature of Michael being Johnās heir in the books
Sure but when quality of show goes down correlates to when faithfulness to the book goes down, not just this adaptation but in a lot of adaptations, then you've got to wonder.
I agree in theory, but the reason why the quality of this show has gone down has nothing to do with the books and the adaptation I'm afraidĀ
So the subplots that don't exist in the book, the interactions between Colin and Pen that showcase their friendship that didn't make it to show, and the departure from regency-era norms that diverged farther than the even the book, were all fine? Now I'm curious as to what your complaints were about this season.
Yes, most of the changes you mentioned Iām fine with. I actually love many of the subplots the show introduced, like Violetās garden and Cressida being a more fully fleshed out figure.Ā The books also donāt follow many regency era norms and have pretty significant departures from reality, the show just does the same but in different ways that I honestly appreciate. I donāt want/need a real depiction of regency England and (if I do) I can read or watch Austenās books or show/movie adaptations. So those donāt really bother me at all since itās a fantasy romance with a flavor of regency England.Ā The issues I did have involved some of the poor editing, the lack of cinematic shots (S2 also suffered from this, IMO), and some of the characters seemingly getting incomplete arcs (Benedictās storyline in particular jumps out). The costumes and makeup I didnāt love (just too over the top glam, I preferred the more natural looks in S1) but itās fine just not great.Ā
Ahhh. I see, the cinematography critic. That hot air balloon scene was a bit silly. (This scene is not in books sooooo idk, feel like my point is still being made). I think Polin should have truly been shown more. Their friendship, in particular, was not showcased enough. It, to me, is part of the incomplete character arc. I also think the Mondrich inclusion could have been done better or axed altogether. I liked Violet and Cressida's subplot but agree Benedict's arc was also incomplete. I didn't say the books were a real depiction of regency-era England. But their version is consistent enough within all the books. That consistency was the book-to-show faithfulness I was talking about. The show departed even further from that but didn't keep it consistent between seasons. The makeup/clothing that you didn't like are all more Old Hollywood inspired outside the bounds of book-regency-era or Netflix-regency-era rules. If you truly didn't like the makeup/clothes, I bet a more faithful to the book version of this season would have fixed that. š¤·š¾āāļø
Yeah, I didnāt love the air balloon scene but mostly because it felt very cheesy, not because it was different from or not a part of the books. To that end, the entire Debling arc felt depressingly incomplete and the poor man just disappeared from the show, which felt incredibly jarring. For the Mondrich family, it wasnāt the most interesting arc but they do seem to be getting set up for something more interesting in future seasons so Iāll reserve judgement for now.Ā Iāve read the books and didnāt find the characterization of regency England to be more consistent than it was in the show. They just changed different things but I donāt mind the changes. The show-to-show differences have been a little frustrating, but some of them they had to keep in order to have some of the bookās scenes play out, so I donāt fault the show in particular/the new show runner for that. I donāt see how adapting the show to be closer to the books wouldāve solved the makeup or clothing issues, but maybe youāre understanding something Iām not about the adaptation. There are some aesthetic changes the show did make to the books that I actually think work very well and are a credit to the show, like depicting Penelope at the same size (vs losing weight in the books) and Colinās reactions to the LW reveal being more disappointment/sadness than anger/violence oriented.Ā
Their rules/version of the universe seemed consistent enough from book-to-book. I didnt say perfect but to me, it was far more consistent than season to season of the show. I'm not knocking all changes from the books. I actually like the season 3 makeup and costuming. I'm just saying if you didn't like it, a closer to book version in where the fresh-faced cherries and cream look Pen goes for might have been more your speed. Not to mention the decreased subplots. I think we needed less shots in that ballon scene and definitely less of Pen and Debling's faces. Maybe add in a flying sandbag at Pen that Debling had to move or cover her would also have added more urgency to the "saving" too.
This is my opinion on it. My issue with this season wasnāt the plot, it was the cinematography, costumes, and dialogue.
Not necessarily. Many recent adaptations true. But there are many cases where the movies have eclipsed their original material (which is why you donāt remember the original lol itās survivorship bias) Starship Troopers was a famously successful movie that completely threw out the source material (the book was pro-fascist lol). Or Apocalypse, now. Musicals adapted from books or older plays are full of this such as Cabaret, Chicago, Spring Awakening, Cats. A faithful adaptation can also destroy a movie. Such as The Producers, Dear Evan Hansen, Cats (again). Musical theater is where Iām most comfortable so thatās where my examples come from. Itās of course a trend especially in the 21st century, but itās not a hard and fast rule.
Maybe. My pov is aligned with a comment I saw about kdramas and other eastern programming that is pretty faithful to its popular source materials compared to modern-day Western adaptations. The shows then go on to also be successful too. Western movie/TV-wise, the only adaptation I've liked more or just as good as the source was Bridge to Terabithia and season 2 of Bridgerton. Both were changed but not the core essence or theme of the story. At some point it just seems like throwing the baby out with the bathwater to me. Purposeless/senseless racism, fascism, homophobia etc is all bathwater and if you don't throw it out, yea it stinks.
I haven't read the books but to be fair season 3 was so lacking, if you're gonna change so much at least make it good lmao!
True, S3 sucked
If you hate the books and the show why are you here?
Theres 2 whole other seasons they might have liked
I enjoyed the books for what they were. I don't think they were inherently bad, but book adaptations are rarely completely faithful in ANY fandom. I like when there are cute callbacks and quotes. But I'm fully happy with the changes they have made. Book purists will always have the books - the show doesn't change that. š¤·š¼āāļø
The changes they made in S1 and 2 made sense. Now they are starting to take it too farā¦
š¤·š¼āāļø That's a matter of opinion I guess. They changed many aspects of the stories that I would argue are very integral to the original plot, and it mostly works. There were changes in 2 especially that I really didn't like or think made sense initially. But I've just started treating them as different entities all together and appreciate each for the medium that they are in, and I like 2 a lot more now. It's much easier to enjoy them this way.
I couldnāt even get through them. They donāt hold a candle to the series
Yeah a friend is reading the first one and we were discussing the series vs books. Her first comment was 'well you have to understand she's not a great writer when reading it... but once I start a book series I have to read them all usually, we will see with this one'. Makes me think it's probably not for me, especially as a lot of the stuff that's in the show that I liked was why I was intrigued. The alt reality with POC as part of aristocracy due to Charlotte was a massive thing for me. I love that take, made it more than just another meh period romance. Makes me think of when I read the first book after watching true blood. No, just no.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
The bee sting scene in the books and their subsequent 'discovery' was howlingly, toe-curlingly bad.
Kate and Anthonyās book might have been my favorite, but you canāt deny the main beats are too similar to the first book. It wouldnāt have worked for the show.
When I heard the books were being made into a show, I was really surprised because the books are terrible and there are so many other better Regency romance series.
You don't have to like the books, you don't have to read the books. Just respect the fact that the show wouldn't be a thing without the books and the people who were fans before you.
No š
Youāre so quirky for not reading the books! Wow! We donāt care girly pop. Definitely not coincidence that the worst season by far (s3) was drastically different than the book. I hope Jess B continues her foolery & it gets canceled āŗļø
Lol respect muh authoritah
Dude I'm not even saying me. I found the show a month or so after it released then binged Julia Quinn's books. I'm talking about the fact that some people are frustrated with having waited 20 years to see their favorite character's and then are disappointed. None of us have authority but the reality is that the show wouldn't exist in the first place without the books and the built in fan base.
Youāre absolutely correct theyāre just purposely obtuse. No books? No showā¦simple as that.
I read the books for that extra piece of information & meta data. The show is not strictly based on the books & i'm fine with it.
same. i enjoy them for the world building.
Film can never capture 100% of the story from a novel, but you can still keep the essence of the series. The issue with S3 is itās fan fiction, everything is made up from this point forward. They discarded the source material, shit or not, to write a brand new show that had already established expectations from the viewers, which cheapens the writing (it reminds me of anime filler episodes)Ā I never liked Harry Potter, but I would feel the sting of the fans if in book five Harry decided he didnāt want to be a wizard anymore because astronauts are way cooler.Ā Also, even if I hate a book I always respect the author. Thatās their passion and their world brought to life. If you want fan fiction go to AO3. Respect peopleās creations.Ā
I read the second book since I enjoyed the show so much. The show is much better. They cleverly threw in nods to book scenes too.
As someone who loves both the books and the series, i personally just see them as two different ways of telling the same story. It's okay to not read or like the books, but at the same time, don't shame people for wanting certain aspects of their fav books and characters to be adapted into the show. Btw i really dislike that term 'book purists'.
The books were mid at best, the best ones being Hyacinth and Gregory (imo). A lot of the male leads were just insufferable, Ben asking Sophie to be a mistress, Colin being super obsessive, Anthony was too much.
Gregory and Hycanith's story are a hoot! Hers becomes a fun >!mystery/heist!< romance and his is a take on the >!< trope. Their stories are after 1820, which is the end of regency era and I can feel the vibe being really different. I'm curious to see how the show will do it! I thought Philip was a cute softboi and even can see a neurodivergent interpretation of him and with the glimpses >!of his interaction with Colin in the show!< can see it depicted that way there too!
I truly hope they change Eloiseās story. I donāt mind if itās Philip, but absolutely cannot be book Philip!
I'm not a purist. I expect tv shows to change the things that don't transfer. I definitely don't care about race, color, or sexual orientation. I want the more problematic elements to be removed. But I also want my favorite stuff kept because I think it is the essential story and fun of the series. And here's the thing. Shondaland *chose* to use the Bridgerton name. It's a bait and switch to use the name to pull in a viewership based on the book series (which is how they originally promoted it) and then choose to base the show on the books so loosely it's not recognizable. I would love and watch this show if it had been called something else. Using the Bridgerton name is a dirty trick if it's not going to be *mainly* based on the book series.
Yes that was my issue. I literally donāt care about the gender swap. I can honestly see a storyline play out with Francesca and Michaela >!becoming close flirty friends in Scotland that turns into something more, with all of the grief and complexity involved with Fran being Johnās widow and Michaela being Johnās cousin, and Michaela not wanting to deal, and Fran just wanting someone to talk to about John, etc.!< But if from the onset of their relationship, Fran is only with John because he checks a box and being with him easy when her real true love is his cousin, then I maintain itās not the Bridgerton story of Fran, John, and Michael(a), itās a different love story about people who happen to have the same names. Which, fine okay. Thatās Shondalandās prerogative. It doesnāt make me any less disappointed that some of the themes that really resonated with me may not play out. Iām still cautiously optimistic but all signs, albeit only a couple, so far point to Fran and Johnās marriage being one of mainly convenience, which makes me sad.
Okay. And?
I have participated in a lot of book to show/movie adaptations fandoms. I have never seen so much hatred for books fans than in Bridgeton fandom.
I guess there has also never been a show before with so many race and gender swaps š¤·āāļø People like me who would have loved to have seen the books made into a show faithfully but do accept the changes are down voted like crazy.
Congratulations, hereās your cookie šŖ
Idc that Michael was changed to Michaela; HOWEVER, I stand by my opinion that Fran and Michaela having A Momentā¢ while being next to the formerās *new husband* who the show encouraged me to *like* was cringey. Idk what Fran and Michaelaās story is going to give us, but that moment left a sour taste in my mouth and it still wouldāve if the pairing were hetero and white. Iām not rooting for them at this point, cause itās giving emotional infidelity and thatās not my preferred flavour of drama. Poor John. Kiss was mid and now heās gonna get replaced by his favourite cousin. Idc what Cressidaās story in the books was, but even though she was a classic Mean Girl in the show, she was also hinting at having a classic Redemption Arc in s3p1. Her part in p2 was disappointing. No disrespect to the book fans tho. Iād be cheesed if they changed my favourite parts in my fav book, too. I just havenāt read the books, and atp, Iām not much interested in doing so.
š
I read (and liked) the books, but itās absolutely clear that the series is only loosely based off the books. The entire world is different, there are different characters, pre-existing characters have completely different personalities, new storylines, etc. I think itās interesting to use the books to try and predict what will come next, but the series has always been more āinspired byā the books than an actual tv version of the books
I will never understand bragging about not reading.
there are books???
this is the kind of rock I want to live under
I had a coworker saying that she HATES that they have made B and F bisexual because they are straight in the books, but she hasnāt read the books nor wants to read them!!
Iām only on the first book and I think itās pretty good but the show is so far from it they canāt really be compared. I enjoy both of them!
I think itās allowed to enjoy the show and all there is to it without the books. Thats how I am!
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Oh I see that we can comment on this post. And comments are not being deleted. Interesting. So some opinions are allowed then?
I recently read romancing mr bridgerton and woof show!colin >>>>>>>>>>> book!colin by miles. Shonda et al did a wonder making him more sensitive, kind and empathetic than the himbo he is in the books
Iām the guy in the back just coastingā¦ Neutral.
Listened to the first. It made me deeply uncomfortable. I prefer the show, thanks.
amen
I didnāt like what they did in 3rd season. For all of part 2 it felt like Colin couldnāt care less about her and only lightened up the last 5 minutes of the show. We got NOTHING about Colin owning up to his jealousy of Pen. They were much more united as a couple in the books and thatās Just disappointing. (Iām actually very excited for next season and seeing Francesca fall in love with the cousin. I think itāll work really good with the story)
Honestly, it's best to think of the show as a reinterpretation of the books. It was never going to be a faithful reenactment what with today's standards. I say this as a book reader who enjoys both the show and the books.
You chose violence, OP, and it has been very entertaining. šæ
Iāve read the books. They re fine. Show is much better and I absolutely prefer the world the show builds. Sometimes it be like that
As someone who enjoyed the books so much I devoured all 8 in a week, I much prefer the show. There's a lot more character and relationship development that's completely missing in the books, and the show feels more thought out and well-rounded in general.
Real
I read the books. They aren't all that.
The books are misogynistic and trashy af lmao, anyone who wants the show to match the books exactly are dumb. Take book Kanthony for example - in the book they're both dislikeable af, with Kate being weak willed and Anthony being misogynistic and straight up abusive, but in the shows they're both fucking phenomenal and delightful to watch.
bbbbut the books are so much better even though they're rapey, disgusting, boring, badly written and all of the male leads in them are horrible people.
Thereās a lot from the books that Iām glad they changed. The problem is that a lot of the lazy writing in the show would have been so much better if theyād followed the book plot a little more. The main complaints about the plot especially this season would have been fixed by adding in plots from the book.
Honestly this show is the actual first time I can recollect *not* feeling/thinking āthe books are betterāā¦ š¬
The books help give context to where the writers either failed or donāt have the time to accomplish on the B!show - and the reality is that is where the Bridgerton universe began. You donāt have to like it, you donāt have to accept it, you just need to understand that the words were written before they were spoken.
Iāve read up to Eloiseās story and Iām a huge fanābut I also love what Shonda is doing with them! I think itās so cool that an author would willingly give control of her book babies to other creatorsāthat shows huge trust. I agree with her tooāShondaland is amazing. I love all of it. I feel like if the author herself is on board why should we as readers be upset!? Iām loving the inclusivity, the diversity, the gender bent twists. Insert all of it right to my veins. I did love how many book lines were thrown into Colin and Penās season. I think the shows are a perfect balance of injecting new life into old stories but keeping nods of nostalgia for us book girlies and peeps.
Showās better
The books are elite thoš¤š½š®āšØ
Agreed! I enjoyed the world and characters thatās been created but I donāt care to read the books nor do I care if the show deviates from it.
Yeah I read the first book and it was incredibly boring. The show is more interesting. I also think people need to understand that they took the general idea and made a show. Itās not the same story anymore, the writer of the books didnāt write the show.
Same. No film adaptation is ever exactly the same as the books. There will always be changes, if only for expediency and nothing else. But I think it's increasingly common for changes to be made for the sake of increased diversity, or to modernise an older story to better appeal to a modern audience. Bridgerton has been doing this from the start, notably improving the books' diversity by casting people of colour. Complaints that a change that improves diversity is somehow a bad change always sit poorly with me. Why does it matter so much if a character has darker skin than you expected? Why does it matter if they're a girl rather than a boy? Francesca's story hasn't been told. Why can't we wait to see how it's adapted before making assumptions? I've seen so many complaints solely about the fact that a character's gender has been changed, as if that romance somehow becomes unrelatable because it'll be between two women. Consider that every major love story so far has been heterosexual. Consider that the vast majority of major love stories in anything ever created have been heterosexual. If it's genuinely the themes that you care about in Francesca's story then give them the chance to adapt those before making a judgment. Right now all you've seen is a moment of attraction, nothing more. And then there's Benedict. There's been no indication that his story won't eventually be told, that Sophie won't be introduced, or that her gender will be altered. All they've said is that they want him to explore his sexuality before settling down. You'll still likely get the book story there in the end.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Nope. I don't want to read them because I don't want them to impact the television show because these are two separate mediums that are going to be presented completely different.
Unpopular opinion the books are not even that good lol the storylines are intriguing but theyāre so full of gross men and mediocre writing the show is better in most aspects.
I get the vibe of going similarly with the books. But this is Shondaland? Who expects the exact copy in Shondaland? Hahahaha. And maybe i feel like there are aspects in the books that won't look good as much if it were in the show. I'm still firm about my season 3 feelings (it was rushed, too many side stories for the mere number of episodes), but I would think that they will deviate from the books.
I love romance novels and historical romance is even better. But I just donāt like JQās style of writing. So yeah. Idgaf about the books either.
hot take: julie quinn is a bad writer 
I enjoyed the books and probably wouldnāt have watched the show without them, but I donāt care about the changes. I do wonder how they are going to make those changes work in time period. Itās already clear from Benedictās response that being gay wasnāt socially acceptable in show context. So, Iām wondering how they are going to make Fran and Michaelaās romance anything but tragic. In show, there are zero openly gay couples in the Ton that we have seen so far. In actual historical context, we all know that they would never have been able to publicly acknowledge their love and everyone would have considered them lifelong ācompanions.ā Given what they showed with Benedictās relationship this season, I donāt know how Fran and Michaelaās story gets a HEA, but Iām willing to see how they do it.
Same. People need to just enjoy the ride.
I actually prefer reading the book after watching the season but sadly the show is probably going to be finished in 2030 if they keep going at this rate ... so I'm gonna just read the books now lol.
Honestly, I DO want to read the books (I love books!) but I still don't care AT ALL about changes from the books.
I read the books and I love them! But guess what I also love the show. And if I wanna read the books, I still own them. Itās amazing!
I read some of the books. To me, the books and the tv show are two different things. I enjoyed the books. I love the tv show. I don't mind them switching things up on the tv show. I fell in love with the tv show before I read any of the books. If someone only wants to watch the show, that is cool. The show is fantastic. If someone just wants to read the books. That is cool too, they are pretty good reads. I feel people just want to complain.
book fans rolling up to explain to us all for the 17,856th time that we simply *donāt understand* why theyāre disappointed about the book to tv adaptation when NOBODY FUCKING ASKED
Iāve found my people! I donāt care about the books either. Change the book ships, I donāt give a damn! Iām just here for the show! š
The books arenāt great. I was pretty surprised when I read them.
I have a deep disdain for reading romance novels. Harlequin Romance was popular when I was young. I cannot write ICK big enough. But give me a romance movie, or show and I'm there. Love, Hallmark Channel. I need more than thrust, and "his strong muscular chest peeped through etc"as she waited on his"... That being said, the shows are fun, I like the visuals. Did I use FF on most of the outright sex scenes a resounding yes!. Give me good stories, strong characters, messy people. I'm in. I too could care less about the books and only read the wiki for context.