Universal Pictures | Release Date: November 12, 2004
7.2
USER SCORE
Generally favorable reviews based on 77 Ratings
USER RATING DISTRIBUTION
Positive:
46
Mixed:
24
Negative:
7
Watch Now
Buy On
Review this movie
VOTE NOW
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Check box if your review contains spoilers 0 characters (5000 max)
8
lukechristianscMar 31, 2016
Bridget Jones is back! The sequel to the 2001 hit. This sequel lacks the charm that its predecessor had, but Renee Zellweger as always charming and shines as the character, and this film still has a little bit of charm but under theBridget Jones is back! The sequel to the 2001 hit. This sequel lacks the charm that its predecessor had, but Renee Zellweger as always charming and shines as the character, and this film still has a little bit of charm but under the charmingly uncharming direction by Beeban Kidron (Amy Foster and Used People). Based on Helen Fielding's second novel in the series, the three original writers including Ms. Fielding, Richard Curtis, Andrew Davies return to write the screenplay also they got another writer on board Adam Brooks. The story takes places four weeks after the first film Bridget Jones (played once again by the adorable Renèe Zellweger) is still working as a host and is dating Mark Darcy (Colin Firth). Bridget is jealous of the time that Mark spends with his co-worker Rebecca (Jacinda Barrett), Bridget thinks Mark is cheating on her, which causes their relationship to go down hill. Despite a vacation meant to smooth things over, ends their relationship. On an assignment in Thailand, she has a dalliance with her ex Daniel Cleaver (Hugh Grant) and is temporarily jailed for falsely accused for drug smuggling before Mark rescues her. Look I don't care for the predictability, I loved this movie is it perfect? No it's not perfect but it's a funny charming funny rom-com it's still cheerful and that's what I love about the Bridget Jones series, is it funny? Yes. Despite issues I found in the direction and some in the script. Zellweger saves this film, I still found this movie charming it's a good film with problems. 3.5 out of 4 Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
3
MarkB.Jan 5, 2006
A failed attempt to recreate the fizz of 2000's charming and entertaining Bridget Jones' Diary that follows the all-too-typically-followed path also trodden by such sequels as Barbershop 2: Back in Business and Legally Blonde 2: A failed attempt to recreate the fizz of 2000's charming and entertaining Bridget Jones' Diary that follows the all-too-typically-followed path also trodden by such sequels as Barbershop 2: Back in Business and Legally Blonde 2: Red, White and Blonde: let's give 'em More Of The Same, only to prove again that more is less. Unlike the Reese Witherspoon and Ice Cube second go-rounds, you can't totally make the criticism that Bridget Jones: The Edge of Reason is an UNNECESSARY sequel; Helen Fielding, the author of the book on which the original was baseddid indeed write a followup, but the adapters seemed about as interested in following Fielding's plotline as they were in following that of James Joyce's Ulysses. Even so, the original ended perfectly and organically with insecure-in-love-work-and-everything-else Bridget dumping Mr. Wrong, embracing Mr. Right and finding True Love At Last. As played so endearingly by Renee Zellweger in the original, Bridget (a British lass whose rough American equivalent is the comic strip character Cathy) was both hilariouly awkward AND tremendously empathy-inducing; you laughed at her multiple faux pas but also felt hugely protective of her and had a real rooting interest in her well-being. Well, good-bye to all that: it's not Renee's fault; she's still an excellent actress and terrific farceur who's doing what the script tells her to--but Bridget in the sequel has gone from appealingly vulnerable to so ridiculously insecure and needy, endlessly embarrassing and humiliating boyfriend Mark (Colin Firth) that I found myself constantly wondering something that was the furthest thing from my mind while watching the original: namely, "Why in God's name doesn't he toss this shrill Looney Tune out on her ear and change all the locks?" Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
SusanM.Oct 11, 2005
Falls far short of the first BJ movie.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
matta.Dec 14, 2005
Cannot understand why the critics were so harsh with this. Just as good as the first one. There are some seriously classic scenes here and although Hugh Grant's limited screen time was unfortunate, it was still a very funny, romantic movie.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
RegOzApr 5, 2012
Uttterly stupid! It was a real disappointment! ...so now, Bridget is the girl that everybody loves, hot, successful, smar guys and also intelligent, gorgeous, successful lesbians? Really? I mean....should I say much more? I have noUttterly stupid! It was a real disappointment! ...so now, Bridget is the girl that everybody loves, hot, successful, smar guys and also intelligent, gorgeous, successful lesbians? Really? I mean....should I say much more? I have no intentions to watch it never again! To me is a real 0 and not because it is a sequel- I am always tolerant with sequels-but because the whole story is silly, ridiculously boring, and feels forced! Bridget is worse than ever! Unfortunatley they have destroyed all the attractiveness that Hugh Grant's character used to have, they made him little less than evil...and he was the best character of the first movie! If you can avoid watching it, but if you are curious watch it, and if you like it-I don't think you will- then good on you! Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
4
marcmyworksSep 17, 2016
Its so sad that this wound up being the sequel to one of the best romantic comedies ever made. The Edge of Reason simply recycles the best bits of the original film and itself has no originality. The book it is based on is actually funnierIts so sad that this wound up being the sequel to one of the best romantic comedies ever made. The Edge of Reason simply recycles the best bits of the original film and itself has no originality. The book it is based on is actually funnier than the original, which means this film should have been just as good if not better. For shame. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews