Bridget Jones's Baby

SPOILER-FREE MOVIE REVIEW

I am a sucker for romantic comedies.

Also, it's been a while since I last saw a half-decent romcom in the cinemas, with the last solid one being either 2015's The Longest Ride or 2014's The Fault In Our Stars. This year's share, on the other hand, has been nothing short of mediocre, to say the least.

With the release of Bridget Jones's Baby - the third film in the Bridget Jones series, I was actually really excited - despite not having seen a single one of the films at the time I heard of the new movie's release.

I was excited because I liked all the actors in it, despite Hugh Grant not being in this one - which is a shame because I find the conflict between the Grant's character and Colin Firth's absolutely hilarious.

I thus decided to binge-watch the two 'Bridget' movies before watching the new one, and I enjoyed them very much (more of the original, cos the 2004 sequel was quite shite, wasn't it?).

With myself caught up with two films' worth of content, I was ready to watch the third film, and boy did I have a great time.

For starters, one of the more immediate things that I noticed with this movie was that it had all the charm and cuteness which was what made the original so popular and well-received.

In other words, they managed to capture the essence of the original film in this sequel - something they didn't quite manage to do with the first sequel.

What made this better was that it lasted for the entire film, making it feel truly special and it's probably what made me walk out of the cinema with a beaming smile on my face.

A large part of that must be credited to the director Sharon Maguire, who directed the original. I firmly believe that her returning to directing this sequel truly helped to encapsulate all the magic.

Let's talk about the cast, and can we please just take a moment to appreciate the brilliance and chemistry between all the returning cast members (Renée Zellweger, Colin Firth as well as Bridget's parents and best friends).

It felt so nostalgic and lovely to see everyone reunited. Sure, everyone has inevitably aged, but they all still look pretty good - especially Renée Zellweger and Colin Firth!

Sure, there are rumours that Zellweger did some cosmetic surgery to alter her facial appearance, but I've never been one to fully believe in these reports. To me, she still had her classic cute look and that's good enough for me. Plus, no matter what she does, I'd still appreciate her work because I've liked her as an actress ever since I first saw her in Jerry Maguire (1996).

Another actor I have really grown to like is Colin Firth, whom I think is a very underrated actor. I thought he looked pretty good despite being 'old' at 56 years of age, and the real-life age difference of nine years between Zellweger and Firth didn't show at all on screen.

I think he's an actor with plenty of range, and I just love the sound of his classy and sophisticated British voice, don't you?

Plus, his chemistry with Zellweger is just impeccable. I adore the two together.

Yes, it's a shame that the lovably irritating character which Hugh Grant played didn't return, but it was nice that they made references to him throughout the film, hence not cheaply writing off his character completely.

In his place, Grey's Anatomy's Patrick Dempsey played a sort of 'competitor', but not a rip-off of Grant's character by any means. Dempsey was charming and cool and kind of does what Grant does so well being British, just that Dempsey does it in his own American way.

On to the story, and this was where I feared the film could have disappointed.

The thing about sequels or reboots or any form of 'new instalment' is that there will always be this question asked of it - "Is there demand for it, and is a sequel really needed?"

Think about some of this year's sequels/reboots - Ghostbusters was totally unnecessary, Allegiant ran out of steam, and X-Men: Apocalypse was only meh.

As for Bridget Jones's Baby, however, I'm glad to report that the story was one that was absolutely worth a new instalment, and it most certainly did not feel made just for the sake of banking in on the Bridget Jones brand name.

There were many throwbacks to the original film, as well as some plot points that feel all too familiar, but they're only minor flaws because if it worked back then, why not now, right?

They even managed to successfully modernise the story and the characters so well, be it with regards to advances in technology (i.e. Bridget uses an iPad to write her diary instead of a physical book now) or Pop Culture references (there's a hilarious cameo by a famous singer whom I shall not name), which I thought was really commendable given how these characters haven't been explored for so many years.

It's almost as if these characters lived quietly all this time up till now. That's how good I thought the updates were.

Are there any flaws? Well, to be completely honest, I really couldn't find anything major that was wrong with it.

The film is made well, directed beautifully, shot nicely, acted well and yeah, it's a pretty efficient film. There really aren't any major flaws or problems that I had with it.

All in all, Bridget Jones's Baby is a lovely revisiting to a set of characters who gave us so much joy back then.

Apart from the slightly awkward fact that there were only women (both young and quite old) in the cinema and not a single male within sight apart from myself, I still had a great time with the movie, and it made me realise just how much of a sucker I truly am for romcoms.

None of the charm was lost despite the 12-year gap between the last film and this one, and the movie effortlessly managed to put a beaming smile on my face.

Go check this movie out, friends. It's a good one.

8/10.