Should Bridget Jones return?

What had become of Bridget Jones? In the fourth film of the series, based again on the novel of the same name by Helen Fielding, we find the protagonist in middle age, with the two pre-adolescent children she had with Mark Darcy (Colin Firth), who died a few years before the beginning of the story. The protagonist is in a very different stage of her life, but in a similar scenario to the first film: without a partner and no clear future. With this starting point, three films are intended to balance. The first one brings back old acquaintances from twenty years ago, especially Hugh Grant's character, Daniel, now the protagonist's best friend. The romantic comedy that wants to connect with the concerns of women in middle age based on the original approaches. Bridget finds herself again in compromising situations while she begins flirting in the era of Tinder. This is where the film creaks the most, and not just because the sexual humor sounds cheap, the situations are predictable and the conservatism of the characters is more noticeable than ever. The protagonist's clumsy manner, her main sign of identity, is not read socially in the same way in a woman of thirty as in one of fifty. But the film does not know how to take advantage of this dislocation, and Bridget remains intact despite all her power of seduction, which turns her into a pink fantasy rather than a romantic and fun reflection of the concerns of so many similar women. The vindication of her sexuality is made through an adventure with a boy in her twenties, but ends up objectifying the male character more than celebrating a relationship that goes against the grain.

The film also reflects how Darcy's disappearance affects Bridget, and it is in this third, more sentimental and emotional aspect that this fourth installment finds its reason for being. In this, and proclaiming the great Chiwetel Ejiofor as the perfect leading man for a film of this type.