Renee Zellweger & Hugh Grant signed up for a fourth ‘Bridget Jones’ movie

The first Bridget Jones film, Bridget Jones’s Diary, is so good. It’s everything you want from a romantic comedy – it’s genuinely funny, it’s comforting, it’s delightfully weird in some places, and it has an extremely likable heroine and a very good Mr. Darcy. The second film – Bridget Jones: The Edge of Reason – was not particularly good but still somewhat enjoyable, and they mostly kept to the source material (Helen Fielding’s second book). The wheels well and truly came off for the third film, Bridget Jones’s Baby, in which Bridget tried to choose between Patrick Dempsey and Colin Firth… all while she was close to 50 years old and pregnant. It was a complete mess and it should have killed the franchise. I thought it did! And then we started hearing rumors about a fourth Bridget Jones movie in the works. Well, it turns out that Renee Zellweger is still interested in milking this dead-and-buried franchise, because she’s officially signed on. It will be an adaptation of Fielding’s Mad About the Boy.

Renée Zellweger (Judy) has closed a deal to reprise the role that brought her her first Oscar nomination in Universal Pictures and Working Title’s Bridget Jones: Mad About the Boy, Deadline has learned.

Others set to return in the film, from director Michael Morris (To Leslie), include Hugh Grant (Wonka) and Emma Thompson (Good Luck to You, Leo Grande). Newcomers to the cast will include Chiwetel Ejiofor (Rob Peace) and Leo Woodall (The White Lotus).

Based on the third book in Fielding’s series, Mad About the Boy picks up with Bridget in her early fifties, as she navigates the challenges of modern life while juggling the responsibilities of motherhood. No word yet as to who Ejiofor and Woodall will be playing.

[From Deadline]

I’m sad to report that I have read Mad About the Boy and I think I know which characters Leo Woodall and Chiwetel Ejiofor are playing. While it will be cute to see Chiwetel as a traditional romantic lead, I wish it was not in a Bridget Jones movie! My God. Leo is definitely being cast as the much-younger man she dates for a few months, right?

Major Spoilers: if we’re going with the Bridget Jones Cinematic Universe, I would assume that Mark Darcy and Bridget get married after she gives birth to their son (at the end of Bridget Jones’s Baby) and then the fourth film will pick up using Mad About the Boy as the source material – the book picks up about a year or two after Mark Darcy’s death. That’s why Colin Firth isn’t “returning” to the franchise – because Helen Fielding killed him off in the book, which is all about Bridget getting back into the dating scene (and as always, losing weight) as a widowed single mother.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

28 Responses to “Renee Zellweger & Hugh Grant signed up for a fourth ‘Bridget Jones’ movie”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Mcmmom says:

    Once I heard she killed off Mark Darcy, I lost all interest in the franchise.

    • Lau says:

      I remember people’s reactions to Patrick Dempsey’s character being quite negative for the third movie. I don’t think they’re going to be particularly pleased that Mark Darcy is being killed off.

  2. SunnyDays says:

    I do hope they change the “losing weight” focus. That part of the franchise is so problematic. I can see how no one batted an eye when the first few movies came out and I remember the endless coverage about how much weight Renee gained for the role and how she accomplished that, but I think we can do better with this film.

    I will watch the s–t out of anything with Chiwetel Ejiofor or Leo Woodall!

    • Localady says:

      Agreed. I’d love to see our womanly weight valued somehow, and if anyone could pull it off as a comedic reference, maybe Bridge is our gal. ‘Bridget and amigas enter a jewelry store . . . ‘ ‘woman’s weight in gold’ maybe a kick ass new main character is introduced w a heavy dose of rizz, wearing an armful of gold bracelets, from a cool ass culture that doesn’t set thinness as beauty, she comes in as an artist teacher, sets them straight on a woman’s weight and then they all eat brunches together after their ‘workouts’, idk . . .

  3. Kokiri says:

    That first movie was perfect & still hold up today, excepting the weight part.
    The rest are terrible & I won’t see this one.

    As a story, it’s passed it’s funniness. She’s not particularly likeable in the next films, & she never needed to lose weight so that whole storyline is off for 2024, imo.
    Her goofiness was charming but I’ve no desire to see the same punchlines, now about diapered & sleeping & childcare.
    Boring.

  4. Michelle says:

    Fielding made something perfect and then peed on it. 🙁

  5. The Hench says:

    Another vote for ‘please stop flogging this dead horse’. Bridget Jones’ Baby was execrable. It really feels that the world moved on from women like Bridget Jones being either real or amusing or at all representative. I wanted to shake the character until her teeth rattled back in the first film. Now she just feels like an insult to women everywhere.

  6. It Really Is You, Not Me says:

    I never read the third book but I saw the movie. For some reason my local library has the fourth but not the third so you just inspired me to check it out on Libby for a work conference I am going to in 2 days.

    If I hate it, at least it’s airplane, pool, and hotel room time that I needed to kill anyway.

    • AMB says:

      My advice, that you 100% didn’t ask for: borrow a backup as well so you have something to switch to instead of throwing your phone in the pool. (Life is too short to listen to something you hate!)

  7. Meredith says:

    Well, get that money, guys, I guess! Not my thing, but I hope they got a good deal.

  8. Louisa says:

    I guess I’m the only one who loved the 3rd movie! It genuinely made me laugh out loud. However, without Colin Firth not sure I’m too interested in the 4th.

    • Ladiabla says:

      I loved the 3rd movie too, because in the end she got everything she wanted. No more Mark Darcy? I love Bridget but not sure I’ll see this one.

    • Murphy says:

      This is exactly how I feel, the third movie was so sweet!! And it was nice that there was no man treating her like crap in that movie.
      And without Colin Firth, forget it-what’s the point?
      Did Hugh Grant’s publicist write this article?

    • olliesmom says:

      I liked the third movie too. The first is a classic. The second was horrible – almost unwatchable. I read About the Boy when it came out and it made me sad that Mark Darcy had passed away and it makes me sad that Colin Firth won’t be in this one because I love the Bridget – Mark dynamic.

  9. Eurydice says:

    No.

  10. Flamingo says:

    This feels like another Godfather Part III. Nobody asked for it, but everybody wants the easy paycheck that comes along with it. 100% a cash grab.

    Zero interest in this.

    • Erin says:

      The ironic thing about G3 was that everyone wanted so much money to come back that when negotiations broke down and they couldn’t get a major character to return (Duvall) they ended up having to rewrite the movie substantially.

      • Flamingo says:

        Duvall spoke about it, he said he just wanted the same money Pacino and Hall were getting and they balked.

        And Coppolla just wanted to fund his winery. And G3 was his only card to play to get the money.

        As far as I am concerened the only movies are Godfather I and II that exist lol.

      • Flamingo says:

        ugh brain fart not Hall, I meant Diane Keaton lol

  11. janey says:

    Bridget should be left in the 00s where she belongs. Things have thankfully moved on, and whilst the first film was funny and felt liberating at the time, it’s not where women are now. leave it alone, leave us the memories.

  12. QuiteContrary says:

    I loathed “Edge of Reason,” and the horrible Asian stereotypes in the Thailand scenes.

  13. SarahCS says:

    I read the first two and watched both films but for some reason have little to no recollection of the second in either format. The third totally passed me by so I don’t see this getting on my radar at all. There could have been a very interesting story to tell about older Bridget but from what I’ve heard about it that doesn’t happen.

    I still enjoy the first film and the fight will never not make me laugh.

  14. DaveW says:

    I have such fond memories of the first one. Loved the book and movie, could relate as I’m close in age to Bridget Jones, and was lucky enough to attend the premier in NYC (BFF’s mother had connections…weird to look thru my pics and see Harvey Weinstein hugging RZ). Didn’t like the second, didn’t see the third and will probably skip this one as seeing someone my age still obsessing over the same things as when a 20something just isn’t very appealing.

  15. Elfie says:

    If Colin Firth isn’t in it, no one is going to care. What an awful idea.

    • Elle says:

      While I agree with you (and I wouldn’t care even if Mark Darcy was in it, not my franchise really other than the first one was cute) – I could see this appealing to either widows or divorcees of that age (40s and up, really) having to navigate being single again and new realities of dating these days. Perhaps more so widows, as there aren’t too many movies in general and especially new ones that are comedic in nature about being a widow. None that come to mind for me at least. So I could see that group maybe finding humor in a movie about a really shitty situation they are also going through if it is done well. I won’t be watching it so I will never know. But I could see this appealing to some people. I think it would be more appealing if it was a brand new story though, and not a new Bridget Jones. Harder to get financial backing for that though probably.