Jump to content
Forums forums
PRIMETIMER
CuriousParker

Bridgerton In Media: Bodice Ripped From the Headlines

Recommended Posts

Quote

Based on Julia Quinn's best-selling series of novels, BRIDGERTON, is set in the sexy, lavish and competitive world of Regency London high society. From the glittering ballrooms of Mayfair to the aristocratic palaces of Park Lane and beyond, the series unveils a seductive, sumptuous world replete with intricate rules and dramatic power struggles, where no one is truly ever on steady ground. At the heart of the show is the powerful Bridgerton family. Comprised of eight close-knit siblings, this funny, witty, daring and clever group must navigate the upper ten thousand's marriage mart in search of romance, adventure and love.

Media!

Share this post


Link to post

Well there'd finally some movement on this. The titles of the first season are:

Episode 1.01 - Diamond of the First Water
Episode 1.02 - Shock and Delight
Episode 1.03 - Art of the Swoon
Episode 1.04 - An Affair of Honor
Episode 1.05 - The Duke and I
Episode 1.06 - Swish
Episode 1.07 - TBA
Episode 1.08 - After the Rain

https://www.spoilertv.com/2020/10/bridgerton-season-1-episode-titles.html

From that it seems they're doing each of the sibling's books as the main plot of one episode but not in order and starting off with "The Viscount who Loved Me". Photos and trailer should be dropping tomorrow and hopefully a release date. 

 

  • Like 1
  • Useful 1

Share this post


Link to post

Finally.  Some action.

But based on the casting, I don't think they're going to be doing a book per episode since I don't think they've cast some of those characters yet.  And aren't some of the leads in the later books essentially kids in the earlier books?  They hired young for the first season. 

Share this post


Link to post
8 hours ago, Door County Cherry said:

Finally.  Some action.

But based on the casting, I don't think they're going to be doing a book per episode since I don't think they've cast some of those characters yet.  And aren't some of the leads in the later books essentially kids in the earlier books?  They hired young for the first season. 

It seems you're right. I made some assumptions based on the titles I could see fitting to the eight books. The First look photos do have Hyacinth and Gregory as children. 

It premieres 25th December. 

https://www.spoilertv.com/2020/10/bridgerton-season-1-episode-titles.html

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

I like the look of the Featheringtons, you could tell it was them even if you didn't know who was playing them. I enjoy Polly Walker so it will be good to see her again. She can play ambitious matriarch in her sleep. Also looking forward to seeing what Adjoa Andoah does as Lady Danbury. 

I thought perhaps Simon looked a bit too suave and confident but then I remembered that's the point. To the outside world he's every inch the perfect Duke. He and Antony in that club look perfect. It will be interesting to see Daphne in action, I can't tell much from the pics. It seems a simple part but the "pretty, romantic but sensible everywoman" can be tricky. Not to mention some of the more controversial things. 

I badly need some fluffy, funny, well written "Regency lite" nonsense right now. 

 

Edited by Featherhat
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

The casting does look good.  I agree the Featheringtons all look right on the money and I am thrilled with Penelope's casting.  They didn't go skinny!!!    Lady Danbury looks perfect!  I know people were speculating about the scope of the series, but I am sure this must be just the first book (Daphne and Simon's) because Franscesca is too young in this for it to be anywhere near the time period for her book.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
16 hours ago, DearEvette said:

I know people were speculating about the scope of the series, but I am sure this must be just the first book (Daphne and Simon's) because Franscesca is too young in this for it to be anywhere near the time period for her book.

It's true they can't do Francesca let alone Hyacinth or Gregory and not Eloise because she's supposed to be (good heavens!) late 20s. But I thought the title "Diamond of the First Water" possibly related to Antony wanting to marry Edwina who was "the diamond" that year. However I can't find either Kate or Edwina in any of the cast lists. It could be related to Daphne thinking she should be but isn't. It seems like they'll be adding in a lot of characters and expanding on various plot points to get this to eight episodes for a fairly short book. 

Sir Phillip Crane is listed as appearing, though he was obviously connected to the family before his book. 

Share this post


Link to post

I'm not familiar with the books this series is based on but the trailer has intrigued me. Looks like the production values are way better than in Shonda's attempt at the Romeo & Juliet story. Maybe Netflix gave her a lot more money than ABC did, hah, hah. Odds are good I'll watch this unless it turns out I'll have to have read the novels to follow the storyline.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

I love Regency romance generally so I've been looking forward to this. That's a great teaser trailer to get people excited, the production values look high, and it's lovely to see the actress from Derry Girls in it! But you can't tell from that if the quality of the writing is any good. I guess I'll have to try it on Christmas Night to find out! Fingers crossed. And maybe, if it's successful, it will lead to more Regency romance screen adaptations? I'd love to see some Georgette Heyer on screen.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

This isn't officially "official" but it looks like Netflix has renewed Bridgerton for Season 2.  They have a production start date in March.  I remember reading that they were supposed to film this in the summer so this isn't totally a surprise.  

I've only read two of the books so far but I vastly preferred the second so I'm looking forward to casting for the series. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

This is a media thread for the series. 

Character/plot details we know from the book and its sequels belongs in the spoiler/book talk thread.

Posts that have this info in them have been moved (or will be once I'm off my phone) into that thread.

Generic stuff like liking a book or character is fine but more than and we risk saying too much.  Thank you!

Share this post


Link to post

Full trailer:

I like this a little less than the teaser trailer mainly because it looks like it's going to stick closely to the book and that might lead to a long eight episode season unless they can punch it up a bit more.

Share this post


Link to post

I think they might be. Just from that clip it looks like even thought the main story is following Daphne/Simon, they are setting the stage for Eloise (she is the one complaining about wanting to 'Fly') and it looks like possibly Benedict's story as well.

What I really appreciated about this is they showed the importance of the Queen's audience.  Quite a few shots of Queen Charlotte.  She held a drawing room quite frequently where the young ladies had to be presented at court.  Court gowns were super costly and the fashion in Queen Charlotte's court was that feathers were a required accessory.  So it is a nice nod to real fashion history that Daphne is wearing feathers when she is presented. But her dress isn't quite right.  I believe the court dresses during Queen Charlotte's time  were supposed to be more Georgian silhouette (bigger, wider hoops) rather than Regency silhouette.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

Oh this is tough. 
I love shows like this
I love Julia Quinn
(I wanted to read the books)

It's a Shonda show though 😞

but the trailer looked so fantastic. 

Share this post


Link to post

It's a Shonda show but I don't know how intimately she's involved with the writing.  

But even if it follows her pattern, I find her shows usually enjoyable for the first two seasons before they go off the rails.  So I think I can do two. 

  • Like 1
  • Laugh 1

Share this post


Link to post

Based on the NYT article, it doesn't sound like she's involved much in the writing.

"With its speedy pacing, fervent monologues and strong matriarchal characters, “Bridgerton” bears Rhimes’s unmistakable imprint. But the person tasked with bringing the show to life was her protégé, the showrunner Chris Van Dusen, who started as Rhimes’s assistant on “Grey’s Anatomy” 15 years ago and eventually rose to co-executive producer of “Scandal.”

When “Scandal” was in its final season, Rhimes recalled, she handed the first “Bridgerton” novel, “The Duke and I,” to Van Dusen and said, “Make this into a series.” So he did, wrapping the filming just a couple of weeks before the coronavirus pandemic shut down television production across the globe."

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

10 hours ago, TheOtherOne said:

This doesn't really feel like news, but TV Line says Season 2 "could" start shooting as early as March (though the show hasn't been officially renewed).

People (blogs...etc.) who pay attention to such things saw there was production scheduled for this past July.  For obvious reasons, it was delayed and now it's scheduled for March.

I've said this elsewhere but I do suspect Shonda basically got a two season commitment as part of her deal.  I've noticed Netflix doing this quite a bit lately where second seasons have essentially been greenlit (and sometimes already filmed) before the first season debuts.  That's not to say that they couldn't cancel a second season but I do feel good about it. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

For all that I found the treatment of the topic in the series very problematic, IMO it's encouraging that it has spurred some productive discourse regarding the presentation of consent in the media:

https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2020/12/bridgerton-sexual-assault-scene-how-does-it-happen-in-the-book

https://www.pajiba.com/film_reviews/the-questions-of-male-consent-that-puncture-both-fantasy-worlds-of-bridgerton-and-wonder-woman-1984-.php

https://www.vox.com/22194033/bridgerton-netflix-rape-scene-novel

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/tv/0/bridgertons-rape-scene-exposes-problem-historical-romantic-fiction/

Usually with something seen as "frothy" like the romance genre, things like that just aren't taken seriously.

OTOH, it's unfortunate that a bigger audience is first exposed to a romance series where the handling of the topic is as oblivious as IMO Quinn and the series (in a different way) are. Issues regarding consent are of course present in the romance genre as a whole, particularly in older works. But the genre in my view also often does very good work in very sensitively and intelligently depicting the complexities involved.

That said, if they wanted to adapt something like the Wallflower series by Kleypas, for example, I would also want them to deal with "The Devil in Winter" in a manner that either acknowledges that St. Vincent abducted and threatened rape in a previous book or drop that plot point altogether. None of that "He didn't really mean it, it was just a joke, he has a heart of gold LOL" nonsense the novel tries to pull.

One of the best historicals dealing with this and one of the best books of the genre IMO is "Indiscreet" by Balogh, really taking into account the brutal reality for women and the societal consequences. With an anti-hero slowly coming to understand and genuinely repent that him ruining the reputation of the heroine and consequently having to marry her re-victimized her after her family had shunned her already years before for refusing to marry her rapist. It didn't even seem anachronistic that he gained this awareness and took responsibility for his own actions because Balogh gives it all so much nuance. But I guess this is also a case where you wouldn't have silly fun, adapted to the screen it would translate into a serious historical drama.

  • Like 1
  • Useful 3

Share this post


Link to post
On 11/2/2020 at 1:40 PM, rollacoaster said:

This will fill the Harlots shaped hole in my soul. 

Me too! I was thinking the exact same thing when my Mom and I were binging this weekend.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

5 hours ago, katha said:

OTOH, it's unfortunate that a bigger audience is first exposed to a romance series where the handling of the topic is as oblivious as IMO Quinn and the series (in a different way) are. Issues regarding consent are of course present in the romance genre as a whole, particularly in older works. But the genre in my view also often does very good work in very sensitively and intelligently depicting the complexities involved.

There's also some behind-the-scenes issues where Quinn has said some problematic things about writing people of color in her books. There's a thread on Twitter here that is very worth reading. 

I'm still watching, of course, but there's a couple of problematic areas. 

Share this post


Link to post
12 hours ago, katha said:

One of the best historicals dealing with this and one of the best books of the genre IMO is "Indiscreet" by Balogh, really taking into account the brutal reality for women and the societal consequences. With an anti-hero slowly coming to understand and genuinely repent that him ruining the reputation of the heroine and consequently having to marry her re-victimized her after her family had shunned her already years before for refusing to marry her rapist. It didn't even seem anachronistic that he gained this awareness and took responsibility for his own actions because Balogh gives it all so much nuance. But I guess this is also a case where you wouldn't have silly fun, adapted to the screen it would translate into a serious historical drama.

Indiscreet is SUCH a good book especially for the reasons given.  But also because of how all the characters around the heroine re presented with their attitudes -- the church, the people in the village, etc.  The hero's brother is one of my favorites because of how he handled everything.  Really, it is such a shame that we haven't seen more romance novels adapted.  There are so many that are smartly written and full of very interesting characters and plotting.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post

The cast reads an excerpt from The Duke and I. 

https://www.instagram.com/tv/CJeD_vPDOMy/?igshid=zud9qal27j3r

I can't decide who's my favorite. Marina with her slightly doubtful air, the Featherington sisters getting warm under the collar, Penelope's French accent or the Bridgerton* boys. I think it's the last. Why are you looking at me? So when are you and I shooting this scene? 

Once again I applaud this show's promotion.

*using the characters' names as I don't know all the actors yet

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post

A couple of pieces I enjoyed are this one, about Shonda Rhimes signing with Netflix:

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/features/shonda-rhimes-is-ready-to-own-her-s-the-game-changing-showrunner-on-leaving-abc-culture-shock-at-netflix-and-overcoming-her-fears

Shonda asking for another Disneyland pass reminds me of Ma Rainey looking for a bottle of Coca-Cola, if anyone's watched Ma Rainey's Black Bottom. In each case the talent bringing in all the money was not valued. Way to see the big picture there, Disney exec!

And this piece asks why the romance genre has had so few prime time TV adaptations this century, compared with other genres and given its enormous popularity. There's no mystery here; the answer is sexism pure and simple. But it's good to have it pointed out in black and white in the New York Times:

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/28/arts/television/bridgerton-outlander-romance-novels.html

I hope Bridgerton isn't a one-off. I share Julia Quinn's hope that it opens the door for the romance novel industry and paves the way for lots more adaptations.

Edited by Kirsty
  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post

7 hours ago, Kirsty said:

And this piece asks why the romance genre has had so few prime time TV adaptations this century, compared with other genres and given its enormous popularity. There's no mystery here; the answer is sexism pure and simple. But it's good to have it pointed out in black and white in the New York Times:

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/28/arts/television/bridgerton-outlander-romance-novels.html

I hope Bridgerton isn't a one-off. I share Julia Quinn's hope that it opens the door for the romance novel industry and paves the way for lots more adaptations.

Slightly off-topic, but this is one reason why I was so disappointed when ABC cancelled The Baker & the Beauty, almost nobody does rom-coms/romances anymore. 😕

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Yeah, the romance genre has always been disparaged and ridiculed in sexist terms. There are issues in the romance novel community, but that's true for all other literary genres as well. And if spy novel writers like John LeCarre can be regarded as important authors (I agree, I'm not bashing him!), then why can't prolific romance novel figures like Nora Roberts or Mary Balogh?

There are many great books and series that could be adapted to the screen, they would be fun and interesting. Many of the authors also have quite nuanced takes on topics like gender, class, psychological problems, war or race (though this is still a blind spot for parts of the writers and parts of the reader community, it seems to me). Quinn isn't particularly sophisticated and we've talked about the various problems in her works, but she can be witty and entertaining. So with the mostly encouraging reception for "Bridgerton", I don't see why other broadcasters/streaming services/producers can't start looking for more source material in the genre.

Edited by katha
  • Like 10

Share this post


Link to post
On 1/1/2021 at 6:01 AM, Kirsty said:

And this piece asks why the romance genre has had so few prime time TV adaptations this century, compared with other genres and given its enormous popularity. There's no mystery here; the answer is sexism pure and simple. But it's good to have it pointed out in black and white in the New York Times:

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/28/arts/television/bridgerton-outlander-romance-novels.html

That article was 50% interesting and 50% made me want to hit my head against the wall. It’s like someone decided to write an article so that the TV/movie industry had all the excuses they wanted to avoid romance novel adaptations, all right there in one handy place. 
 

But none of those excuses hold a lot of water. There are plenty of contemporary romances. There are plenty of romances without sex, or where there’s no need to do more than make it clear that the sex happened; the particulars of it aren’t relevant to the plot. There are plenty of romances where there’s something other than just the romance going on, there’s a mystery or some sort of action story — no need to have people standing around while they work through their emotions. 
 

It kind of felt like they interviewed a bunch of people who knew nothing about romance novels, and asked them what they thought the problems would be based on their assumptions about the genre. 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
On 1/2/2021 at 1:37 AM, katha said:

Yeah, the romance genre has always been disparaged and ridiculed in sexist terms.

IMO, it didn't help when Harlequin suddenly switched to using exactly the kind of titles that played to the scorn and prejudice of what non-readers thought they were about in the first place: The Bachelor's Baby Bargain, The Tycoon's Secret Baby, The Sheikh's Virgin Bride, blah blah blah. All slightly smutty in a breathless, isn't-this-titillating kind of way. For the most part, I stopped reading Harlequin when they started using these kinds of titles. I had been fighting for Harlequin to be regarded seriously, and to overcome people's assumptions that they "knew" what a Harlequin romance was. I actually wrote a scholarly article which was later published on an online book review site, about what Harlequin Romances had done for the genre, and then they caved and began playing to the lowest common denominator by using titles that convinced people that what they'd believed all along (that HRs were trashy, smutty books) was correct, and it became impossible to read the books and feel any kind of self-respect because they suddenly seemed so...tawdry.**

**The truth is, I've always loved plotlines like marriage of convenience, blind hero/heroine, heroine fleeing abusive ex, anything paranormal--which Harlequin was doing long before most other publishers,  except, Kismet and Loveswept.  

I'll stop before your eyes glaze over...

  • Like 2
  • Useful 1

Share this post


Link to post
47 minutes ago, magpye29 said:

IMO, it didn't help when Harlequin suddenly switched to using exactly the kind of titles that played to the scorn and prejudice of what non-readers thought they were about in the first place: The Bachelor's Baby Bargain, The Tycoon's Secret Baby, The Sheikh's Virgin Bride, blah blah blah.

I think by the time Harlequin began using these types of titles, which I want to say was early 2000s, non-readers ideas of romance had already been entrenched.  Harlequins obviously have been around for years and were fairly tame for years.  It wasn't until Kathleen Woodiwiss burst onto the scene that modern romance took on a wholly different cast. 

But I think it was authors like Johanna Lindsey and her covers done by Elaine Duillo who was the first person to put Fabio on covers which is what crystallized what romance was all about in non-readers minds. 

I have to say, speaking of Elaine Duillo, say what you will about women with their bounteous breasts and Fabio with his bared chest heaving, but Elaine Duillo's covers are works of goddamn art!  She actually painted her covers.  A lot of romance cover art was originally painted, not photographed or illustrated.

220740785_Elaine1.jpg.1637db4bd617b53b953b613fb5d5502d.jpg

139397148_Elaine2.jpg.3d747fb182bf0acc6601fbfa6f4e59be.jpg

1735482479_Elaine3.jpg.69fa94bc6ee061657fecddff461eba9a.jpg

  • Like 2
  • Useful 1

Share this post


Link to post

I certainly hope there will be more seasons because while the Simon and Daphne pairing was swoony I found at least one of the brothers and one of the sisters more interesting.

Also, Anthony is the oldest brother? So, how come Benedict looks at least 10 years older?  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...

Customize font-size