Read Bridget Jones:Mad About the Boy by Helen Fielding Samantha Bond Online

bridget-jones-mad-about-the-boy

A GoodReads Reader's ChoiceBridget Jones—one of the most beloved characters in modern literature (v.g.)—is back! In Helen Fielding's wildly funny, hotly anticipated new novel, Bridget faces a few rather pressing questions:    What do you do when your girlfriend’s sixtieth birthday party is the same day as your boyfriend’s thirtieth?Is it better to die of Botox or die of loA GoodReads Reader's ChoiceBridget Jones—one of the most beloved characters in modern literature (v.g.)—is back! In Helen Fielding's wildly funny, hotly anticipated new novel, Bridget faces a few rather pressing questions:    What do you do when your girlfriend’s sixtieth birthday party is the same day as your boyfriend’s thirtieth?Is it better to die of Botox or die of loneliness because you’re so wrinkly?Is it wrong to lie about your age when online dating?Is it morally wrong to have a blow-dry when one of your children has head lice?Is it normal to be too vain to put on your reading glasses when checking your toy boy for head lice?Does the Dalai Lama actually tweet or is it his assistant?Is it normal to get fewer followers the more you tweet?Is technology now the fifth element? Or is that wood?If you put lip plumper on your hands do you get plump hands?Is sleeping with someone after two dates and six weeks of texting the same as getting married after two meetings and six months of letter writing in Jane Austen’s day?Pondering these and other modern dilemmas, Bridget Jones stumbles through the challenges of loss, single motherhood, tweeting, texting, technology, and rediscovering her sexuality in—Warning! Bad, outdated phrase approaching!—middle age.In a triumphant return after fourteen years of silence, Bridget Jones: Mad About the Boy is timely, tender, touching, page-turning, witty, wise, outrageous, and bloody hilarious.TODAY Book Club Selection...

Title : Bridget Jones:Mad About the Boy
Author :
Rating :
ISBN : 9780804148764
Format Type : Audio CD
Number of Pages : 12 Pages
Status : Available For Download
Last checked : 21 Minutes ago!

Bridget Jones:Mad About the Boy Reviews

  • Heddus Blackwell
    2019-05-29 13:32

    Number of days expected to take to read this book: 1, number of days actually took to read this book: 9, number of times expected to be able to put down this book: 0, number of times actually put down this book: 100+I loved Bridget Jones; I avidly read the weekly column before the books came out and excitedly awaited the release of the third book. As all fans are aware, Bridget's appeal was that women, whatever their background, could identify with her. Sadly, this is no longer the case: she is a wealthy widow, does not work ( her ludicrous attempts at screenwriting can't be counted as work and they most definitely can't be counted as being funny ), has a nanny and a cleaner yet constantly whinges about her hectic life, easily loses 3 stones in 13 weeks and bags herself a toyboy 21 years her junior. Most of us would struggle to relate to her and this, perhaps, reflects the probability that Helen Fielding's life now is very far removed from that of most women. The thirty something Bridget was imperfect, insecure and loveable; the 51 year old Bridget is just a silly mare who needs a bloody good talking to by someone who lives in the real world as opposed to her ( once entertaining ) ridiculous friends. Had Mark Darcy lived, it's very difficult to imagine that he would have put up with such an annoying creature. This is the main reason that the book just doesn't work the others being that the attempts at amusing social commentary about matters such as competitive parents and domestic technology have been done before and that the book has obviously been written with the film in mind. Up until the last 50 pages I was going to rate it 2 stars ( v generous owing to nostalgia ). However, as the predictable ending, with its clumsy parallel with 'Pride and Prejudice' ( yet another one ), unfolded, I nearly threw the book on the fire and so could only award it 1 star.

  • Kay
    2019-05-23 14:10

    After hearing what the book is supposed to be about and the direction it's supposed to go in,

  • Mimi
    2019-06-16 14:18

    Dear Ms. Fielding, I want to erase this book from my memory. I read it, and, despite the plot, the scenes are good, the writing is fine, funny, and sometimes sad. But, the premise that (view spoiler)[Mark Darcy is dead was a really stupid move. Mark and Bridget are interesting enough that you didn't have to kill Mark to make Bridget's life interesting and your readers didn't need to see her fall in love again. She's not supposed to love again.(hide spoiler)]I don't think you understand the appeal of your previous books or characters. Readers did not just want to see Bridget falling in love, despite struggles. The books to us are about love despite imperfections. Love, as Louis de Bernières says, is not about falling in love. "..when [falling in love] subsides, you have to make a decision. You have to work out whether your roots are to become so entwined together that it is inconceivable that you should ever part. Because this is what love is." And that is what your readers, Ms. Fielding, got from the first two books. We knew intuitively that Mark and Bridget weren't just falling in love. We were watching real love. And you ruined it. And I will erase this latest book from my mind and pretend you stopped writing at the end of the last book. Sincerely,Mimi

  • Joanna
    2019-06-13 06:32

    Time spent looking forward to new Bridget Jones book: Months!Time spent reading new Bridget Jones book: 2 daysTime spent being disappointed in new Bridget Jones book: rest of life, approx.(view spoiler)[I was so excited about this book, and even hearing the Big Spoiler about Mark Darcy did not dim my enthusiasm. Bridget Jones at a new stage in her life, as a widow and a mother, it seemed like it could be an interesting idea. If Helen Fielding wants Bridget to be an older singleton, I do think that it's better this way than - for example - if they had been married and then divorced, or just never managed to uncross their signals once and for all. But this book - oh my. While it seems like Helen Fielding really wants you to chuckle with fondness over Bridget being the same old Bridget, I felt like her version of Bridget Jones at 51 was a bit too hollow, or too facile, perhaps.Yes, Bridget would perpetually forget school permission forms and musical instruments. Yes, she might be too distracted by her own concerns to notice a septic fingernail. And it's fine for her to not know exactly where Germany is - as noted in The Edge of Reason. But I do think that if she was working on a screenplay adaptation of Hedda Gabler, that she would at least have a copy of the original play showing the correct author and spelling of the character's name. This is a minor plot point, but it shows the larger issue with this book - it veers from making Bridget seem stupid to making Bridget a character that it is hard to believe in.Maybe part of that is because Bridget's new circumstances are less relatable - she has a nice townhouse and a nanny and no need to work for money. Through the course of these books, she has morphed from Eliza Bennett to Anne Elliot, and somehow landed at Emma Woodhouse. The bits that seem to try to make Bridget relatable are all to do with crisis about the children - a look at how adorable and funny these little people are sort of humor. I still remember the scene where Magda and Jeremy had that blazing row outside of Bridget's flat, while her bathtub was overflowing and the car alarm was going off all over - it was screamingly funny. Nothing in this book really raises a genuine laugh.There are a few nice moments in it - when she has the moment with Jeremy where they are both being extremely sad about Mark, and when - as part of that same scene - she thinks about how she has spent the last 20 years not wanting to hurt the feelings of a group of Cosmo's circle who are consistently rude to her. Those both felt very real and true, so much so that they almost seemed like part of a different story altogether.The narrative structure of this book -which sticks to the standard diary form, but jumps through time from the opening scenes back in time to an earlier period, then catches up with the opening scenes time period about half way through, continues through linear time until the end, when it fast forwards to a Happy Ending quota. Aside from the part that day entries in the diary are so sprawling that they sometimes now go on for multiple chapters, the overall structure and time movement doesn't make much sense. Time as a whole seems a bit problematic for Fielding in this installment - with Bridget being 51, with her oldest child at age 7 - she must have had her first baby at 44. This is, at least, nine years after the end of the last book, when she and Mark were planning their lives together. Sure, maybe it took awhile for them to get it all together, but with all the previous mention of biological clocks, doesn't it seem like they would have tried for kids right away? Or if not, that there would be some mention of why? (It seems rather like the answer is so that Bridget's children can be Cute!Little!People!) Bridget's friends are all more or less intact - although Tom is now a top psychologist (really?) and Jude has remained single after her divorce (10 months after the wedding) from Vile Richard. Shazzar has moved to America with her husband, which may or may not be a metaphor for the voice of feminism becoming more distant as Bridget ages. As opposed to the previous books, however, where the friends had actual subplots of their own (Tom's plastic surgery/disappearance, for example), they seem rather one note in this installment. Tom's obsession with Gwenyth Paltrow's lifestyle blog is horned in at every possible opportunity, but to no real end. It's not even that funny.Roxster, who is the toy boy that Bridget takes up with, is a merry sex god who seems to have no personality of his own. He's also 30, although his character seems to live and act more like he just got out of university (lives with three other boys and obsessed with food). It's lovely that he is so nice to Bridget and helps her to get back on the horse of dating, but you don't really care about him very much. Also, her obsession with texting and twitter makes Bridget a worse version of herself - distracted, and actually rather rude. Also, their tweets go on for pages, and if you are not familiar with the way the @handles work, it is very difficult to tell who is talking, and to who.The True Love Interest is easy enough to spot, as he is the one who takes on the role of swooping in every 50 pages or so, scowling or saying something a bit snide to Bridget, and then disappearing for a long bit of Roxster obsession. Argh. Part of my issue is that I didn't much like The True Love Interest in general (he's not just a bit rude to Bridget at first, he's actually insulting her in front of her son) and part I didn't like the way Bridget gushes about him toward the end "HE'S SUCH A MAN." And what was up with the coda where they decide to get all the children christened at the end? It felt weird and tacked on and awkward. Book is simply not v.g. (hide spoiler)]

  • Diane
    2019-05-24 10:07

    When I heard that Helen Fielding had written a third book about Bridget Jones, I was a bit perplexed because I wasn't sure whether the quirky antics of the scattered, 30-something Bridget would still be amusing in a 50-something mother. But it was surprisingly fun to read about her adventures in dating and parenthood. The book made me laugh out loud several times, and I often found myself smiling while I read.The novel opens with Bridget excited about dating a younger man and writing a screenplay, in addition to being a single parent of two children. As you may have already heard -- and which is revealed early in the book -- Bridget's husband, the wonderful Mr. Mark Darcy, was killed in an accident while working in Africa, and now she is finally coming out of her grief and depression to start dating again.I think so many women fell in love with the Bridget Jones books (and the delightful movie versions) because she allowed us to laugh at ourselves and our funny obsessions with dieting and men and self-improvement projects. It was smart of Helen Fielding to update the story because that generation of women has matured and now has other issues to deal with, and who better to help us cope with laughter than our dear old friend Bridget?One new thing that Bridget tries is social media. She opens a Twitter account and quickly gets obsessed with how many followers she has. She feels pressure to tweet clever things, and then embarrassment after tweeting while drunk. And when she meets a young man on Twitter she likes to flirt with, she learns how much fun texting can be:"The fantastic thing about texting is that it allows you to have an instant, intimate emotional relationship giving each other a running commentary on your lives, without taking up any time whatsoever or involving meetings or arrangements or any of the complicated things which take place in the boring old non-cyber world. Apart from sex, it would be perfectly possible to have an entire relationship that is much closer and healthier than many traditional marriages without actually meeting in person at all!"In addition to the humor of modern life, there is also a sweet side to the story. Bridget genuinely loved her husband and was devastated by his death. Her plans for self-improvement and forced cheerfulness are so touching because she is desperately trying to be a good mum to her kids, even though she'd rather stay in bed, wallow in her grief and eat chocolate ice cream.If you enjoyed the first two Bridget Jones books, you will probably like this one. There is humor, there is romance, and there is even a happy ending. I declare it to be v. v. good.

  • Hannah
    2019-05-26 12:33

    The whole appeal of Helen Fielding's novels have been based on my absolute love for anything Jane Austen, and considering that Mr Darcy is "my guy", Pride and Prejudice retellings or modern remakes have always had a special place in my heart.Granted, I enjoy the movie more so than the book, but at least I can still picture Colin Firth as Mark Darcy. That's not to say that the book isn't great - it is infinitely times greater than any other piece of chick lit out there, and that's the appeal of Bridget.Bridget is someone I can turn to when I'm feeling down with my life. When sit down and assess how things are going and I realise:So I turn to books and movies with HEA that make me swoon to try and feel good about myself. Bridget is always, always, that feel good moment. Whether it's in book or movie form.In saying that, I will never pick up this novel.Why? Click spoilers to find out why.(view spoiler)[The great attraction of this novel, of course, is one Mr. Mark Darcy. It's a fact. We love Bridget because she's normal, her bum is the same size as ours, and she's having a midlife crisis. Heck, I'm turning 24 and I'm having a midlife crisis. We women relate to Bridget.Why? Because if Bridget can snag a Mark Darcy, then we all can. Mark, Mark, Mark, Mark Darcy. He's the love of our lives, the man of our dreams and we all gave a big collective sigh when he and Bridget got together. Then recently, I found out something completely shocking. Mark Darcy - *cries* - as in Mark Darcy, Christmas jumper wearing, barrister hottieness Mark Darcy - is dead. As in killed off. How, I don't know. Frankly, I don't give flying fancy how or why. He's dead.Killing off Mark Darcy is like...letting Voldemort live. Like Darth Vader taking over the world (did he take over? IDK, I don't watch Star Wars). Like Vanessa the Sea Witch winning and Ariel being turned into sea plankton. Like any literary hero and heroine never coming together in their HEA. Like Cathy and Heathcliff actually talking to each other.IT'S JUST NOT DONE.Quite frankly, I'm upset. And I won't read this book, despite having eagerly anticipating it since I found out at BEA that she had written another book.I get that Bridget's life is changing. That she's growing older, having babies by the dozen. I would be too if I was with Mark Darcy. But killing him? Making him cease to exist?Well, she might as well have ended up with Daniel Cleaver right from the start. It's pointless.Rant over. (hide spoiler)]["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>

  • Cath
    2019-05-31 06:21

    I preordered it! So excited. It's ridiculous how people judge the book without reading it... The ratings should be blocked until the release...I just read it! I love that Bridget still is the same beloved and funny Bridget we met before. I enjoyed her toy boy adventure, I really love the character of Billy and I think the ending didnt disappoint!Its funny, exciting and so easy to read. Really enjoyable.

  • Dina
    2019-05-24 12:25

    You've got to be kidding me! (view spoiler)[Mark Darcy is dead?!? Dead?!? (hide spoiler)] Even though I'm not a fan of the previous BJ books - the movies are much better, which is an anomaly -, they were certainly a must-read in the late 90s, I'll give you that. But this one... WTF?!?

  • Kate Hilton
    2019-05-19 08:09

    **Spoiler AlertRarely have a seen a set of reviews as inconsistent as those for Helen Fielding's latest installment in the Bridget Jones saga, Mad About the Boy. I assume that much of the hostility derives from Fielding's decision to do away with the beloved Mark Darcy in a horrible accident, and to set the novel at a point in time five years later, when Bridget is beginning to recover from the shock of her grief. This is not classic chick lit in the manner of the original two Bridget Jones novels; there is romance, yes, but this is not the tale of a twenty- or even thirty-something looking for Mr. Right. Our heroine is still neurotic, but life experience has given her character more weight. Her experiments with social media (Twitter, internet dating)are genuinely funny, not because Bridget is hopelessly flaky but because she is middle-aged and struggling to re-enter a world that has moved on without her. Her efforts to lose weight and find meaningful work are less about attracting a man than they are about reclaiming a sense of self out of the fragments of a shattered life. And the search for love - the ultimate success of which gives the last third of the book a satisfying sweetness - is tempered and enriched by Bridget's relationship with and responsibility for her two adorable, fatherless children. So, while I've loved Bridget Jones for years, I feel closer to her now that we've both grown up.

  • Fabian
    2019-05-20 12:15

    No, not as disappointing as Stephen King's newer sequel, "Dr. Sleep." But boy does the minutiae build up quickly to a bunch of nothingness-- not even contemporary British stuff is of any interest here. No, but Fielding SHOULD be commended for killing off a perennial favorite, vaulting our cute Brit into the world of dating once more. Why, oh why is Jonesey such a fan of Twitter & texting? Could you make her any less... generic? Even her likability factor suffers considerably. This is simply not v. good.But of note, that this pesky heroine can survive not one but TWO sequels almost unscathed is testament to her overall amazingness.P.S. Watching "Bridget Jones's Baby" made me sad--a total annhilation of character, themes, blah. It sucked ass.

  • Charlie Darcy
    2019-05-31 07:15

    I wasn't going to read this book. (view spoiler)[Mark Darcy is dead and as my favourite character it didn't seem worth the grief (hide spoiler)] However, as release date neared, I found myself (view spoiler)[wanting to know how it happened to make sure it was fitting to his character and him as a man... and then I'd go back to pretending it didn't happen. [Ahem] (hide spoiler)]I'm sad to say that I didn't enjoy it as a book. I admit I'd gone into it with the above reservations, however, I did at certain times look at the bottom of my kindle to see how long I had left in the book. There are certain parts that are VERY well done! (view spoiler)[ The part that reveals about how Mark died for one. I really felt it in my chest. The poem that he'd created for the children too and how Mabel sent her letter at Christmas to 'Daddy, Heaven, Space. (hide spoiler)] and the lighter side about encroaching age and its pitfalls (the glasses, the struggling to stand up after sitting down too long, technology etc. A lot of it does ring true.... And then there's the things about Daniel. (view spoiler)[I do like that since Mark's death he has proved himself as a true friend - always there immediately after she has called... even if he is cracking onto her still. And I was amused by him confusing Creme De Menthe and Fairy liquid... and the resulting bubbles. (hide spoiler)] In many ways Daniel hasn't grown up at all - he's simply gotten older. Sadly the same has happened to her friends. They're all exactly the same (with different jobs and varying successes) but their love lives haven't really changed (view spoiler)[though Tom does appear to settle down finally. (hide spoiler)] There's also a call back to Vile Richard too and Shaz, but neither appear in the book.The rest seems clunky and at times rather badly written (or just not interesting to me.) I found myself skipping a few pages because they were basically the same thing - mostly the parts about "Hedder Gabbler" meetings and some of the (view spoiler)[Toyboy sex with corny lines thrown in (like how he looks like an advert with a spray painted sixpack. This isn't Bridget! It occasionally verges nearer the mummy porn angle at times - too much focus on the sex. (I'm not a prude by any standards but it was ridiculous. Perhaps because it wasn't Mark and the increasingly careful angle of middle-aged sex with all its random aches and pains and other issues) (hide spoiler)]The interaction with the children is spot on and beautiful most of the time (view spoiler)[even if you ignore the Nanny stuff (hide spoiler)].As for the build up to the end, it was pretty obvious (view spoiler)[ Mr Wallaker was going to be the person she ended up with. It was Fielding's tried and tested manner - the man pops up as a light hearted antagonist (like Mark and the lies that Daniel said about him etc) and then wallop a kiss (or in Mark's case a statement about how he likes her very much just as she is) - lots of shock and discovering that her initial reaction is just not true - then a bit of chasing and wallop again. Together. (hide spoiler)]There has to be something said about the fact that (view spoiler)[ in my opinion anyway, Mr Wallaker is very much Mark Darcy born again (in an ex-SAS soldier's body admittedly) that makes it feel like killing Mark off was again a hideous mistake. (hide spoiler)]In conclusion, my opinion still stands. Aside from the (view spoiler)[Mark mentions (hide spoiler)] I didn't enjoy it 100%. It was a strange feeling, sort of half and half enjoyment and the other half thinking about what it could have been. Don't get me wrong, there are interesting parts but it didn't hold my attention 100% like the other two books have done. I would have preferred to actually see/read about the (view spoiler)[married life of Mark and Bridget, rather than just get the snip its of it, even down to the simple things where he swatted away the jellyfish comments (those stinging ones that come out of nowhere) without her realising and deleted the pointless emails from the school parents on sports day and agree to take black bags and hummus to the sports day picnic without the rowing over who would take what food. I'd have liked to see him reading the poem that he created for the children, and dealing with the sick children in the scene where there was an ever ending cascade of vomit and other things. (hide spoiler)]Now back to pretending that it didn't happen! (like those awful post TEOR Guardian columns!) (view spoiler)[I suppose it wouldn't have been so bad if there'd been something in between, but to go from just getting her Mr Right to him having been dead for 5 years makes it feel as though we have been cheated in some way. (hide spoiler)](ETA: Another small aside - it's irrational but I kept rolling my eyes at the 'ooh, look at me I'm 'soandso' (like fat/snow etc) jokes. They were so repetitive and too often and not funny the first time!! )

  • Sharon
    2019-06-05 08:07

    Diabolical.Lovable, cuddly, foot-in-mouth, just-the-way-you-are Bridget is long gone. In her place is a 51 year old widow obsessed with finding a man (yes, still,- and while we're on the subject, what kind of a name is Roxster?!), losing weight (yes, still, - a referral to an obesity clinic at a size 14? Really Helen? Way to relate to a huge chunk of your original fans there...) and booze (mouthful of wine in the middle of a children's diarrhea/vomit incident? Really?)As for "hilarious" - if you find nits, poo, vomit, technophobia and juvenile name-calling among parents funny, then you'll split your sides within the first 50 pages. Otherwise, you'll sit as I did, cringing for this ridiculous woman. Just keep in mind when reading this that Bridget is no longer in her thirties and trying to work out where her life is going. She's 51, with children raised by a Nanny (even though she doesn't work) and a stupid boyfriend. Her friends haven't grown up either, and her mother is still commenting on her life even though she's now in her seventies. Helen seems to think we've all forgotten who Bridget is - lines from the first two books and films crop up repeatedly. "Daniel, my former emotional f*ckwit boyfriend and Mark's former arch-enemy" or "Running around naked on his parents lawn". Look, I'm all for finding love and discovering who you are no matter what your age, but when these characters are supposed to be in their fifties and they're still having telephone conversations that involve the words "what colour are your knickers, Jones?" - it's time to stop reading. Helen made a huge mistake getting rid of one of the most popular characters, but she made an even bigger one by writing this drivel in the first place. It's obviously written with the intent of being turned into a film, because it's lost all the sparkle of the first two books and instead is heavily reliant on visuals that will work in a Hollywood movie. The sentence "it's raining men" is actually in here. Repeat references to the Dalai Lama's twitter account and numerous mentions of checking for followers made me want to heave. Awful.

  • Karen Chadwick
    2019-05-31 10:15

    I found the endless text speak, twittering etc very, very annoying and incredibly difficult to read, quite frankly I felt it was a lazy way of writing, and a means of padding.Bridget's character (in this book) is completely unbelievable, very immature and totally one dimensional.Extremely poor characterisation, and with an underdeveloped paper thin plot.Maybe this is a minor niggle, but I found the name "Roxter" to be the literary equivalent of nails down a blackboard.Helen Fielding now says that she intends to bring Darcy back, in my opinion, this is backtracking and damage limitation as the backlash has been major.It's not quite Bobby coming out of a shower, but it's not far off and I think it shows a major disregard for the buying public.I paid 13.99 euro for this in Ireland, and frankly I would love to get my money back, rather than this feeling of being ripped off.Writing (and it's appreciation) is a subjective thing, there is rarely a consensus of opinion, no matter what genre, but honestly, lazy writing is not to be supported.

  • D
    2019-05-26 11:26

    high 2sa moderate disappointment. at times fielding really brings it (exploring grief and loss), and seeing the adult incarnations of bridget's pack of besties makes me smile. but mostly i was fatigued by our hapless heroine: the neuroses that used to seem charming just come off as ridiculous in a woman of her age. her self-sabotage, narcissism, and failure to launch were cringingly Rorschachian as i read her in my twenties. but she's fifty-one now, and she simply comes off as sad and unhinged. i'm not saying that women are forbidden their insecurities and flaws after so many birthdays. not at all. what i *am* saying is that bridget has evidenced ZERO personal growth since we checked in with her last. her immaturities and weaknesses are just as pronounced at fifty-one as they were at thirty-something, if not more so. which is sad. dysfunctional. toxic. antithesis of charming.and her Male Consolation Prize this go 'round? no, thank you. he's a gruff, judgy asshole-bully. i suppose i put up with similar from mark darcy because (1) he'd known bridget her whole life and maybe sort of seemed like he had a right to his opinions (not to mention she WAS sort of a dick to him in that opening scene -- you know, the one with the Sad Reindeer Sweater?), (2) he reversed said opinion so charmingly -- and convincingly, over time -- once he (and we) were shown how winning she could be, and (3) he's marck fucking darcy. he gets a PASS, people. (do i NEED to even remind you about the wet man blouse? yes. you're welcome.)but this guy? Prince Charming 2.0? a total fuckwit. he smirks and glowers, his sole function, evidently -- besides *** MINI SPOILER *** nicely filling out a pair of heather gray track pants *** END MINI SPOILER *** -- to underscore how hopeless and ridiculous bridget is. awful. painful. MEAN.AND THEN? he pulls a complete 540 (more than a 180 [<-- see what i did there?]) and *dares* to offer us a sad knock-off of the "i like you -- just the way you are" line, which would be awesome, except for that I DIDN'T BELIEVE A WORD OF WHAT HE WAS SAYING. because all he's done up 'til that point is rag on bridge and point out how ludicrous she is and how much she should be ashamed of herself. but now because fielding is approaching her word limit we're supposed to believe that he magically actually finds said insanity charming? enough to base a FUTURE on? and note, please, that fielding has done LIT-rally nothing, chris praeger, to show us up 'til now how bridget is actually charming and not certifiable.no. it was a mess psychologically, this book. it read as if fielding were reworking her winning formula (messy heroine meets cute and hates gruff hero; haplessness ensues; he recognizes her charm under the lint and mocha stains; she's flattered; they live happily ever after) but had forgotten to (1) show us enough of the hero to make his psychological journey credible and (2) actually remind us that bridge is likable.*le sigh*still, go ahead, kids, and read it if you tittered over the first two titles. there's enough to keep it from being a complete waste of pulp.(ALSO: while Bridge the First = Pride and Prejudice and Edge of Reason = Persuasion, i didn't identify this as an austen revisitation in any way. am i wrong, readers? what'd i miss?)

  • Rache
    2019-06-07 09:11

    Gahhhhh, Gahhhhh and more damn GahhhhhhhhhhLet me preface my thoughts by saying that I'm going to pretend this book was never written, swiftly returning to a sweeter time when I believed that our gentle heroine received the happy ending she deserved from the end of book 2.I would like to start every sentence with 'the very cheek' and 'how dare you' whilst making sweeping arm gestures but I don't want to continually repeat a theme, unlike a certain English Novelist that we all know.Sooo then, let me sum it up quickly by saying - what a contrived, awful, pile of trite!!!!!!!. A complete travesty to the memory of the first two books. I'm almost offended that Helen would think that Bridget fans would enjoy the story/plot. Honestly. What was she thinking; 15 years, since the last book was published,18 years total, of Bridget living in Helen's head and she felt the latest instalment was up to scratch, the best idea she could come up with, that she was doing Bridget's character justice??? I pooh pooh you Helen Fielding

  • christa
    2019-05-29 07:21

    Here is the least surprising sentence that I will write today: The new Bridget Jones book really, really sucks. But we all knew that, right? It all came together for series author Helen Fielding just once, admittedly more than it does for some people, but she’s never again been able to find that same balance of characters, plot, truths and one-liners as she had in our introduction to this once-lovable, relatable and bumbling character. Pity. “Bridget Jones: Mad About the Boy” finds our foot-in-mouth lead at age 50 with two young children and, eeps, no Mark Darcy. He’s dead. He died doing his do-gooder work. No spoiler alert. Fielding dropped this nugget before the book was released. So now B Jones is practically a born-again virgin, so say her indiscernible friends. They insist she get back in the game and toss a bunch of 2013 internet words at her to help her find a man. She latches on to Twitter and begins broadcasting her life to a steadily growing following. So now, in addition to units of alcohol and calories, she keeps track of her followers. As all of this is unfolding, she is working on a film adaptation of Hedda Gabler, though somehow she has gotten this project to the point of production meetings without knowing who wrote the original work, nor how to spell Gabler. So. In Tweets Roxster, a 30-year-old who woos her in 140-or-less character flirtatious blips. Eventually they move to texting, then dating, then navigating the complexities of a relationship between an older-woman-with-kids and a younger-man-with-roommates. None of this is very interesting. Not the Twitter and text banter. Not the constant search for a babysitter -- which brings bad boy Daniel back into the scene in a way that isn’t at all believable. Fielding writes the “toy boy” segments as though she’s heard about Twitter and she’s heard about text messaging … she’s just never done it or known anyone who has. The ending is very predictable. Fielding employs a plot technique that worked the first time she tried it on Bridget, but now seems obvious and, frankly, pretty lame -- the same way it would if you or I were to dig back into a 20-year-old bag and test some of our old moves while wearing our current life. Pa-thet-ic. Oh. Here's one thing, though. For what is supposed to be a comic novel, the sad parts are really well drawn and, well, really sad. Like, "Here. Attach this dumbbell to your soul" sad. At least twice, while Bridget was reminiscing about Mark Darcy, I felt just sick with the weight of it all. So that was weird. Maybe years ago we all liked Bridget because we had grown up with the blonde, coup-driving, size 6 Wakefield twins and, suddenly, here we had Bridget and her granny panties, getting loopy on wine and weeping into the sleeves of her jammies. If she so much as tried to toss her hair she would probably end up in traction. She was a girl who aimed for an ideal and somehow ended up worse, but secretly better, than where she started. And ultimately she found a partner who wasn’t looking for someone who can walk in a straight line without tripping over something. In fact, he found her clumsiness endearing. But first there was a lot of loving to hate the wrong man and hating to love the right one. And everyone knows that shit is the marrow of being a 20-something. Much of this book feels like it was written to be immediately adapted into a movie. A lot of the gags don’t translate to the page and you can practically see Renee Zellweger’s “too-proud-to-cry-because-my-undies-are-showing” smile. I knew this book would suck, just like the second Bridget Jones book sucked. And maybe, upon rereading, the first one sucks, too. Who knows. But much like accepting a friend request from someone you haven’t seen since the mid-1990s, curiosity won.

  • Kate
    2019-05-22 06:23

    No. of times cried: 2.5 (the 0.5 was tears welling, not spilling)No. of chocolate bars consumed: 2No. of times laughed out loud: eleventy bazillionNo. of Twitter followers: 518No. of times I thought “I love Bridget”: eleventy bazillionNo. of perfectly fitting endings for Bridget: 1No. of scenes where I thought Bridget and I would be best mates IRL: eleventy bazillion (especially the nits bits)4.5/5 Yes, shortest most useless review ever but to all the haters*, too bad, Fielding rules. The third installment for Bridget is brilliant (yes, even though it’s true that Mark Darcy is dead).*mostly those people that gave it one star on Goodreads without actually reading the book.

  • Mara
    2019-05-29 06:19

    Helen Fielding and her iconic character, Bridget Jones are the grande dames of Chick Lit, and Mad About the Boy doesn't disappoint. In most ways, that is. As usual, I won't spoiler the plot or tell anything that you can't read for yourself online. Suffice to say, this book will make you laugh and cry at the same time. For us 'women of a certain age', it's easy to relate to the fact that Bridget's voice, and that of her partners in crime, doesn't change, that people don't change, just their life staage and circumstances do. And that's what I loved the most about the novel, aside from the fact that I've always adored Bridget's bumbling and somehow positively negative outlook on life. If you love Bridget Jones, you will absolutely want to read this one, even notwithstanding the terrible horrible that happens which you can read about everywhere else but here. I do agree with some other reviewers that the end is a bit rushed, and tidied up to quickly, and we all know that with Bridget Jones, nothing is ever very tidy at all.PS if you use social media at all, you will die laughing at Bridget's attempts to use Twitter.If you'd like to see my full review, visit my blog http://www.beniceorleavethanks.com/20...

  • Erin
    2019-05-16 12:11

    GAH!I'm so glad that the movie(Bridget Jones and Baby) and this book are distant relations. Thank goodness that movie making people know what will make a woman feel scorned! Mark+Bridget= forever! I had to stop at page 137 because I couldn't take it anymore. But I did skip to the end to read the last 50 or so pages to find out what happens. Also, Bridget J was often blunt and crude, but when did she get down right vulgar? I wish I had never read it!

  • Deborah Markus
    2019-06-02 09:23

    A lot of reviewers think this book doesn't work because the premise is unrealistic. Because there are plenty of women Bridget Jones' age who are single mothers due to divorce, but very few who are widows.Yeah, you know what I've noticed about the other two Bridget Jones books? They're one hundred percent realistic. The stuff that happens to Bridget is stuff all women of a certain age can relate to. Like, remember that time Bridget's mom got involved with that sexy con artist wanted by Interpol? Oh! Or the time Bridget landed in a Thai prison thanks to a phony drug-smuggling charge? We've all been THERE! Seriously! We've all been in actual prison, in Thailand! That's why we read Bridget Jones books -- because we can all, like, relate so HARD!pfffft. Please.If you liked the other Bridget Jones books, read this one. It's as simple as that. Bridget is as endearingly baffled as ever, and she's a lot of fun to watch. That said: Yes, I enjoyed the first two books more than I did this one. But that's because I'm shallow and picky. Bridget has two small children in this book, and Helen Fielding found it necessary to have a lot of extremely detailed descriptions of various bodily excretions. I just really hate that kind of thing.Also, okay: Remember all the terrific scenes in The Edge of Reason with Bridget and her best friend's kids, where Fielding really nailed how kids talk and wrote some terrific dialogue for some very young characters? Well, she kind of fell down on that part of the job in this book. Bridget's daughter has a part-time lisp -- not an actual speech impediment, but one of those "I'm the author and I don't think readers will remember this is a really young kid unless I make her talk funny" tells that lazy writers employ. That got old quickly.But I'm quibbling. This story is funny, and often genuinely moving. Oh, and guess what, reviewers from the New York Times, the L.A. Times, and any other papers who thought that women readers wouldn't be able to relate to a widow in her early fifties? I'm in my forties, and I found myself identifying fondly with many of Bridget's worries. She's intimidated by effortlessly glamorous moms. She can't figure out how to use the remote now that they all look and act like advanced-physics calculators. She worries about her weight and then feels guilty about being so shallow. She knows she should eat healthy, but wants to eat the yummy bad stuff because, hello? Yummy.I can relate.

  • Melissa
    2019-05-27 11:10

    Helen Fielding, what have you done?Aside from the very controversial plot twist that has shaken the Darcy Nation to its foundation, there are two huge problems with this story: (1) It's really slow (2) Bridget Jones is still, well, the same Bridget Jones, and it doesn't fully work anymore.Back in the '90s, Bridget Jones was my homegirl. Fun, carefree, totally neurotic, and extremely funny, she was so relatable. What living breathing member of Gen X didn't have their Jones moments back then? But the '90s are long over, and now she has children, and (sort of) responsibilities. And so does a huge portion of her audience, so the old gimmicks, such as the calorie counts and alcoholic bev tallies, don't resonate anymore. There are definitely some aspects that are spot-on, like the mass amount of "reply all" messages from the school moms, the attempt to *not* look like the mom from Good Luck Charlie, and reading books about French kids and why they are infinitely better. And she is still Bridget, doing things like calling the annoyingly perfect mom Nicolette, "Nicorette." But the rest ... eh, not so much. The screenwriting plotline was ridiculous. The nonstop Twitter/text banter between Bridget and Roxster was tedious. The reason why I read books is because I can only take so much @ and RT, and whoop, there it is for at least 300 pages. Even the ending, which was charming and happy, just came out of nowhere. WHY did we just spend 300 pages with Roxster when we could have built up the ending and gotten to know this essential character a bit more? And last but not least, there's the controversial plot twist. I'm not a Mark Darcy purist, but I don't understand why this had to go down. Would a story about Bridget juggling marriage and motherhood be too been-there, done-that? There have been a couple comparisons to "I Don't Know How She Does It" but I think Bridget Jones' version would have been better, because she is Bridget Jones, after all. All that said, I didn't fully dislike it. It did have some charming parts. But the Bridget Jones franchise has officially played itself out. Maybe Helen Fielding can focus her next project on "Nicorette" who has all the makings of a fascinating story.

  • Lian Dolan
    2019-06-14 07:09

    Flashes of the Bridget we love and the Helen Fielding we love, but not enough. Dang. I wanted to see what Bridget had made of herself and I was rooting for Helen Fielding to find some new obstacles for Bridget to tackle in her own endearing way. But a lot of this book felt recycled from other books- particularly I Don't Know How She Does It- about crazed moms, internet dating, and other middle- aged crises from weight gain ( still?) to how to manage trendy fashion. And the fact that so much of the story takes place via Tweets doesn't improve the situation.The moments where we do see a real 51 year old woman who finds herself widowed and still grieving 4 years later are the best moments in the book. I wish Fielding's editor had trusted the "Bridget Jones generation", like me, to have grown up, too. We didn't need to see the Bridget of 20 years ago, so the dating- the- younger- man subplot seemed very tired and contrived. A Grown-Up Bridget for Grown-up readers would have been great.

  • Helle
    2019-06-08 11:29

    I needed a pick-me-up after a workweek that sent me to bed for a couple of days; something which would demand little cerebral power but keep me afloat and steer me away from the fever-induced risk of self-pity. Well, this book served its purpose. After much eye-rolling during the first half of the book, I did manage a few giggles toward the end (that ended in coughing, but never mind). But though the element of Bridget’s quirky recording of her daily intake of calories, weight, etc. has now branched off to include daily tweets, followers etc., the novelty of the concept has somewhat worn off. I read the first two books about Bridget over 15 years ago, back in the days when I, too, was a singleton who lived in a groovy apartment in the centre of town. A whole generation of women, if not several generations, looked to Bridget Jones to make them feel that being a Colin Firth-adoring, messed-up single woman in her thirties was completely OK. Bridget was endearing and made most of us feel reassured that we weren’t quite that pathetic. Bridget has gotten older now, but so have I. The innocence that characterized the earlier books is to some extent gone (except when she’s with her kids). Sex is now talked about in a much more graphic manner, which seems out-of-character with the earlier Bridget but possibly in character with middle-aged, desperate Bridget. But also, she no longer has any financial or work-related issues because (view spoiler)[Mark Darcy has died and has left her heaps of money, something which probably isn’t even a spoiler (hide spoiler)]. She finds it difficult to get her kids to school on time – despite the fact that she has no job but does have a nanny. I sympathized deeply with her feelings of loss and could relate to e.g. the nit panic and other exciting things that children introduce into your life, but as Bridget’s life was now among London’s privileged ‘SUV-moms’, some of her issues did not stir in me the sympathy that the one major issue did (and, previously, all her issues).Still, maybe that’s not the point. I firmly believe in judging/evaluating a book on its ambition and within its scope, and Helen Fielding didn’t set out to win the Booker Prize. She can put together a plot, create outlandish scenes and keep my inner teenager turning the pages (and my outer adult shaking her head incredulously). And though she managed to do this without much depth, and although parts of the book were repetitive and preposterous, over-the-top silly and quite unrealistic, it served as a cheering tonic during illness and in between weightier books. A quote to round off my first chick-lit experience in over a decade:Cosmo looked as though the rug of his entire socio-sexual world view had been pulled from under him. His face was like a fruit machine with different ideas and emotions whizzing past, failing to find a final combination to rest on.

  • Tatiana
    2019-05-30 07:31

    (view spoiler)[Mark is dead! (hide spoiler)] and Bridget is 51! and still clueless. I don't care to read about that

  • Kate
    2019-06-16 11:16

    Bridget is back! But this time around I found myself, much to my surprise, wanting to staple things to her forehead. Whence such blasphemy? Well...Mark Darcy is dead now, which I understand as an artistic decision--as Chekhov, or was it Ibsen, once said, "All happy families are [boring]." A novel about Mark and Bridget being happy in love and raising their children would have been colossally dull and treacly. But Darcy's untimely extinction means that Bridget is a wealthy widow with no need to work, and this has catastrophic consequences for my ability to put up with her. Modern-day Bridget lazes around having the nanny do the school run (to private school, of course!), half-heartedly working on a screenplay, Tweeting, and obsessing about what to wear. It's not as if she were an Alexey Stakhanov in the previous two novels, but at least she went to a job every day. Now that she's jobless, her shiftlessness is much less endearing.Fortunately for Bridget, most of the people she meets don't share my view and she is able to settle down happily with (view spoiler)[a man whose entire personality appears to comprise a) having been in the armed forces and b) a tendency to silently acknowledge humorous situations with a "flicker" of the eye or "twitch" of the mouth. Seriously, count the number of times Mr. Wallaker flickers and/or twitches, it's like the man's a walking tic (hide spoiler)]. Fortunately for me, Bridget's observational and non plot-advancing writing is as sharp as ever, and it was fun reading her thoughts on modern fashions and affectations. I still recommend re-reading the first two books rather than this one, though.

  • Manybooks
    2019-06-03 07:12

    Although I actually did end up at least somewhat enjoying this third instalment of the Bridget Jones's Diary series, I simply cannot totally forgive Helen Fielding for the premise of this book, for having killed off Mark Darcy. I did get used to Bridget as a single parent, and many of her antics are as endearing and as outrageous as in the first two books. But no Mark Darcy and the fact that Fielding had made him die in such terrible circumstances really did do a number on me and my emotions. Thus, while I certainly did like Mad About the Boy by the end, I also did not truly love it, and will never be able to truly love it (there is simply too much sadness, and a for me nastily gratuitous sadness that I wish the author had refrained from using). And furthermore, since I really do neither like nor even agree with the very concept of Twitter/Facebook, while I could smile a tiny bit at Bridget trying to make friends on social media, I was also not only rather bored by and at this, I also kind of wanted to shake some common sense into her (my kind of common sense). It was always so nice that Bridget was at least somewhat as much of a technophobe as I am, and not all that "connected" and into social media, and when that changed, I have to admit that I felt both somewhat annoyed and kind of abandoned (and one major and important thing Mad About the Boy has definitely shown me, is that I was not and am not missing anything with regard to social media, and that I will continue to stay away from especially Twitter, and more than a bit gladly). Two and a half stars!

  • Assia
    2019-05-30 12:14

    You have no idea how excited I am about this.(view spoiler)[Even though Mark Darcy is dead.(view spoiler)[I'm trying to figure out whether I should buy it on Kindle or hardcover.10 - 16- 13 : I'm going to wait until the price goes WAY down. I'm not feeling it. 11-3-13 : I do not like it omfg I'm returning to buy Fangirl by Rainbow Rowell. (hide spoiler)] (hide spoiler)]

  • Bamba
    2019-05-19 07:06

    I have always hated the idea of anyone rating a book before they have read it but in this case I had to make an exception!!! After the revelations by author Helen Fielding this weekend, I won't be reading this or any other new HF book ever again.I have been so excited about hearing what Bridget has been up too (even tho I did not believe it was necessary) and to hear that HF has destroyed the story of BJ's and shown such a lack of respect to fans is just unbelievable!!Yes, I know its fiction and laughable that I feel so strongly about it...but who doesn't love Bridget?!!!Am still hoping the revelations this weekend were a bad joke/bad publicity stunt!!!

  • Lisa Novelli
    2019-06-04 14:20

    Disappointing. I knew the 'Big Spoiler' before going in. I admit it tainted my pre-conceived hopes for a third Bridget Jones novel, but I resolved to enjoy the book for what it was. Alas, that proved more difficult than even I had expected. Fielding said Darcy 'had to die' because Bridget 'needed to be single'.Actually, no, I disagree. The thing is, what we loved about Bridget was that she was relatable. Even in the more bizarre situations that had little to do with real life (a la the whole drugs mule storyline in book 2), Bridget always felt like one of us (despite being ever so upper middle class). We understood her.And we would have understood her if, even in the best, healthiest most loving relationship, she lost her way. It happens to the best of us. And every part of the story here where we're able to connect most with Bridget, when she's most vulnerable, could easily have been written within her marriage to Mark.Can Fielding honestly think that no happily married woman has ever had doubts, ever lost her sense of self in the midst of mother, wife daughter? We would have still loved Bridget as we watched her struggle along with the majority of womanhood who sometimes loses their way. We didn't need Bridget to be single...we've been there before with her. We WANTED to move onto the next phase of he life. And we didn't necessarily NEED life to be perfect a la Happily Ever After with Darcy. Just something that felt truthful and real. The insecurity of getting older, losing our desirability, losing our sense of self, trying to adapt to modern fashion/technology etc, trying to find our sexuality, sensuality, intimacy again. All of the themes of the novel could so easily have been drawn upon without killing off Darcy. And that's the thing that just so jars with this novel, because the after effects of the thing that actually doesn't happen in the novel, leaves such a bitter taste in the mouth. It was done in such a brutal way. And yes, I'm perfectly aware that women can be widowed young, with very young children, and that really horrible brutal things happen in real life, but here it just felt like a ploy to play on our sympathies: "I won't just make you weep to know Bridget lost the love of her life, but really wring out every ounce of emotion. Why don't I make the children young, 2 years, that's young. Hey, 3 months is even better. Really make the fuckers cry"It just seemed so cynical and crass. However, there were some things to like here. The children were adorable, even if the phonetical spelling of Mabel's lisp did get a bit tedious. The new characters were nice additions, particularly Talitha, although I feel Rebecca was wholly underwritten. I actually really like Roxster. He could have so easily been written as a cliche...young, dumb etc. but he was a nice, regular guy, and the relationship played out perfectly. So full marks there.And Mr Wallander? Well. What's there to say...he was lush. The whole romance with him though, that was a little less satisfying than the character himself. Despite being completely obvious from the beginning that he was 'the one' the act silly relationship felt so rushed at the end of the novel, and although as readers we were aware of his worth for a long time, it felt as if Bridget just suddenly fell in love, jut like that. Loved Daniel in the story: it was great to see him stay true to character, treading that very fine line between a loveable rogue and sleazy creep, falling the wrong side every now and then.There's so much more I could ramble on about, like the complete absenteeism of Shaz. Yes, friends come in and out of our lives, but that doesn't feel true of this character. Surely we would have heard Gand takes of life from the USA? Especially given Bridget's new found love of technology and social networking?Ultimately, the book lacked substance, as did our much loved heroine unfortunately. Disappointed.

  • Harriet Evans
    2019-05-30 08:27

    OK, I'm giving this 4 stars, even though maybe it should be three stars, or even 2! It's kind of patchy and there are things in it that really annoyed me, but I won't spoil it for anyone who hasn't read it. The ending is rushed and not enough care is taken in some parts, whereas other parts are WAY too repetitive (ooh would love to discuss this further with people who've finished it) BUT for one reason only it works and that is a big reason...I LOVE BRIDGET JONESShe is still my favourite character in all literature I think. And to see her as a mum and a widow is really wonderful. She was my 20s, along with Friends, gastropubs and the Spice Girls and I love the way she has retained her character and it works in the context of the book. I love Helen Fielding's writing, her sharpness, eye for detail, and the little things that imbue Bridge with her character. Just as the column about Princess Di was the most moving things I read about her death in the week after it happened, her writing about Mark, her children, the sad parts of her life is sooo good, and there were at least 10 places where I laughed out loud too. I love how brave it was to kill Mark off, and how reimagining her life in this new way works (seriously though, what are those kids doing in those awful schools with those dreadful parents? put them in the local state school and save yourself cash and a whole load of trouble!)Ultimately I feel protective of Bridget and I think lots of people do. She's silly, but whether there's 5% of her in you or 95% (I'm more the latter...) she's a little bit of all of us. To try to make her into something representative of women today and draw some larger picture about what this says about women who enjoy her is really silly and sexist. As HF herself said, no one asks Bertie Wooster about feminism. She's a comic character and this is a comic novel with real heart and while I was reading it I rully rully enjoyed it. Aw. Thanks HF you're great.