By Professor Finola Kerrigan
Professor in Marketing, Birmingham Business School, University of Birmingham
Bridget Jones has done it again at the box office. But if we want to understand the success of this newspaper diary/book/film adaptation, we must acknowledge that such success does not come from nowhere.
I was late to the Bridget Jones party when the first novel Bridget Jones’ Diary came out in 1996. At the time I was working in Germany and missed its launch, despite it becoming an almost instant best seller in over 40 countries. As an English language graduate, I had been immersed in more ‘literary’ tomes and wrote it off as ‘chick lit’.
Three years later, I had moved to the UK to embark on a PhD on marketing European films and my understanding of marketing in the cultural and creative sectors seemed to be paying off. I saw through the gendered marketing and read a borrowed copy, immediately becoming one of those people on the tube who burst out laughing, annoying those around them.
My initial dismissal of the novel (based on a serialised newspaper column by journalist Helen Fielding) reflects exactly the sorts of issues that Kate Mosse (publisher turned author and advocate for women in literature) has highlighted around work by women being diminished, seen as less serious and ultimately less worthy of literary awards than those of men. Happily, I was then able to read the original and sequel back-to-back and see Bridget’s character progress.
Throughout my PhD I explored the success of Polygram Filmed Entertainment, which later became Universal Pictures. I was interested in how the company’s structure influenced its marketing approach. Working Title, as the production arm, and Polygram as the distributor, were among the few successful examples of a company effectively combining production and distribution.
Polygram Filmed Entertainment, the parent company for Working Title Films had some advantages in terms of developing films capable of performing well in multiple markets.
Firstly, they had experience of working in the significant film markets of the US and UK. Secondly, they had team members located across different territories who fed their local knowledge back into decision making about marketing their slate of films to these distinct audiences. Thirdly, they developed a winning formula in terms of the Romantic Comedy genre which combined British humour with a bankable US female lead and Hugh Grant as the stereotype of the upper middle class British man.
Having had incredible success with Four Weddings and a Funeral, then Notting Hill, Bridget Jones was their first adaptation. The project saw the author of the newspaper column, then novels, Helen Fielding, join preeminent comedy writer Richard Curtis and Andrew Davies, well known for their work on literary adaptations. Collectively, they brought Bridget to the screen.
In my academic work on book to film adaptation, we reflected on the challenge in navigating such adaptations, but in this case the collaboration was true to the spirit of the literary character.
The most recent film revisits idents those that came before, which themselves were inspired by the original Mr Darcy from Pride and Prejudice. These familiar elements can connect earlier audiences to the later instalments, igniting their emotional connections to the franchise.
My later study of James Bond highlighted the need for a franchise to retain a relatable formula, whilst evolving storytelling to have contemporary relevance in order to retain audiences. While Bond is associated with masculinity, Jones provides relatability for women. The most recent film revisits idents those that came before, which themselves were inspired by the original Mr Darcy from Pride and Prejudice. These familiar elements can connect earlier audiences to the later instalments, igniting their emotional connections to the franchise.
When we first met Bridget Jones, she was a woman of the 90s, based loosely on Fielding’s own life and social circle. Bridget spoke to younger women navigating that decade, one which is now looked back upon nostalgically. Her character was both admired and criticised as she reflected body anxiety and the challenge of making her way in the working world, justifying decisions, ups and downs in her romantic life whilst also juggling friendship and family. A very relatable character for many middle class, recently graduated women.
We might now question how easily we accepted Bridget’s evident body dysmorphia. Our memories of navigating the size-zero, sex-positive, yet deeply classist and gendered social landscape may feel more bittersweet. Like in all Working Title RomComs, class is treated unproblematically. While many widows with young children may face significant challenges in providing for their families, Bridget has no such concerns.
In terms of the evolution of Bridget Jones as a character, Fielding’s subsequent novels, in 1999, 2013 and 2016 provided the blueprint for the later films, continuity remains through the casting of Renée Zellweger as Bridget, and the almost obligatory casting of Working Title RomCom leading men Hugh Grant and Colin Firth. Change comes via the evolving life story of Jones, continuing up to the most recent instalment to mirror the life of Helen Fielding. However, younger generations are rediscovering Bridget, introduced by parents, older siblings, and the many opportunities to encounter her story through the novels or on screen.
Bridget now is less focused on counting calories, smoking and seems to have reduced her drinking slightly and is much more concerned with supporting her children in their grief and dealing with her own to agonise over her appearance. While the social pressures to get back to work, perform ideal motherhood, pursue an active sex life and find a replacement life partner reappear in Bridget Jones, Mad About the Boy, more mature Bridget relies on her support networks to successfully navigate these.
Bridget has combined the highs and lows of life, professional and personal. The characterisation continues to be authentic to those of us who have grown into adulthood alongside her and according to book sales and box office reports, to new generations who follow on. Jones is complex and not flawless, but she remains relatable, just as she is.
- Find out more about Professor Finola Kerrigan
- Back to Social Sciences Birmingham
The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the University of Birmingham.