Nothing like the book, for better and worse...

Rating: 7/10 (20 July 2002)

I think I'll start by saying that I am not a fan of the book, which I found rather childish and pointless. Therefor I had no higher expectations when I went to see the movie. But fortunately I was proved wrong, I think I can honestly say that apart from the names Bridget Jones's Diary (the movie) is nothing like Bridget Jones's Diary the book. And in my case that was a good thing... for a while.
Strangely no matter how dull the book is I get slightly ticked off if the movie doesn't follow it. And in Bridget Jones's Diary there are very few elements that resemble the book. On the upside, the movie runs smoothly and all parts are equally entertaining (for the most part). On the downside the movie is such a far cry from the book that I wouldn't recognize them if they didn't share the same name.
So for the acting; Hugh Grant is great, and a lot less annoying than usual. Colin Firth was way too dry for my taste but I guess that's how Marc Darcy is. Renee Zellwegger did have me impressed, especially with the accent, I saw her in Jerry Maguire a few weeks ago and was stunned at how different she sounded and looked. Bridget's friends are fine, although you see VERY little of them.
But honestly my main problem with this movie is that Bridget (and Renee Zellwegger) are NOT overweight. According to the BMI calculator 136 lbs on a 5,5 foot frame is HEALTHY! Bridget's BMI would be 22.6, that's normal. Over 25 is overweight. It's really sad the way Hollywood (and other parts of entertainment) makes 136 lbs out to be overweight.
I guess I'd give it (with the cut scenes that were hilarious): 7Â½/10