Reviewed by Colin Jacobson (May 28, 2025)
Based on the novels of Helen Fielding, movie audiences embraced Bridget Jones via 2001’s Bridget Jones’s Diary. This quickly led to a sequel in 2004.
The character went dormant as a cinematic enterprise for 12 years before she returned with 2016’s Bridget Jones’ Baby. After another extended break, 2025’s Bridget Jones: Mad About the Boy brings back the role one more – final? - time.
Widow Bridget Jones (Renee Zellweger) mainly focuses on her children Billy (Casper Knopf) and Mabel (Mila Jankovic). Four years after the death of her husband Mark Darcy (Colin Firth), however, her friends finally convince her she needs to re-enter the dating world.
Younger man Roxster McDuff (Leo Woodall) actively pursues Bridget and they become a couple. However, Bridget doesn’t seem completely convinced to follow this romantic path as she finds herself drawn to her Billy’s teacher Scott Walliker (Chiwetel Ejiofor) and winds up in a love triangle.
Shades of the original movie! In that one, Bridget needed to decide between Mark and competitor Daniel Cleaver (Hugh Grant).
Obviously Mark won that battle. For old time’s sake, Mad brings back Daniel for a couple brief scenes, though it ignores the obvious temptation to make him Bridget’s love interest again.
Mad also goes to the “romantic competition” well one more time. Though I never saw the second and third movies in the franchise, glimpses at their plot summaries indicate that both found Bridget stuck with the need to choose between two potential partners.
Does it seem tedious that all four films use the same conceit? Yeah, but that doesn’t necessarily mean Mad will flop.
Whether or not you think Mad hits the mark will depend on your tolerance for comedic contrivances. The litmus test relates to how Bridget gets to know Scott.
They meet in a theoretically comedic antagonistic manner. Mark then happens to pop up every time Bridget finds herself in an awkward position.
If you find these situations hilarious, you’ll love Mad. If you find them eye-rolling and phony, you won’t.
Me? I largely fell into the latter category.
This doesn’t mean I actively disliked Mad, as it churns up enough charm to make it vaguely watchable. For better or for worse, it ladles out cameos with abandon.
I say “for worse” because these exist as gimmicks. Few of the brief appearances from guest stars actually seem necessary in terms of the film’s plot.
This becomes especially true for Firth’s exceedingly short visits. He appears as a literal ghost and his usage feels utterly gratuitous.
Grant integrates a bit better, but he nonetheless feels superfluous. The same goes for the short turns from folks like Emma Thompson, Isla Fisher, Jim Broadbent and others. They give the movie some star power but could disappear from the proceedings and no one would notice.
Nonetheless, I regard the parade of cameos as a minor positive because a) the actors add spirit and b) they distract from the tedious nature of the film. Mad comes with an awfully thin plot, as it mostly presents a series of comedic escapades into which Bridget falls.
Like everything else about Mad, these feel like self-conscious echoes of popular elements from the first film. Unfortunately, they seem forced and rarely particularly amusing.
Honestly, almost everything about Mad comes across as contrived. The movie replicates aspects of its predecessor but fails to find fresh elements to explore.
That seems like a disappointment because Mad ostensibly explores Bridget at a very different stage of life compared to the first three movies. When last seen in Baby, Bridget was the newly married mother of an infant.
Nine years later, Bridget deals with a dead husband and two kids. The sight of Bridget single again in her 50s as a solo parent offers plenty of room for worthwhile exploration.
Which Mad deals with in only the most superficial manner. Rather than develop Bridget in a meaningful way, the movie simply bounces from one contrived stab at comedy to another.
These only produce sporadic laughs, and most feel like tired rehashes. The film rambles terribly and struggles to figure out a real narrative thread beyond “here’s more Bridget wackiness”.
For fans of the franchise, that’s probably enough. They’re likely just happy to see Zellweger back as Bridget one more time.
For those with less attachment to the role and franchise, Mad becomes a lackluster enterprise at best. Little more than a random collection of supposedly amusing sequences, this flick never gets into a groove.
Footnote: we see photos and footage from earlier Bridget Jones movies during this one’s end credits.
