Simon’s reasoning for not wanting kids may have been stupid,but daphne still needed to respect it. I was screaming at both of them the entire time, they’re so infuriating
If Daphne wanted a family, she should have gone for the Prince, who expressed that he wanted a big family with lots of kids, rather than the guy who didn't want them. But Simon was stupid for essentially trapping her into marriage impulsively, and without meaning to.
@@MinieAnne yes he did. He kissed her in the garden and they got caught. If they didn't marry, that blonde girl would have ruined Daphne's reputation, and she wouldn't have been able to get a suitable match with anyone.
I just realized they could have bypassed the Daphne-rapes-Simon-for-a-baby thing. They established that Daphne and Simon have unprotected sex all the time and he just pulls out. But hey, what if we used common modern logic applied to these alternate reality regency wives tales. Just like they did with "Brenda" and the tea -- it didn't work because that's nonsense. Well, what if Daphne gets pregnant anyways because the pull out method is a less than reliable form of birth control? Daphne would think it's a miracle while Simon would be dumbfounded and upset. Segue into the drama where Daphne learns the truth is that he simply didn't want kids and that he'd been purposefully trying to prevent it. Daphne could be upset at feeling lied to, Simon could be upset about the pregnancy, and Daphne could be depressed that her husband isn't excited for their impending child. PLOT TWIST Daphne suffers a miscarriage early on and is devastated. Simon comforts her and comes to realize that he had begun to accept fatherhood and realizes he can be a different man than his own father was. So at the finale an undisclosed amount of time later it shows them welcoming a baby they both want into the world. NO RAPE NEEDED, DAMN IT NETFLIX HIRE ME.
DAMN SIS YOU NAILED IT. I don't know what happened exactly because I have no interest of watching this show, but there is no way a petite woman can "force" herself on a guy who boxes regularly and is a MAN. He could pick her up and say "no" easily. But the whole idea of her getting pregnant anyway (because for a man who doesn't want kids having unprotected sex makes him a dumbass) and then him grappling with the fear they carefully spelled out is WAAAY more interesting. What if she threatens to leave because she wants a child? What if SHE changes her mind and actually doesn't want kids? So many interesting things!!
This relationship could've been so easy! Simon: "Daphne, I care for you but I have a vengeance against my dead father so I don't want to continue my lineage. Are you still up for marriage?" Daphne: "Oh shit, for realsies? Nevermind then." THE END.
THANK YOU! Exactly! I'm so tired of this trope that normalises no communication. Like, it's that fucking simple! Why is SImon struggling to tell her the truth, it's not that deep. Why is Daphne so pressed on the difference between "can't" and "won't have", the outcome is the same and she needed to respect it, she agreed to not have kids. I'm so tired of hollywood acting like people are unable to tell the truth for literally no reason.
@@Jojo-no4ng they're perpetuating this "won't share my feelings with ANYONE cause I'm super mysterious" thing, poisoning relationships everywhere. Granted, sometimes it's hard but you chose your partner for a reason so just talk to them
he neves says that, he says "i cannot have children" (Daphne thinks he is sterile), and while he is saying that, Simon and Daphne's Brother are about to kill each other over Daphnes "dignity" in a duel with handguns. She chose crap over crap that's no free willing choice. And Daphne is very likely to be upset cos Simon never really opens to her explaing why children were a big NO.
@@Jojo-no4ng couldn't it be that people who liked the show acknoledges that sometimes the worst conflicts in relationships come from poor comunication. Daphne and the Duke are toxic and flawed, but no one is saying they are perfect. Can't and won't is are to very big deal scenarios if Daphne is supoused to be a girl that was trained to become a wife all her life with no other talent but being a mother and a wife, Simon not being able to have children is a tragedy for Daphne, but Simon rejecting children aslo means Rejecting Daphne's her and motherhood, remember that Simon never explains to her why he refuses to have children Daphne does not even know sex works she feels decieved by Simon cos she is very ignorant and she thinks Simon does not wants Daphne's children.
A note, to be fair: having one if not multiple parties to attend every day was actually very accurate for the so called "marriage season" in the era that the series is set into. As a girl, you had one job: get married, possibly above your station. For that, the season was non-stop partying, dancing, being seen in the right parks, being seen at the opera, etc. It was like a 6-months exam session where your failure to find a partner would be extremely public. That part of the series was very accurate, with details such as ending up in a dark section of a park (huge no-no), getting "the hem dropped" when you became of marriageable age, gossip and social standing being able to make or break your "career", etc.
Thats the reason why I think Season 2 was not as good as Season 1. In Seasonn 1, you could feel the restraints and expectations of society. The stakes were so high that Anthony and the Duke were about to duel with a possible death, all because Daphne and the Duke kissed. In Season 2, none of this really seemed to matter anymore? They were doing whatever they wanted, wherever they wanted, and did not really care much for scandals anymore. Ffs the scene where Edwina DISOBEYS THE QUEEN DIRECTLY baffles me. Or Anthony and Kate having very public makeout sessions, after his wedding to HER SISTER failed. Nobody cared. It did not do season 1 justice in terms of societal constraints in that era.
Yeah as some one that read books like Jane Austen(based during the same time about) and yeah those books even say there wasn't much to do other than balls, parties and teas. And often talk about having something at least once a week of not more depending on how rich those involved(the really rich really did have parties all the time because again it was one of the only things for them to do)
Daphne seems like the most extreme version of a 15 year-old in her first relationship who thinks she basically owns her partner because 'but you said you loved me.'
She is like 18 or 19 at max and if we compared her to today's teen then her knowledge level when it comes to relationships will be that of a 13 or 14yr olds at max...
@@nat8134 even if she is shown to be 25, she is completely illiterate when it comes to physical relationships and grew up in a very protected and conservation household... Her mindset is basically like a 15yr old in today's time( or even younger than that considering there was no friend circle or internet back then for her to get information on her own) Its established pretty early that she isn't that matured and has a very idealistic mindset when it comes to marriage...
Daphne does love Simon or at least she is really into him sexually, but it's Simon who puts Daphne in a tricky situation by kissing her. Daphne has no other choice but to marry the Duke or let his brother and Simon kill each other to death.
I think the reason Bridgerton became popular is because of the time frame it came out. Bridgerton came out the day after Christmas I think, so lots of people had some time off and we couldn't exactly do much because seeing family in pandemic was unfortunately not in the cards for many people--depressing. People like me were kinda looking for a head-empty no thought romance and were hoping Bridgerton could deliver. Watching Bridgerton (for me) was like consuming an entire bag of candy all at once, at first it's kinda great because you are easily distracted by pretty people and bright costumes but the further you go, it gets sickening and you kinda leave more depressed and self disgusted than you started.
People also don’t realize, this is a VERY popular book series. There is also a thriving booktube, and bookstagram community that shares adaptions. I knew a lot of people excited for this. There was a fan base already in place, and they spread the word.
omg i was about to comment this....direct conversation is not a thing in this country lool. its all about speaking in circles and resentment hidden in layers and layers of speech.
while every adult i know regardless of class talks about worldly issues rather unrestrained, i definitely agree. probably because thats what most of us have been raised to be like, but also because it really fits the whole (not entirely incorrect) stereotype of british stoicism in the face of adversity. humility is culturally a MASSIVE deal here... nothings worse than not having humility, so we tend to rely on passive aggressively taking the piss out of situations, whether for better or worse. in relation to the actual video, regardless of status, being overly polite and talking in docile coded language is most def the norm lol
Eloise had so much potential to be everyone's favorite character if the writers knew how to give her an ounce of depth. In one of the scenes where she and Benedict are talking about life and prospects, she pretty much tells him that he can do anything he wants to because he's a man, and if he wants to be an artist then all he has to do is hire a drawing master to teach him. I would've loved to have seen more of this frustration at the actual system they're trapped in, and her conflict with wanting to pursue her own desires, but also knowing her place and purpose as a daughter of an upper class family. They focused so much of her discontent towards balls, dresses, men, etc., instead of at the limits that the patriarchal society puts on her education, dreams, desires, and career. Would've also loved a scene that actually shows her discussing/reading her writing. that would've been another great way to give more insight and depth to her character, and show that she's actually passionate about writing. They also could've created such great parallels/a foil relationship between her and Benedict. they're both the second oldest of their gender and have less pressure/responsibility than the eldest, but it's shown in the show that pressure is still being put on them (Their mother urging Eloise to dress more grown up and go to balls, and Benedict being told that he would be head of the family after Anthony duels) , and that they view themselves as less capable in society than their older siblings. Anthony is also free to do whatever he wants to do, but is unsure of himself and lacks a real passion. Eloise on the other hand, has drive and a dream, but has no real options in how her future will play out. I had so much hope for her, but the writers had to make her the generic snarky little sister character.
In the books she ends up with a creep who didn't do anything to help his depressed first wife who then commits suicide and he chooses Eloise as a sensible replacement because he needs a woman to f*ck and take care of his kids, he abuses these kids btw.
There's so many unexplored themes here that the show absolutely bungles or maybe just doesn't know how to navigate, that could have given us infinitely better episodes and characters. Way too much "tell, don't show" happening here, just like you said with Eloise talking about how limited she is and how much she enjoys reading and education, but it always FAILS to show these things! We don't get a real sense of exactly HOW these women are allegedly limited aside from them talking about it. Only ONE named male character displays misogyny, and he is immediately shut down! Not just shut down but punched by Daphne, punched by Simon, scolded and threatened by Anthony, and then smeared all over society and his reputation destroyed until he's no longer on screen again. This world fails to show us the alleged patriarchy it says it operates under. It fails to show us more of that great dynamic between Benedict and Eloise. It fails at observing social classes and other conflicts, despite knowing full well that this is an established issue. As much as I enjoyed parts of it, this show does suffer from extremely sloppy writing and a lack of depth, not to mention knowledge of its own purported themes.
YES! I was waiting for her to have some type of big rebellious moment but nothing - it is so frustrating to see a show where the writers had a chance to develop a great character but then just don´t. In retrospective it feels like she was supposed to be the exact opposite to Daphne so that Daphne could appear even more angelic. Would have been nice if they had granted her that depth.
@@gaanadelrey I’m personally disgusted that that show was green lit for a second season, even after all the problems that the show runners and writers undoubtedly know about. And since it’s filmed in Paris, it makes me nauseated to think about what they had to do to whitewash the people in the background. That’s not accidental. You can’t go to a place as racially diverse as Paris and just accidentally have only white people in the background. That’s on purpose.
That was my big issue with the casting. She looks either confused or scared at all times and things really aren't that complex between her and Simon to need to warrant that.
I think it was mentioned in the book that daphne likes to scrunch her eyebrows a lot. Also i guess her “lost puppy” face is supposed to represent her innocence and naiveness while being in the marriage market where people actually marry for status and not for love.
I feel like Simon's thing with having kids isn't that petty, or at least it had the potential not to be. It could have been a really interesting way to explore how trauma can sometimes lead to irrational or self-harmful behaviors, maybe leading into Simon's fears of abusing his kids the way his father abused him. They could have explore the mechanics of coping with trauma in the Regency Era and given him a chance at a decent healing arc. But instead they just...piled on the trauma.
@@owenlealWho cares if it was out of spite? That is his right and it wasn’t like he did it for absolute little reason. He was abandoned by someone who valued title above all else including his children . That seems reasonable.
I can't believe that Daphne's sexual assault of Simon was just brushed off, and NEVER spoken of again. While he should have been honest about not wanting to have children, he didn't deserve that. It's worse in the original novel, where Simon was drunk, and couldn't consent.
@@MohamedRamadan-qi4hl If that was a joke, it was a shitty one but if it wasn't then yes, yes they can. No one would like anyone forcing themselves on them. Be a little considerate, man. Edit: Sorry if you were being sarcastic, it's rather difficult differentiating sarcasm on the internet these days..
@@platyperri BeCaUz MeN AlWaYs wAnT SeX. Tbf though wether or not the comment you responded to was sarcasm it's such a common stupid belief that woman can't rape men (because "of course your body reacting physically means you want it, right ?" Ugh) that the show doesn't even aknowledge a scene where one obviously does. It's just so disgusting.
100%. This is why she's my least favourite in the tv show. I've read a lot of the books while bored at work and that part of her personality is not nearly as extreme in the books. They make her over-the-top "I'm Not Like Other Girls" in the tv show. The books aren't good, but I promise it's not as bad in them, hahah.
Ok, I'm no historical fashion expert, but the contrasting fashion style is kind of a whiplash. People be wearing Georgian and modern fashion styles in one scene.
The queen and her entourage wear mid-18th century fashions, because the costume designer thought that the real Queen Charlotte never adapted to the change in styles at the turn of the century. However, this was very quickly debunked, as one of Queen Charlotte's few surviving dresses is in the Empire silhouette; not to mention that court dress did evolve with the changing fashions, as evidenced by English fashion plates of court attire from the period.
MakiMaki i love fashion history however the regency era isnt my main area of interest so some other people may be able to better explain it, but i also noticed this. there are way more reasons than the one that comes to mind INSTANTLY that i wont really go into, but the most noticeable issue for me is the cravat. pretty much every other guy has a white cravat (as was popular) but for some reason they gave him these odd low necklines and put him in black cravats, which wasnt really a thing for at least another decade! i think somehow that choice throws you off a little visually because NO ONE else wears that fashion, so if its a design choice meant to set him apart somehow, i wish it had a real meaning in the show
and yes oh my god, the mash ups of different eras are sometimes so off putting because it makes no sense why they put queen charlotte in styles that were very much not fashionable. every anachronism with costumes in period pieces is an opportunity to say something about the characters or imbue it with meaning and they never did that in a way that worked. i’m about to ramble on and on about an example of this done right so forgive me in advance for that. a great example of doing something technically anachronistic that REALLY worked well is the costuming in crimson peak. the sharpe siblings wear clothing from the 1880s, likely belonging to their parents, while the movie is set just nearing the turn of the century, so thats about two decades off. the clothing is absolutely not in fashion, and noticeably so, but the reason behind this choice works on a visual and character level. visually, it sets them apart from the light and flowing costuming of everyone around them-it makes them look out of place, dark, and restricted. relating to character, i believe this was done to emphasize the hold the past has on them, and how trapped they are in it. as their childhood is what eventually will turn them into monsters, it makes a LOT of sense to have their costumes represent the way they are trapped by the past and by the traumas they endured at the hands of the people whose clothing they now wear. THAT is how you use anachronistic costume choices to send a message! and apologies for the mini essay i got carried away here
Can we also acknowledge how Daphne read Simon's letters to his father, totally disregarding his privacy? She spoke about it as it was a perfectly normal and healthy thing to do.
This! And then she has the nerve to be like "I know why you have issues now because I violated your privacy, don't worry ☆~it's okay~☆" and it's supposed to be some dramatic moment where she helps him open up or something??? Ew ew ew ew ew
Thing is, THIS COULD HAVE STILL WORKED, if the show then treated this like she was wrong for doing so and she suffers some consequence (i.e, her seriously losing Simons trust). It would really drive home the fact that Daphne is someone who is inherently naive to unspoken social and moral decency, when all her life she's grown up knowing she's kept in the dark about certain things and is somewhat an emotionally driven person. But the show does not do this, which is frustratinggg
Yeah, that was bad. I hated that too. I wish she didn't do it. She could have learned all those things about Simon just from conversations with the housekeeper and the Lady who raised Simon. Then she could have had a realisation that they barely know each other and tried to make a genuine effort to get to know him better, to which he could have responded by opening up to her, develop a real relationship and then consummate their marriage (yes, in this situation I think it would have been better for them to develop an actual relationship before hitting the sheets). When she was talking about her impending wedding night to her mother, when Simon gets two separate rooms at the inn, I really thought that they will end up having a non-physical relationship until they work out their issues. It's just really jarring that Simon talks about how he cannot give Daphne children, but they end up constantly having sex anyway. I know that the trope of "woman fixes man" is old and tired and I hate it and the show wants to have many sex scenes, because the actors look good, but the whole situation makes these characters look immature, selfish dumbasses, especially Daphne. I guess I will just go back to watching "The Painted Veil" then.
The thing about this show is that it takes itself so seriously... Maybe due the time setting but it should've played with clichés and made fun of them, because when serious stuff happened, like the rape scene, they never adressed it, and they should have, male assault is dismissed so much already...
It reminds of Dickinson, which doesn't take itself entirely seriously, and does the same 'modern spin on old time' but more fully integrated it with some modern slang and just unedited modern songs so it lightens the tone and keeps you focused while still tacking some interesting issues.
"The Great" does a great job at not taking itself seriously and it's a fantastic and entertaining show but let's be real, this was an erotica adaptation and nothing more. It exist for the sexual tension, steamy scenes and to set up future stories in the series with the side characters for future seasons where they will repeat the same thing again It's all about that book porn!
@@loganally4227 I haven't seen Dickinson, but it sounds way more interesting than more seasons of Bridgerton with the same "happily ever after" formula
Better than gossip girl... Except S1 and the wardrobe there isn't anything in gossip girl... Atleast the Duke of Hastings didn't try to sell his teenage girlfriend to his old uncle in exchange of money...
My only issue with this video is that, historically speaking, the London season during the regency period legitimately was constant balls/teas/breakfast parties/private sitting rooms with callers. It was only a small section of the year but these wealthy aristocratic/noble families would be in their country estates the rest of the year so this legitimately was their time to both find a spouse and see al of their friends/build connections. That was just part of the game
Yea thats one of the few things here that i hate for him to not research about bridgerton, hating stuff that are literally in bridgerton, the non stop gossip the very frequent balls+park ,the neutral setting for purity etc Also he rants literally 2-3 minutes, screaming oMg tHiS sHoW is SO BORING bOrInG bORiNg ! iTS sO bOrInG ,mUsIc bOriNg! bALLs aRe bOring! And no im not rlly exageratin on that
I also find it annoying that he didn’t even do five minutes research on ‘fallen women’ duels, seconds and forced marriages to ‘save a reputation’ they were all big parts of romance stories of the era and did happen (with less frequency) in real life. Maybe the show could have elaborated better - but wouldn’t that have just been more exposition?
he also didn’t research the fact that the bridgerton books came out before gossip girl so they’re not copying it. And it just feels like he doesn’t like the romance genre overall, bc it’s supposed to be cheesy. Also the story has mini subplots to prepare you for the upcoming seasons
right? a little tiny bit of research would have explained a lot to him. and, gossip girl is inspired by regency era stories, not the other way around. the show has issues, for sure, but a lot of his issues are with the era-specific stuff not the story so much. that said, the show is so much better than the books in my opinion. if one wants to read good regency-era romance novels, there are a million that are better than this series.
Рік тому+18
Yes, and it was the moment when anyone who wanted to be socially/politically relevant would meet with others and build connections. The constant party is probably the only part of this series that is actually true to the time.
The worst part is that, they could have had the whole unwanted pregnancy plot point without the rape. The pull out method for contraception is the worst - 20% of couples who use it will get pregnant within the year. They could have just gotten pregnant. Simon would have had to have dealt with his feelings about having his bloodline continued in this unexpected turn, whereas Daphne could have dealt with the realisation that he'd lied and this is not the partner she'd expected. No rape required. FFS.
you are a disgusting person. this is literally the law. this is what happens in the uk regularly. in fact its probably sensible to link this to the high male suicide rate in young men. yet you write this disgusting comment but presumably will try to find a way to defend this position in real life. disgusting hypocrite. i mean you literally just wrote a justification for it. forcing somebody into parenthood. and yet this apparently, other than the act of giving birth, does not apply to women? dont people like you always say that a woman should be able to have an abortion 'for whatever reason she wants, maybe she just doesnt want to be a mother, its none of your business'.
@@granolaman4410 who are you responding to? They are talking about a plotline being fixed without including sexual assault. What does this have to do with real laws? Also, unwanted pregnancies have nothing to do with male suicide rates.
@@granolaman4410 The hell are you on about? Simona Seizova just pointed out that the pull out method is not great at birth control, and that fact could have been used by the writers to do a better version of this plotline WITHOUT sexual assault/rape. Simon was willingly having sex and doing so with the pull out method; having that method fail would not have been forcing him to do anything, it would have been a natural consequence of something he willingly chose to do, while still causing the conflict needed for the plot. Your reply is nonsensical.
I liked that boxer and his wife, they should have their own story, from a rough poorer life to riches. Still staying the loving couple they are despite all things coming in between.
Also relevant is that the first Bridgerton book came out 7 years before the first season of Gossip Girl. I'm getting fed up with people complaining about stuff that's been "done before" when the one they complain is the copy is actually the older version.
I have a big love for the 1995 Pride&Prejudice TV series with Colin Firth, but I find it so interesting, because it is simply hilarious by today’s standard. They are literally taking a walk in the house - up and down, because they don’t have anything to do all day other than gossip when there is no party to attend. :D So, yes, I agree that it is just a description of the Regency period when it comes to the upperclassmen.
I have to wonder how much of Bridgerton’s success is due to the year of pandemic self-isolation and the drought of emotional stimulation and social drama
for sure!! as well as the cottagecore revival (also due to the pandemic). idk if they'll be able to adapt all those books into a tv show 5/6 years from now
My big issue inaccuracy wise is if they had gone for a straight alternatw universe where, for instance, slavery of African's never happened, that would be one thing, and it would be yet another thing if, in this universe, slavery did happen but it was abolished throughout the Empire much earlier and black people earned titles through merit over a course of several decades; but the show felt the need to qualify the presence of black nobility and their answer to that was something as simplisticly schlocky as "Oh but the king fell in love! And he married a black woman and that solved racism!"
This is so true! That one rushed scene/explanation made the concept of an alternative universe collapse (which was the only thing that actually had my interest in episode 1) and made it super weak and undermining of the actual plight of black people at the time
It WASN'T really that simplistic though, because Simon actually calls B.S. on that claim and then walks angrily out on that conversation. (But since Simon wasn't really concerned about their racial differences to begin with, Lady Danbury was basically just trying to guess at why Simon was even possibly SO dang reluctant to properly romance the young lady who'd caught his eye that Lady Danbury just threw that possibility out there and kind of got it a little bit wrong since Simon'd pretty much never told anyone up until then of his plans or determination to not continue his family line the way he was societally expected to, so it doesn't become an entire plotline after that. Lady Danbury brings up race because she's asking Simon if race is the obstacle that is holding Simon back from pursuing Daphne because she doesn't understand why he won't pursue an actual relationship with Daphne, but race ISN'T what’s holding Simon back & he doesn't want to share what's really holding him back instead *and* he personally disagrees with Lady Danbury's claim that love conquers all so he simply objects and leaves. It's only a mention, just to acknowledge that there are racial disparities present at all and that potentially contradictory views about them may or may not exist in the greater more-unexplored areas of the Bridgerton world as well....even though the two main characters - Simon & Daphne - themselves seem to see race as a non-issue personally.) I don't remember if the word "slave" was ever actually used in that conversation or not though-I would have to rewatch to be sure either way. BUT *"Two separate societies, divided by color"* could, in my opinion, just as easily be referring to two separate & more-homogeneous countries and/or cultures in general as it could refer specifically to slavery. And it could in that vein be saying how after the Queen's marriage to the King, now, their country has become a more unified multiracial culture. It's just regular historical fiction though, which always runs a wide gamut anywhere _FROM_ imagining fictionalized versions of actual historical characters and/or locations and/or events _TO_ imagining completely original fictional characters &/or places &/or events simply set within or during a historical setting(not entirely unlike regular more modern fiction often does). But it's not specifically alt-history fiction, so it's not really attempting to specifically reimagine any certain thing with the particular intention to explore how that exact change would or wouldn't have theoretically come about and/or would or wouldn't have realistically changed the world from the world as we actually or historically know it with that truly being a main point/purpose of the story or the worldbuilding as a whole. The showrunner basically said even before Netflix's _Bridgerton_ came out that he wanted to create a kind of historical escapism fantasy with this series that people could turn to for a break from always focusing on the issues of the real world which are evermore present and forefront in the conversations and the issues of current times, but also didn't want to just completely ignore things like race altogether as if they don't matter or aren't important conversations to be had either so would only touch on these kinds of serious issues more lightly without making it a primary focus of the actual plot itself. Basically, because conversations are so intensely sociopolitically charge in reality, he wanted to craft a fictional story where people could kind of press pause on those conversations and just slip away for a little while into an idealized fantasy/historical version of a world and just enjoy themselves. Personally, I think he succeeded at doing that pretty well(with the unfortunately atrocious and mishandled exception of what Daphne does to Simon); although, sure, the showrunner could perhaps have done even better. I think the problem is, however, that many people actually want that conversation or any kind of an actual social commentary on the issue which the showrunner was specifically & intentionally circumventing...rather than simply suspending their disbelief and accepting it for what it was. Which IS fair. But I think the showrunner's intentions were fair too, even if not really something that's going to appeal the same for every viewer.
This show is literally fanfiction come to life. It has so many popular tropes of the medium: Enemies to lovers, arranged marriage, fake dating; you name it. The worst part is that I've read fanfiction that's done all of this better than Bridgerton did, which must be rather embarrassing for the show's writers.
@@kaili_28 Eh. The "Rape/NonCon" tag on AO3 exists for a reason and I have seen it used before, so there's totally fanfic out there with that sort of shit as a subplot.
What I cannot wrap my head around is that in the year of our Lord 2O24 (or 2023 I guess) we're still doing the 'young woman is so sexually naive she doesn't know what masterbation is' trope!?? Like holy shit this isn't a dimestore romance novel from the 1980s!
honestly what drew me into bridgerton was the cliché of it all - i had fun with it *because* i knew everything that was gonna happen, it was like reading fanfiction to me lmao i hadn't realized people were praising it for being so different, that's the most surprising part of this video
Exactly! Bridgerton is the kind of show you know isn't realistic and is probably toxic but you enjoy it anyway because it distracts you from all the shit in the real world. It was tropey down from episode 1, I mean, the episode literally ends with the two love interests fake dating...did anyone expect something unique? Sorry for them then.
100% with this comment. This show was just fluff, which is fine if you enjoy it as just that. But who can seriously enjoy this show as something 'different'?
This totally. I thought it was tropey ok purpose. I still think it is, and other people are forcing it into a serious box that it will never fit bc it wasn't made to, lol
I remember feeling physically sick when Daphne forces Simon during that one time they're intimate. I can't like her after that. It was horrifying to watch, especially when Simon clearly conveyed with his body language and verbally that he did not want it. It was rape, plain and simple.
and somehow that never happened??? towards the end it’s like that never happened and he didn’t seem to care??? he happily gave her a child and i don’t know why he was comfortable doing that
It would be one thing if she actually got consequences for her actions. But they didn't mention it after it. She got no consequences. She got what she wanted.
it is true that it looks not normal BUT on a side note, and as a woman of a quite small weigh, hum there is no way Daphne could force anything, in the way that Simon (who does boxing and look super fit) could have JUST MOVED HER. Come on it's ridiculous
@@florylege sometimes forcing isn't just about physical, its mental too. But also, in here, Daphne manipulates the love Simon has for her as well as clearly clamping down and making sure he finishes inside her. It is forcing because his body language shows he's in shock and clearly doesn't want it.
I wasn't that much bothered about "that scene" ... if anything is the most historically accurate thing in the entire series. Don't talk to your daughter about sex, leave all the power in the hand of the man, wait until some shit happens.
If Daphne's and Simon's roles were switched, the whole conversation would be different. And a lot of people would be deadass angry at Simon within an instance.
I'm adding nothing new, but I also agree. Rape and sexual assault towards men is just as serious as it is for women. I hate how it's not treating like that.
Okay a bit embarrassed to admit but I’ve actually read the entire series this show is based off of. It’s actually not ripping off gossip girl- if anything it’s the other way around: the first bridgerton book came out in 2000 and the gossip girl author was inspired by lady whistledown. Two years later she released her own book In a round about way we owe the existence of Gossip Girl to the Bridgerton series. So there’s that. Also all other 7 (😨) books are basically the first books plot with little changes here and there. Oh and the rape scene was included in the book and it’s kinda worse because as a narrator Daphne is VERY intentional about what she was doing in the moment and then does a 180 immediately afterwards claiming she NEVER intended to to anything like that. Like girly I read the words two chapters ago!!!
When you say Book Daphne was more deliberate with regards to *that* scene, was it actually acknowledged as such by the writing or are you still supposed to root for her? EDIT- Ah, therein lies the issue. She's the narrator.
Not in that era. Adopting wasn’t something you did to raise a child as your own, unless you were concealing an illicit pregnancy and were trying to keep the family name clear. Adopting didn’t create a parent relationship. It would be, at best, like taking in a kid to help a servant in the house, or because you were rich and wanted control of the upbringing of your grandkid. Adopting to have a child to love and raise as your own wasn’t done yet.
@@TacticusPrime Except I think they played the trick of getting rid of the racism, but keeping the patriarchy, which is smart because the particular play of patriarchy at the top is one of the few unique things of that time.
@@M.M.Y.B ... there are a LOT of things unique to the Regency era. I'm not sure what "patriarchy" has to do with the lack of adoption. It's true that adoption as we think of it didn't really exist in England until the 1920s, but orphans were taken into the houses of people in the community and cared for. Found families have always existed in some form or another.
@@M.M.Y.B Yes. Not just orphans either. Famously, Jane Austen's third brother was fostered by their much richer cousins and he inherited their estate. He even took their name, becoming Edward Austen Knight.
I just wanted her to marry the prince. He was nice, he wanted kids, their personalities vibed well...My mom and I were screaming at the screen like GIRL NO Leave that broody rake alone and get yourself a damn prince!
THIS IT WAS LIKE GIRL GO GET THE BAG NOT THE MAN WHO IS NOT GOOD AND ISNT COMPATIBLE FOR YOU IN ANY WAY WHATSOEVER, i felt so bad for the prince because he was just used as nothing but a pawn in daphne & simon’s sick game, plus he was very pressured by the queen to court daphne.
When i watched this show and Simon told that he can't have kids i thought: "Oh, maybe, he really can't have kids and it would be a great challenge for them to overcome and they would be together despite this. And then they would take a child from some kind of orphan home. Daphne would face mother's (and maybe even their whole society's) incomprehension. But they would go through it together" But instead writers gave us this shit
Here's why I think Bridgerton got popular. It came out right as everyone was spending Christmas alone and realizing that this whole Covid thing was going to last longer than a couple months. People were craving an escape to a "simpler time" before masks and social distancing. I guarantee you if the show had come out 10 months earlier or heck even if it had come out that following May where things were starting to look up the show would have probably been passed over.
Absolutely true! 82 million people were just lonely during Christmas and the Covid-19 and needed an escape. Do you think that if Covid-19 did not happen, people would have watched this show? No, they wouldn't. I agree there is nothing special about this show and the actors and Shondaland got lucky due to a universal virus that kept millions in their homes.
it’s still frightening to me how they had an entirely graphic r@pe scene in this and it was just glossed over and never spoken of again. fandom and show. it’s like it never even happened
It broke my heart seeing so many people deny that it was rape. If a man had forcibly came inside a women im sure they'd be singing a different tune, and the double standard is really upsetting so im so glad to see comments like this calling out the bullshit!
@@insidesoccer6498 essentially, towards the end of the series when Daphne realises the Duke CAN have children but CHOOSES not to and feels betrayed, she gets on top of him during sex and forces him to stay down as he finishes so that she can try and get pregnant against his will, effectively r*ping him and it was a huge violation that wasn't really addressed. In fact, he kind of apologised later on for lying and yet she didn't really apologise for what she did which was very disturbing
@@_laurenolo_ yes!! seeing him lying there with this distraught look on his face along with the stuttering (something that he hasn’t done since childhood and from what i note, is also a nervous habit) made my stomach sink. i have no idea how production allowed this scene to go through
It's legit a plot device people advise new writers with. Something along the lines of what ever you protagonist wants, don't give it to them. In this case it Daphne wanting kids and the Duke wanting to keep his word. And coincidentally their wants are conflicting which adds to the ✨drama✨
Yeah definitely, I watched a lot of videos on this show and the fact this was the only one to actually address the r@pe scene is worrying. Also same on the not wanting kids and thinking about that happening is freaking anxiety inducing
They could've easily cut that out and written some new scenes were Simon discovers being a dad isn't as bad as he thought or smt. Like maybe a certain someone would lose their life and leave behind a orphaned toddler that Daphne decides to take in, and eventually Simon warms up to them. Idk but would've been a story I would watch...
@@maanlicht8583 There was this scene where Dahne(?) holds a random child and he looks at her contemplating. They could have used and expanded that as you said. Or have an accidental pregnancy where both had no agency in, would fit the whole drama in the show.
@@beccg9421 Yes I remember now, that could work too. I sometimes wonder how the writers ever decided to keep it, the scene was already frowned upon whith the books...
@@maanlicht8583 I've never read the books and only started the show for some light entertainment. But r@pe should never be framed as entertainment without consequences. Glad to see others thinking the same!
Season 2 of Bridgerton was extremely predictable, but that was one of the reasons I liked it so much. It was quite satisfying to watch what I predicted come true in a mostly well written manner, with angst, romance, family - it was like watching a fanfiction when all you want is something stupid and predictable, so you have something which you can be casually involved with while relaxing. Something like Gossip Girl also fits here. It's new enough to be interesting, and the plot is predictable enough to be comforting when life feels unpredictable. And they are definitely an alternate reality, I don't think that the writers ever claim 100% accuracy
The comfort of predictability is honestly why I love watching slasher movies. You know most of the characters will act extraordinarily stupid and throw common sense out of the window the second the plot starts to pick up in order to justify their bloody end.
I totally agree! Season two was way better…and to me it was mainly because the two main characters align personality wise, its not just chemistry for the sake of it. It makes it so much more satisfying to watch when they get together.
@@sabcam2000Interesting take. Do you want to elaborate? I know that they were filming season 2 during covid and they had trouble with some parts, but still... I did not notice much of a difference. Arguably, budget seemed bigger and it showed in some scenes.
“It’s the most successful show Netflix has produced” I’m so glad Squid Game swooped in less than a year later to beat that record. And by “beat” I mean obliterated. It’s nuts the records that show has beaten…
@@kanyanavanathan3786 it's sad because that means it's probably gonna be irritating and spam my feed for the next 3 years like it has for the past while....
But bro, Squid Game is now Netflix’s most popular show with just one season. You is on season 3 and the Crown season 5 and it’s not as big as Squid Game in terms in how many people have watched it.
"they spend the entire show having the same arguments over and over again and they never really solve any of them" and that's pretty much it. Every scene made me feel uncomfortable and confused I only kept watching it because the aesthetics were visually satisfying.
Maybe I just don't watch enough television, but I have a feeling people are going to look back at shows like Bridgeton and Emily in Paris and say "wow, we were seriously going through something in quarantine, weren't we?" I can't keep but feel that these shows that run almost 100% on escapism wouldn't have been even noticed if the entire world wasn't stuck in quarantine at the time.
i wrote a fanfiction when i was like 8 about two persons faking a relationship for convenience and then falling in love, im pretty sure it was better than bridgerton
but I mean, didn't everyone write a fanfiction about two people faking a relationship and falling in love? (not hating on your comment btw, loved reading those fanfics when I was a teen)
Bridgerton has the same vibes as reading a really well written fanfiction with an interesting premise that you end up finishing and enjoying purely bcs ur love of like 1 character
A lot of the issues you seem to have with Bridgerton are issues that would've been commonplace in the Regency era! They used to have what were called Seasons, where the only purpose *was* to get married & there were multiple parties, soirees, etc... so they could find a suitable (money, power, station, title, etc..) partner. They did used to duel for honour, so kissing someone in those days of you weren't married, was seen as something major, as now his sister was "sullied" & no longer marriageable. This was the age where heads would literally roll if you offended the monarch in any way, so meeting the Queen (which *was* a very big deal at the time) & her not believing your story would've had far reaching consequences...
In Benedict's story, which I think will be season 3, some of the story happens after the season so it will not involve so many parties. Though there are still a few parties. Lol
I was shocked when a friend of mine told me she didn't think what Daphne did was rape, because if he wanted he could've thrown her of since he is stronger??? Like good job justifying male rape love
I had an argument with a family member about it and they said a similar thing. The reason they gave however, was that it was okay because they were married. You can be married to someone and still be raped by them. And even in this circumstance, it was def rape, whether fans of the show like to admit it or not.
The book is worse! Both or just soulless cash grabs at Jane Austin‘s popularity without actually understanding anything about her or the time period she wrote in!
Jane Austen was actually one of the famous writers who had their works immortalised but the tropes and genre of the novels was always huge in reading circles both from that time and after
Exactly! Every Regency romance is a shameless Jane Austen rip-off that lacks her critique on social issues (which makes her work timeless) nor her finesse with language and wit (banter isn't the same as being witty, which sadly many writers forget). I'm no big fan of Austen because I prefer the darker themes and settings of the Brontës, but Jane Austen definitely knows how to write a story of manners without being ridiculously shallow!
can you please do a video on Bridgerton season 2? i didn't enjoy season 1 and thought everything about it story-wise was rather underwhelming - but ended up surprisingly very much enjoying the recently released Season 2. i'm genuinely curious if Season 2 offered you a different perspective at all or if you thought it was another sad attempt, and a breakdown of whatever impression you had!
like i felt the character motivations/dynamic between one another were a lot more fleshed out in a way that the audience can empathize with (love for family -> responsibility for family -> therefore, self-interest conflicting with family duty). IDK YOU DON'T HAVE TO AGREE AT ALL AND MAYBE JUST END UP HATING BRIDGERTON EVEN MORE BUT I JUST WANT TO KNOW YOUR THOUGHTS/COMMENTARY ON THEIR ATTEMPT #2 OKAY
The only way this ending with a baby could have worked is if she had helped Simon work through his emotional trauma and once that happened he realized he did want a family.
@@chimchimsjamkookies4242 I understand that it can be difficult to include certain things but I hate it when they skip important details when adapting books to tv/movies
Bridgerton feels to me like it was an excuse for a group of people to cosplay and put on fake accents and pretend to be on downton abbey while making tons of awkward sex jokes, and someone happened to be filming it
Specifically for non-white people to do it, since white actors have been doing it for years. I wish the plot had been more deserving of the occassion, though...
The king didn't have alzheimer's disease. King George the third was believed to have suffered from Acute Intermittent Porphyria. His son, George the fourth ruled as regent during this period which is why it's known as the regency period. George the thirds madness is well known to anyone who knows anything about regency England, including regency romance readers. There is also a movie called The Madness of King George, which leans heavily on the Porphyria theory, from 1994 starring Nigel Hawthorne as George, and Helen Mirran as George's wife Charlotte.
The reason the first season is such a mess is because it's setting up for seasons 2, 3, 4, and 5. 2, now obviously out, with Anthony and the whole ridiculous pronouncement at the end. Benedict with the speech from the artist about being brave in love, so his whole arc in this season was opening that door for him. 3, is Colin and Penelope, though we saw more of the lead in for that in season 2. In season 5 it's Eloise's book and that is all to do with Marina's (Brenda) husband. I guess they wanted to show whoever picked up the show that they had plenty of material, but it really was overstuffed. Each series could be shorter and accomplish the story better. Daphne is a great character in the book, right up until the rape scene, then it's hard to have any sympathy for her, but I do enjoy the later books, even though they're not particularly accurate or well written. The constant PoV switches, sometimes mid-paragraph, drive me to distraction. As for the reason everyone got annoyed with having actors of colour in the show, grow up. The only thing that disappointed me about it is that Lady D. brings it up about George, the king, marrying Charlotte and raising PoC up to the aristocracy and changing England in one fell swoop and then the show does absolutely nothing with it. They could have set it up as a fantastic AU and instead it peters away into nothing. The annoys me so much that when I rewatch the show, I always skip that scene. I also hate the modern music and dancing. Do they really think a modern audience are so fickle that they won't be able to watch unless they use modern music?! Again, with AU it might have worked, but they bottled out of that idea almost as soon as they introduced it. It would have been better just to cast actors of colour and then not mention anything at all.
It's just the old Netflix spotlight of the month thing. QG was great but had its month of incessant marketing, once everyone had binged it, time to yell about the new show
@@zerere_ tbh i can see people not liking queen's gambit, i really don't think it's to everyone's taste. but good lord, it hurts to even see clips and gifs of bridgerton, it looks like absolute cringy and nonsensical trash. edit: at least queen's gambit was cohesive compared to...this.
There's definitely disturbing aspects to the show as well as the books (Colin threw up major red flags in his book) but I think you hate it a lot more if you're not the intended audience. I love trashy romance novels and that's pretty much what this was. So I mostly enjoyed it. I will say that I read two and a half of the books before giving up in disgust so the show is an improvement 😬
I actually liked it at first, but for some reason, the graphic sex ruined it for me, then the graphic rape scene, well...I couldn't watch it after that. I was actually angry at what Daphne did and was heated that she was allowed to get away with that.
Agreed, there was something video-game animation about the sex scene. I think it was a little too long, but no fun. The SA was weird even after I switched to spanish.
@Allison Etzler I'm normally here for sex scenes that are done well, but here it just felt out of place, unnecessary and tacked on. It's like baking the fluffiest Victoria sponge in the world with the most beautiful icing, then pouring hot seminal fluid & shame on top of it.
I'm glad you didn't continue because she gets no repercussions for it and the blame keeps being tossed to Simon for lying to her, we get a whole scene where we're supposed to feel bad because the rape didn't end up in pregnancy like she wanted too...
@@millsrome Horrible. Just fucking awful. It makes me upset that showrunners think this is what progressives want. All I wanted was a show that looked like a cake that was just as substantial, that had folk that looked like me in it. I did not need the clumsy incorporation of politics, nor sex/assault scenes that literally undo what the showrunners are trying to give themselves a pat on the back for.
If you thought Simon's character motivation was stupid, wait until you get to Anthony Bridgerton's in book two. He believes he will die young because his father died suddenly due to a bee sting so now he does not want to commit.
I mean yeah but it was more Anthony just never thought he could surpass the greatness that he believed his father was. It wasn't just because of a bee it was because he never thought he could outlive his father who died at 38. So Anthony never wanted to commit or fall in love because he's going to die young. It is silly but I think more than what you're saying 😂
What fucks with me is that everyone in bridgerton looks like they're cosplaying a character I can't remember and it drives me insane. I'm like "Yeah.... I've seen you before.. but where?"
I personally found them a parody of every Jane Austen character. Like Daphne is Jane Bennet, Simon is a Mr. Darcy wannabe, while eloise is a mary bennet that is shown as if she could be likeable in any way. The character just straight up feel like a bad comic version of any woman author's character of the time. It's just,,,,, bad...
Ok looking back I worded this poorly. What I mean is that, the actors look super familiar, especially the female lead, it's kind of a mix between the actors themselves looking familiar, and their character being designed in such a way that they resemble other fictional characters (like wendy darling and jane bennet). I think they did a great job of it, because I think some of the live action disney style could benefit from this colorful/stylistic approach to character design and costuming. Phoebe Dynevor (the actor who plays Daphne) was a big one for me, cause I stg i've seen her before, appparantly ppl think she looks like kiera knightly and kate winslet, and I can totally see the resemblance now.
Finally someone saying that Daphne's a monster. She literally r*ped Simon... everytime I talk about this show with other people the SA scene is always dismissed as if it's "nothing" and even the show picture it as if Simon is the bad guy because "he lied" and Daphne had no other choice. She freakin' r*ped him and they never adress this. To me Bridgerton is the story of a poor man that ends up trapped by a psycho in an abusive relationship
The moment you said the basic plot, a million of "friends to lovers" fanfics sprung into my head. Hell, I could probably name ten from the top of my head. That's such a basic basis for a story.
I stopped watching when daphne sexually assaulted Simon. I wasn’t enjoying the show to begin with, but when that happened it cross a line. Hearing that they brushed it off makes me hate this show even more.
They could've easily cut that stupid scene out and written some new scenes were Simon maybe discovers being a dad isn't as bad or smt. For example: a certain someone would lose their life and leave behind a orphaned toddler that Daphne decides to take in, and eventually Simon warms up to them. Idk but would've been a story I would watch...
Yeah so did I. It's so stupid, there's literally no reason for it to be there. It only exists for them to fight (again). There were so many other ways to do it.
I honestly feel like they sexually assaulted each other which makes their relationship ridiculously toxic. I liked the show but that aggitated me so much! Simon not telling her that he is able to have children but just doesn't want to have them before he has sex with her, feels very rapey to me. Especially considering the fact that he knew how truly naive she was. Idk ... The show is actually interesting in my opinion but those themes also just rubbed me the wrong way.
@@YouWillGetThereBuddy Kind of.... I mean technically she doesn't understand the concept of "pulling out" and so yes, she doesn't have informed consent for the style of sex they are having and he knew that. But .... I'm not sure if that's rape or sexual assault.
no one is saying Daphne and Simon ain't toxic, i do think the author of the books wrote the relationship that way considering the complex situation of that time. Girls being reduced to finding a good catch that will care for them, and men deciding for them.
@@alejandroespinosa7085 even if the author was self aware, and knowingly made their relationship toxic, I think that it might have been a mistake. Now I am stuck watching to characters who I don’t care about and am frustrated by because they are terrible people. I am not invested in them or their romance, because it’s plain as day that they should not even be together in the first place.
I remember reading tweets and articles calling it "jane austen meets gossip girl" and I was genuinely excited about it. after the first episode I was so angry that I watched the pride and prejudice bbc series to cleanse my brain
I was also disturbed that they had sex without daphne knowing anything about the action or anatomy of sex. Like how could she be comfortable? How is that….that’s like scary right?
I listened to Stephen Fry's podcast "Victorian Secrets" on Audible - really good podcast, btw. Anyway, apparently that wasn't uncommon in the Victorian era (Yes I know this is not Victorian) - i.e. for a woman to go off on her wedding night not knowing anything about sex. It wasn't something "polite society" spoke to their girls about.
If it was 21st century, I could understand your feelings, but remember that the show depicts 1800s - almost all women (of the society) went into marriage bed without knowing anything about sex. THat was the norm. Is that good? No. But that was the reality; and to judge it by our 21st century standards... doesn't make sense.
@@Lina-lq7jm That's just flat out wrong. It was the mother's job to educate her daughter about her duties on her wedding night and to her husband. Same with fathers and their sons.
15:18 those two seconds of Supernatural while saying "some shows only survive because of the natural charisma of a few characters even tho the writing went to shit" made me burst out laughing BECAUSE IT HURTS!
Concerning the s3xual a55ault scene, I'm not for redeeming that behavior at all, but here's what they could have done if they _reeeally_ wanted to leave it in. Daphne should have gotten _seriously_ put in her place. If she didn't know anything about sex, then she should've had a character explain, very seriously, what r@pe is and why what she did was extremely violating. Make her beg Simon for forgiveness and let him seriously consider if he wants to forgive her. The scene in which she confronts her mother about not teaching her about sex could have been even more raw and powerful-- because she didn't know about sex, she ended up hurting someone she loves and ruined her relationship and she feels very guilty about it. And then Simon could have forgiven her (because they have to get together) and explained that they have to decide together if and when they will have children and that she has to respect that. I'm obviously of the opinion that it never should have happened in the first place, but there's also a way to handle this topic that would make it less horrific.
Yes, but that would require for the characters to talk clearly and intelligently for more than 10 seconds. Better have them constantly lie (poorly) and hide important information for... reasons
@@Jeremy-wp4yh yes, because he consented to have sex, but not to finish in her. He took away his consent in that scene when he said 'wait, wait, Daphne, no'. She held him down and didn't let him pull out. That's at the very least assault.
The thing that I see very clearly on a second watch after having read 7 out of the 8 books in the series, is that the producers didn't know if they'd get more than one season, so they put a bunch of stuff from later books into the first books story. Marina isn't mentioned until book 5. Eloise doesn't look for whistledown until book 4, which is told half from whistledown's perspective. No one pays any attention to Benedict until book 3, etc. The producers took 20 year old books and tried to get as much out of the series as they could in one season, which is why nothing about it is particularly innovative
About the whole party thing, I believe it was due to the period being regency era in the London Season. There were picnics, dinners and balls all day every day
Exactly. It was meant to be a period of the year where members of the nobility could come together in one city (from their own estates which are all over) for the express purpose of social politicking/marriages.
Thank you, I was scrolling to find some comment about this! The London season was serious business, you had over 4 events every day because girls had to have a husband by the end of it. And the wardrobe sent families back a huge amount every season, so it was possible that if the season ended and you didn't have a proposal of marriage you just didn't have the money to go through another one the following year. Even if you did, after 2 or 3 seasons with no proposal of marriage you were at serious risk of becoming a "spinster". It's insane for us, but that aspect of the show is in no way fictional.
Not exactly in 1813 Europe is at war with Napoleonic France and they are all focused on the war effort parties and picnics are only common for both military and aristocrats during the 2nd half of the regency period from 1816 to 1820
i think you'd like the second season much more than the first. the story//main ship was overall much more interesting and gods the chemistry between the lead actor and actress was great! would love to hear your opinions on it in a video !!
He was nominated for an Emmy and her character is a villain by the end I literally couldn’t stand her. I understood WHY she wanted what she wanted but … When you literally consider Simon had EVERYTHING he stood for basically taken from him. He never wanted to be married-BAM he married. Didn’t want children-BAM he’s a father. He has emotional trauma-BAM they ignore it. There was a point around episode 7 that I just sat there and considered that character literally gave up EVERYTHING he stood for in the beginning … for convenience of the plot to WRAP UP his story arc by the end of the season. It absolutely wasn’t earned. And THEN HES R@PED. No wonder the actor was like ahahaaaaa I’m out
Yes, I think that Phoebe should have been nominated for the Emmy. She seemed to be the better actress. Rege only got the recognition and the nomination because he was handsome and charistmatic. His acting was just mid to me. I agree with his commentary. Finally, someone who didn't like this show actually pointing out the weaknesess in this season.
Honestly to be honest I expected them to go in the way of 'coitus interruptus' is an incredibly unreliable method of contraception - she thinks she is pregnant and is excited , they argue, they are on the outs, she isn't pregnant, they get back together. No blatant sexual assault to brush off.
that actually would have been an interesting plot. Simon would have been hesitant from there on to have sex with Daphne at all, as he'd seen that coitus interruptus does not work. Daphne would first be really happy when she finds out that she's pregnant, thinking that through some odds Simon is fertile after all, but would find out by telling him that he actually does not want children.
Yes ! Honestly, I know they were trying to be "faithful to the book" but at that point they could have scrapped it completely... It makes you wonder thought, Simon is a rake and has only used coitus interruptus as a mean of contraception... How many tiny Simons are running around ? For a man that doesn't want an heir, he is quite reckless, should have used the age old celibacy if he really didn't want any.
i was kinda weirded out because when i watched the first episode i thought it was colorblind casting but it wasn’t? also why were there barely any dark-skinned women or asian women if it’s supposed to be not colorblind? just very confused.
@@noonstyles3973 THIS. exactly. the reason beauty standards are still so pressuring on women of color is that we constantly see women of color we’re “supposed” to look like but they fit into euro-centric standards of beauty. diversity isn’t diversity unless we show different kinds of beauty.
@@sahana3177 yeah like a digestible version of coloured people. That have certain features which are considered attractive by the beauty standards but at the same time have don't look white. I think it's called token diversity
and the book its based on predates all of the above. I'm not saying that it doesn't have issues. it does and rereading the book 20 years later, makes me notice and cringe at things i skimmed right over back then. but the point is... the novel still predates every piece of media that you have mentioned, so.... of all the valid criticism towards the narrative? this is NOT one of them.
A side note regarding the vendetta of Simon: I did get that tho, out of personal experiences. Even though our dad's out of the picture for a long time, I thought Simon doesn't want to have kids, cause he's afraid he'll copy his dad's behavior. Even if he doesn't want to, I could understand the train of thought.
But that’s not the way it’s described in the show. The literal only reason he gives for not wanting to have children is because he swore it on his fathers deathbed that his bloodline would end with him. I agree that trauma doesn’t die with the abuse es and I think him being afraid of repeating his fathers patterns would’ve made for a great reasoning and a good storyline. But they chose to go with: I said I wouldn’t do it and now therefor I can’t.
@@EstherRab yeah, fair enough. This entire show had many possibilities for great storytelling, but ends up choosing the vague or superficial (or even virtue signaling) way out.
@@deadinside8719 You will not. I have a kid and I'm doing my best to be the parent I wish I had, even though my parents were very cold and my mom would complain and victimize herself instead of teaching us how to do things properly.
@@summerrose8110 very. The thing is I was familiar with the book series and read a couple from them but not the first book, I just saw reviews for it and no one in the book community talked about it at all either. It’s so weird
@@someoneunknown7259 Never read the book, but that is fucked up that nobody talks about women being rapists. There's another film I've seen(It's a pornographic film), it's called Forbidden Legends of Sex and Chopsticks and there's a sequel too. It takes place in Ancient China before communism, and there's a character named Lotus who rapes her brother-in law, but she gets her karma when Lotus dies.
I watched it, not knowing of the books, and literally screamed out of anger at m Pc at this scene. Like I gone trough a lot and I liked the show so far (in terms of ypu don't know what to watch) I could not believe seeing a rape scene in such a hyped series and no one, NO ONE said how wrong that is. I searched for Reviews and could not fond anyone pointing that Out. That was a rape, he said no and Stop. Til this day I cannot believe how hyped Bridgestone was/is
i hate that people call it a mix of pride and prejudice and gossip girl because apparently everything set in regency era is pride and prejudice + something
to be fair, i think what they mean is the enemies to lovers trope. to be honest, Bridgerton, in my opinion, is a mix of a lot of things; p&p, to all the boys, gossip girl and more. i don't know what everyone is talking about about expecting originality. ii mean the show was marketed as a bunch of other things in one already indicating the lack of originality so i don't know why people expected originality. also i don't think it's fair to say the show just ripped off shows like gossip girl because it is an adaptation of a book that didn't come out in this millennium even. so..... that being said, the show had a lot of issues that people have also rightly pointed out
I remember the scene where 'Brenda' is heartbroken by the fake letter from her lover They show the mother who says 'it would seem our efforts were not in vain' which implies she made a false letter, quite clearly. BUT THEN THEY LITERALY SHOW HER FAKING THE LETTER In that moment I was like 'damn these writers think we dumb'
Who is Brenda? Lady Featherington faked a letter to Marina, because her lover/man who got Marina pregnant was not responding to any of her letters. Marina being pregnant meant she needed to be out of Lady Featherington's house asap, preferably married, so her daughters could find husbands without the scandal of an unmarried relative living in their house. The reason they couldn't kick Marina out is because Lord Featherington owed Marina's father a shit ton of money he couldn't repay. Lady Featherington faked the letter to get Marina to agree to a marriage asap.
As someone who works 50 hours a week then comes home to do another kind of work, I’ve got to say I found the slow pace of Bridgerton and fanciful costuming a beautiful escape. I watched it when I had an unexpected two hours to myself last year... it was snowing and I happened to have a box of fancy chocolates from Christmas to open at the same time. It all came together in a perfect two hours spent and I still think back to it whenever I need to remember that momentary escape. Such is life for many people. My point is that what you see as ‘boring’ might be seen as a welcome alternative to the day to day struggle that many people have to face. As for the show, I enjoyed it. It was like the box of fancy chocolates, sweet and tasty with no real nutritional value. Too many and you get sick if them, once in a while and it’s a perfect diversion.
bridgerton was beautifully made (especially those elaborate costumes) so people were willing to forget they were essentially watching a mash up of a bunch of mediocre shows/films they’ve already seen.
@@taruuu no one said they were accurate, but thank you for reminding us. If you don’t think they’re nice dresses, that’s cool, but there’s no denying that hours of hard and tedious labour went into placing every intricate and beautiful detail of the wardrobes. The hard work of the costume department shows, and i am not about to write off all of their efforts.
Wait, so it ends with him having a kid, despite his whole thing being that he does not want children? And that is the happy ending? Is the only "happy ending" reliant on him realizing that having a kid was something that he wanted and would make him happy? Can we not have a happy ending where she instead realizes that simply farting out a tiny human being is not the only key to happiness? It feels like this "happy" ending is reliant on one character losing out what they actually wanted, and letting the other win and have what they wanted. That is not happy, that is toxic as all hell, and simply having him get some last second "oh wait, I changed my whole way of thinking and sure, I am full on board now!" is not good writing.
@@karlijns4816 idk even if the father died I think parental trauma and spite is REALLY deep for some people and I wasn't all that hyped that they had a child
it's also racist as fuck because the white woman's wishes are treated as valid and the audience should want them to come true and yet Simon's wants and needs are disregarded and he sacrifices his for love
I mean, I agree that I would have liked for them to show that having children is not peak happiness but I still felt like her reasons for wanting children were more reasonable than his reasons for not wanting them . I mean, it wasn't that he didn't really want children, it was just that he was holding on to a very, very, very stupid revenge that actually only affected him. He was sacrificing to get back at a man that doesn't even exist anymore. Like you know that saying that goes "Revenge is drinking poison hoping someone else will die"? Well here it doesn't fucking matter because the other guy is already dead! It was just so fucking pathetic and stupid. If he truly didn't want children I would totally support it but he didn't give a fuck if he had them or not, he was just mad at his dad
@@elizabethdiaz8409 Parental trauma, in my opinion, is a good enough reason to not want kids because it goes deeper than revenge. What happens if he turns out to be a bad father because he himself never had good parenting? Also, children is an area in a relationship where neither party should compromise. Simon had the right idea from the start when he didn't want to marry Daphne at all because she wanted kids and he didn't because that's exactly how that problem should be solved. I don't want kids simply because I don't have the patience to deal with that mess so why would I marry a guy who does want kids only to make him give that up for me and potentially make him unsatisfied in the marriage?
Also, Simon’s actor is leaving the show because he doesn’t want to do it. It’s not a big mystery, he won’t be the lead in future seasons because they plan on changing focus like the books do. He wants to move on to bigger roles, and he didn’t want to commit to anything else.
@@Kevin-rg3yc the fact that producers DIDNT lock him down for at least a few seasons blows my mind. I kinda get why some people are upset, the show gave him a big platform and he won’t even give them a cameo, but at the end of the day this is just a job for him.
IMHO, Simmons actor what is the best one in the show, and I think the season isGoing to suffer after his departure. He’s a talented actor, and I’m glad he is getting greater opportunities.
@@taylorgayhart9497 right maybe they didn’t expect for him to be a international breakout star from the show but still they should’ve done something just in case lol. I believe they might have been some money issues or creative differences
Very interesting video that brings up a lot of valid points! I will say though, I think the part about the characters being annoying is, if not deliberate then at least more or less impossible to avoid. Any regency drama, or period drama in general, that follows rich af people will have mostly annoying characters, because it's pretty difficult to write a character whose biggest problems in life is whether the ball room decor is the right shade of lavender or whether the lace on a new dress is fine enough to properly show off how loaded they are, as anything but a spoiled brat with no personality. Even Downton Abbey which is often hailed as being great (and which I personally enjoy a lot too) has the issue of all the upper class characters being whiny crybabies arguing about things that would make anyone who's ever been forced to work a day in their life scoff.
Soooo it’s not actually that outrageous for them to have at least one party per episode. One thing you have to understand about the Regency Era is they did party, A LOT! Especially during the marriage market season, which is when this series takes place. They would actually often go to parties and balls every single night during this season. The idea of it was to make up for the many months spent at home in their country Estates, without much more than their neighbors and a few neighbors to socialize with, so bored out of their minds. It was also a way for people to find their partner; when they’re at home at their country estates they’re not able to network a lot and will not often run into eligible marriage material. Because of this when they were in town (a.k.a. London) for the marriage market season they would want to go out as much as possible and meet as many people as possible. I think the show does assume at times that people watching have at least some understanding of the Regency, which for many of the book readers that will be the case, but for the general audiences they could’ve explained things a little better. I haven’t read this series, but my BA is in English Literature, and I spend most of my time re-reading Jane Austen, so for me my enjoyment from this show came from the many historical and literary references, but I will admit I have yet to finish the series.
Well...because netflix is a company and they wanna produce shows that get a lot of ppl to buy the subscription and watch the shows and therefore make a lot of money. This was super popular, soo....
@@astakorpiala9722 I don't doubt the fact that it's popular. I just don't see the reason why IT'S SO POPULAR and even more so than shows like Anne with an E, which actually deals with real issues in the 19 century, such as racism, sexism and does not force anything onto the viewer.
Honestly speaking even book readers HATE book 1 that first season is based on. Book 2 is really popular tho and very funny so I think season 2 will be much better.
This guy should watch Reign. Him mentioning how the characters have conversations in the middle of dances reminded me of how I noticed the characters in Reign relay information while walking ALL THE DAMN TIME
And its historically inaccurate. They could have just not made it and put it in my favorite era and about one of my favorite queens and I will be fine with it. BUT THEY DID.
I agree with everything you said apart from the duel bit. It was actually the only historically accurate part of the show. Family honour was still very much the priority during the regency, so his reaction, despite no one seeing, was totally how the man of the family would react. However, duelling was criminalised by this point, even though it was very much still a widespread way of solving grievances, so he would've had to leave the country on the rusk of hanging. Also, George III suffered with porphyria, not altziemers, so as a history buff, I enjoyed this nod very much. I was more annoyed we didn't get to see his son George (future George IV) as he was regent in the kings stead... The whole reason this is set in the REGENCY era!
Most of the social settings in the show are quite historically accurate, if sometimes exaggerated. The depiction of "The Season", the dueling, the gossip papers, all done quite well. A lot of the gripes he had in this video weren't the show's fault. It was just the life of the upper class in Regency England!
I just want to say.... kit kat should sponsor you, and yes I do need kit kat.
u mean nestle? they steal water from poor children XDDDDDD
@@rercia5871 let people make innocent jokes. we all know that nestle is awful
I always need a kit kat
NO kitkats are bad, Nestlé owns them
Oh man... I'm dying laughing here listening to the thing he said. Especially that sarcastically infuriating tone
I think “it’s better than Emily in Paris” is the new “better love story than twilight”
nah its actually "at least its not as bad as riverdale"
Is it, though? Better than Emily in Paris?
@@3dmaster205 I’d say so, the clothes are way better! (And I personally enjoy the actors more as well)
@@3dmaster205 Atleast bridgestone was enjoyable?
Yup xDD
Bridgerton is like a wattpad fanfic but in a historical setting and without Harry Styles
or kpop idols
@@crinamogorean9451 True, but I'm from the "older" generation😂
And those are exactly the aspects in which it lacks
True except that it’s a bad Wattpad fanfic with no understanding of history!
U lost me at without Harry styles 🤣
Simon’s reasoning for not wanting kids may have been stupid,but daphne still needed to respect it. I was screaming at both of them the entire time, they’re so infuriating
If Daphne wanted a family, she should have gone for the Prince, who expressed that he wanted a big family with lots of kids, rather than the guy who didn't want them. But Simon was stupid for essentially trapping her into marriage impulsively, and without meaning to.
@@glitchedcrit3848 did we see the same show? He didn't trap her.
@@MinieAnne yes he did. He kissed her in the garden and they got caught. If they didn't marry, that blonde girl would have ruined Daphne's reputation, and she wouldn't have been able to get a suitable match with anyone.
wasnt stupid at all tbh.
What I don't get is why the characters thought they had an option of not having kids. If they're gonna have sex, it'll likely happen.
I just realized they could have bypassed the Daphne-rapes-Simon-for-a-baby thing. They established that Daphne and Simon have unprotected sex all the time and he just pulls out. But hey, what if we used common modern logic applied to these alternate reality regency wives tales. Just like they did with "Brenda" and the tea -- it didn't work because that's nonsense. Well, what if Daphne gets pregnant anyways because the pull out method is a less than reliable form of birth control? Daphne would think it's a miracle while Simon would be dumbfounded and upset. Segue into the drama where Daphne learns the truth is that he simply didn't want kids and that he'd been purposefully trying to prevent it. Daphne could be upset at feeling lied to, Simon could be upset about the pregnancy, and Daphne could be depressed that her husband isn't excited for their impending child. PLOT TWIST Daphne suffers a miscarriage early on and is devastated. Simon comforts her and comes to realize that he had begun to accept fatherhood and realizes he can be a different man than his own father was. So at the finale an undisclosed amount of time later it shows them welcoming a baby they both want into the world. NO RAPE NEEDED, DAMN IT NETFLIX HIRE ME.
DAMN SIS YOU NAILED IT.
I don't know what happened exactly because I have no interest of watching this show, but there is no way a petite woman can "force" herself on a guy who boxes regularly and is a MAN.
He could pick her up and say "no" easily. But the whole idea of her getting pregnant anyway (because for a man who doesn't want kids having unprotected sex makes him a dumbass) and then him grappling with the fear they carefully spelled out is WAAAY more interesting.
What if she threatens to leave because she wants a child? What if SHE changes her mind and actually doesn't want kids? So many interesting things!!
Wayyyy more logical
I would actually enjoy watching this (NETFLIX is missing out)
GENIUS
That's brilliant!
They should have thought of that.
“You can’t force charisma. You either have it or you don’t.”
MY SIMS BEG TO DIFFER
@sam mayne 😎
That made me laugh on an awful day
Thank you
🕶️
Okay I’m playing Sims while watching this you didnt have to call it like this😂
Woohoo
Daphne: I want to live separate lives from each other
Simon: Okay I respect your wishes
Daphne: How dare you
😂😂😂😂
Factssss
😂😂😂😂😂
Surprised Pikachu face
Oh my god. I hate her so much. lol
This relationship could've been so easy!
Simon: "Daphne, I care for you but I have a vengeance against my dead father so I don't want to continue my lineage. Are you still up for marriage?"
Daphne: "Oh shit, for realsies? Nevermind then."
THE END.
THANK YOU! Exactly! I'm so tired of this trope that normalises no communication. Like, it's that fucking simple! Why is SImon struggling to tell her the truth, it's not that deep. Why is Daphne so pressed on the difference between "can't" and "won't have", the outcome is the same and she needed to respect it, she agreed to not have kids. I'm so tired of hollywood acting like people are unable to tell the truth for literally no reason.
@@Jojo-no4ng they're perpetuating this "won't share my feelings with ANYONE cause I'm super mysterious" thing, poisoning relationships everywhere. Granted, sometimes it's hard but you chose your partner for a reason so just talk to them
he neves says that, he says "i cannot have children" (Daphne thinks he is sterile), and while he is saying that, Simon and Daphne's Brother are about to kill each other over Daphnes "dignity" in a duel with handguns. She chose crap over crap that's no free willing choice. And Daphne is very likely to be upset cos Simon never really opens to her explaing why children were a big NO.
@@Jojo-no4ng couldn't it be that people who liked the show acknoledges that sometimes the worst conflicts in relationships come from poor comunication. Daphne and the Duke are toxic and flawed, but no one is saying they are perfect.
Can't and won't is are to very big deal scenarios if Daphne is supoused to be a girl that was trained to become a wife all her life with no other talent but being a mother and a wife, Simon not being able to have children is a tragedy for Daphne, but Simon rejecting children aslo means Rejecting Daphne's her and motherhood, remember that Simon never explains to her why he refuses to have children Daphne does not even know sex works she feels decieved by Simon cos she is very ignorant and she thinks Simon does not wants Daphne's children.
@@alejandroespinosa7085 wait... I could swear that at some point he'd said he wouldn't have children... ok so they're both idiots!
A note, to be fair: having one if not multiple parties to attend every day was actually very accurate for the so called "marriage season" in the era that the series is set into. As a girl, you had one job: get married, possibly above your station. For that, the season was non-stop partying, dancing, being seen in the right parks, being seen at the opera, etc. It was like a 6-months exam session where your failure to find a partner would be extremely public. That part of the series was very accurate, with details such as ending up in a dark section of a park (huge no-no), getting "the hem dropped" when you became of marriageable age, gossip and social standing being able to make or break your "career", etc.
yeah, I mean, he said he doesnt know a lot of history....we believe him. Many of the things he said were just...part of reality
@@laramalik8890 he had more of a problem with the actual regency era than the show
@@snug_as_a_bug right hahahaha
Thats the reason why I think Season 2 was not as good as Season 1. In Seasonn 1, you could feel the restraints and expectations of society. The stakes were so high that Anthony and the Duke were about to duel with a possible death, all because Daphne and the Duke kissed. In Season 2, none of this really seemed to matter anymore? They were doing whatever they wanted, wherever they wanted, and did not really care much for scandals anymore. Ffs the scene where Edwina DISOBEYS THE QUEEN DIRECTLY baffles me. Or Anthony and Kate having very public makeout sessions, after his wedding to HER SISTER failed. Nobody cared. It did not do season 1 justice in terms of societal constraints in that era.
Yeah as some one that read books like Jane Austen(based during the same time about) and yeah those books even say there wasn't much to do other than balls, parties and teas. And often talk about having something at least once a week of not more depending on how rich those involved(the really rich really did have parties all the time because again it was one of the only things for them to do)
Daphne seems like the most extreme version of a 15 year-old in her first relationship who thinks she basically owns her partner because 'but you said you loved me.'
she kinda is. She didn't even know what s*x was.
She is like 18 or 19 at max and if we compared her to today's teen then her knowledge level when it comes to relationships will be that of a 13 or 14yr olds at max...
@@vp98215 Daphne is supposed to be 21
@@nat8134 even if she is shown to be 25, she is completely illiterate when it comes to physical relationships and grew up in a very protected and conservation household... Her mindset is basically like a 15yr old in today's time( or even younger than that considering there was no friend circle or internet back then for her to get information on her own)
Its established pretty early that she isn't that matured and has a very idealistic mindset when it comes to marriage...
Daphne does love Simon or at least she is really into him sexually, but it's Simon who puts Daphne in a tricky situation by kissing her. Daphne has no other choice but to marry the Duke or let his brother and Simon kill each other to death.
I think the reason Bridgerton became popular is because of the time frame it came out. Bridgerton came out the day after Christmas I think, so lots of people had some time off and we couldn't exactly do much because seeing family in pandemic was unfortunately not in the cards for many people--depressing. People like me were kinda looking for a head-empty no thought romance and were hoping Bridgerton could deliver. Watching Bridgerton (for me) was like consuming an entire bag of candy all at once, at first it's kinda great because you are easily distracted by pretty people and bright costumes but the further you go, it gets sickening and you kinda leave more depressed and self disgusted than you started.
Exactly, thank you!
This!!
This is 100% accurate I love the candy metaphor
That makes an insane amount of sense hahaha
People also don’t realize, this is a VERY popular book series. There is also a thriving booktube, and bookstagram community that shares adaptions. I knew a lot of people excited for this. There was a fan base already in place, and they spread the word.
As someone who lives in the UK, I can attest to the fact that the whole “not talking about vital issues” is a very British thing.
Especially for wealthy aristocrats
Well, we do talk about them, just passive-aggressively and indirectly, causing it to take ages and be very confusing.
omg i was about to comment this....direct conversation is not a thing in this country lool. its all about speaking in circles and resentment hidden in layers and layers of speech.
It’s VERY MUCH a Regency thing as well. “Polite conversation” was pretty superficial.
while every adult i know regardless of class talks about worldly issues rather unrestrained, i definitely agree. probably because thats what most of us have been raised to be like, but also because it really fits the whole (not entirely incorrect) stereotype of british stoicism in the face of adversity. humility is culturally a MASSIVE deal here... nothings worse than not having humility, so we tend to rely on passive aggressively taking the piss out of situations, whether for better or worse. in relation to the actual video, regardless of status, being overly polite and talking in docile coded language is most def the norm lol
Eloise had so much potential to be everyone's favorite character if the writers knew how to give her an ounce of depth. In one of the scenes where she and Benedict are talking about life and prospects, she pretty much tells him that he can do anything he wants to because he's a man, and if he wants to be an artist then all he has to do is hire a drawing master to teach him. I would've loved to have seen more of this frustration at the actual system they're trapped in, and her conflict with wanting to pursue her own desires, but also knowing her place and purpose as a daughter of an upper class family. They focused so much of her discontent towards balls, dresses, men, etc., instead of at the limits that the patriarchal society puts on her education, dreams, desires, and career. Would've also loved a scene that actually shows her discussing/reading her writing. that would've been another great way to give more insight and depth to her character, and show that she's actually passionate about writing. They also could've created such great parallels/a foil relationship between her and Benedict. they're both the second oldest of their gender and have less pressure/responsibility than the eldest, but it's shown in the show that pressure is still being put on them (Their mother urging Eloise to dress more grown up and go to balls, and Benedict being told that he would be head of the family after Anthony duels) , and that they view themselves as less capable in society than their older siblings. Anthony is also free to do whatever he wants to do, but is unsure of himself and lacks a real passion. Eloise on the other hand, has drive and a dream, but has no real options in how her future will play out. I had so much hope for her, but the writers had to make her the generic snarky little sister character.
In the books she ends up with a creep who didn't do anything to help his depressed first wife who then commits suicide and he chooses Eloise as a sensible replacement because he needs a woman to f*ck and take care of his kids, he abuses these kids btw.
100% agree. The few scenes with Eloise and Benedict were like coming upon an oasis in the desert.
There’s a song from the unofficial Bridgestone musical called “if I was a man” and I really like it, maybe u would too?
There's so many unexplored themes here that the show absolutely bungles or maybe just doesn't know how to navigate, that could have given us infinitely better episodes and characters. Way too much "tell, don't show" happening here, just like you said with Eloise talking about how limited she is and how much she enjoys reading and education, but it always FAILS to show these things!
We don't get a real sense of exactly HOW these women are allegedly limited aside from them talking about it. Only ONE named male character displays misogyny, and he is immediately shut down! Not just shut down but punched by Daphne, punched by Simon, scolded and threatened by Anthony, and then smeared all over society and his reputation destroyed until he's no longer on screen again. This world fails to show us the alleged patriarchy it says it operates under.
It fails to show us more of that great dynamic between Benedict and Eloise. It fails at observing social classes and other conflicts, despite knowing full well that this is an established issue. As much as I enjoyed parts of it, this show does suffer from extremely sloppy writing and a lack of depth, not to mention knowledge of its own purported themes.
YES! I was waiting for her to have some type of big rebellious moment but nothing - it is so frustrating to see a show where the writers had a chance to develop a great character but then just don´t. In retrospective it feels like she was supposed to be the exact opposite to Daphne so that Daphne could appear even more angelic. Would have been nice if they had granted her that depth.
Ranting about a show for 45 minutes and then concluding with "still better than Emily in Paris" - I gotta say, I love your channel!
I liked Emily in Paris bring on series 2
I give u good news, Emily in paris get season 2 this year 😌
@@nic3525 you *liked* it? The one with the American superiority complex? The one with the masked racism and stereotypes? Wtf?
@@gaanadelrey I’m personally disgusted that that show was green lit for a second season, even after all the problems that the show runners and writers undoubtedly know about. And since it’s filmed in Paris, it makes me nauseated to think about what they had to do to whitewash the people in the background. That’s not accidental. You can’t go to a place as racially diverse as Paris and just accidentally have only white people in the background. That’s on purpose.
I felt that comment deeper in me than my uncle at the age of 5
I fear the day you'll find something worse than Emily in Paris
Is Kissing Booth out of the equation?
Considering how long the movie(s?) is(/are) in comparison to Emily In Paris, and especially since there will be new seasons.. maybe?
*cough* riverdale *cough*
THIS
ooookay, did he watch The last airbender tho...?
y does daphne constantly look like shes about to cry
in every scene she just looks absolutely terrified
Think she was constipated
I disagree, I think she looks constipated and like she's dealing with a painful colon.
It's her eyebrows i think
That was my big issue with the casting. She looks either confused or scared at all times and things really aren't that complex between her and Simon to need to warrant that.
I think it was mentioned in the book that daphne likes to scrunch her eyebrows a lot. Also i guess her “lost puppy” face is supposed to represent her innocence and naiveness while being in the marriage market where people actually marry for status and not for love.
I feel like Simon's thing with having kids isn't that petty, or at least it had the potential not to be. It could have been a really interesting way to explore how trauma can sometimes lead to irrational or self-harmful behaviors, maybe leading into Simon's fears of abusing his kids the way his father abused him. They could have explore the mechanics of coping with trauma in the Regency Era and given him a chance at a decent healing arc. But instead they just...piled on the trauma.
True. If his thing was based around a subconscious fear rather than some strange spite, then it could have worked.
Real
@@owenlealWho cares if it was out of spite? That is his right and it wasn’t like he did it for absolute little reason. He was abandoned by someone who valued title above all else including his children . That seems reasonable.
I can't believe that Daphne's sexual assault of Simon was just brushed off, and NEVER spoken of again. While he should have been honest about not wanting to have children, he didn't deserve that. It's worse in the original novel, where Simon was drunk, and couldn't consent.
@@MohamedRamadan-qi4hl are you being sarcastic cos if ur not u r being rlly stupid
@@MohamedRamadan-qi4hl If that was a joke, it was a shitty one but if it wasn't then yes, yes they can. No one would like anyone forcing themselves on them.
Be a little considerate, man.
Edit: Sorry if you were being sarcastic, it's rather difficult differentiating sarcasm on the internet these days..
I skipped all the sex scenes so when I heard this was a scene I was disgusted. I’m kinda glad I skipped them now.
@@platyperri preach 👏🏼👏🏼
@@platyperri BeCaUz MeN AlWaYs wAnT SeX.
Tbf though wether or not the comment you responded to was sarcasm it's such a common stupid belief that woman can't rape men (because "of course your body reacting physically means you want it, right ?" Ugh) that the show doesn't even aknowledge a scene where one obviously does. It's just so disgusting.
Eloise is peak “I’m not like other girls”
I literally screamed when he said it. Couldn't stand her character!
STR8 FAX
Idk why i didn't get that vibe from her but she was my fave lol
100%. This is why she's my least favourite in the tv show. I've read a lot of the books while bored at work and that part of her personality is not nearly as extreme in the books. They make her over-the-top "I'm Not Like Other Girls" in the tv show. The books aren't good, but I promise it's not as bad in them, hahah.
!!! every scene she was in she had a face like a slapped arse accompanied with a very diluted faux feminist comment smh
Ok, I'm no historical fashion expert, but the contrasting fashion style is kind of a whiplash. People be wearing Georgian and modern fashion styles in one scene.
The queen and her entourage wear mid-18th century fashions, because the costume designer thought that the real Queen Charlotte never adapted to the change in styles at the turn of the century. However, this was very quickly debunked, as one of Queen Charlotte's few surviving dresses is in the Empire silhouette; not to mention that court dress did evolve with the changing fashions, as evidenced by English fashion plates of court attire from the period.
@@jaimeguerrero7320 Yeah I just learnt that recently. Also idk if it's just me, Simon's outfits look kind of... More modern??
U have not seen reign then... It's supposed to be queen Mary story in the 1500s but they wearing Alexander McQueen body hugging dresses
MakiMaki i love fashion history however the regency era isnt my main area of interest so some other people may be able to better explain it, but i also noticed this. there are way more reasons than the one that comes to mind INSTANTLY that i wont really go into, but the most noticeable issue for me is the cravat. pretty much every other guy has a white cravat (as was popular) but for some reason they gave him these odd low necklines and put him in black cravats, which wasnt really a thing for at least another decade! i think somehow that choice throws you off a little visually because NO ONE else wears that fashion, so if its a design choice meant to set him apart somehow, i wish it had a real meaning in the show
and yes oh my god, the mash ups of different eras are sometimes so off putting because it makes no sense why they put queen charlotte in styles that were very much not fashionable. every anachronism with costumes in period pieces is an opportunity to say something about the characters or imbue it with meaning and they never did that in a way that worked. i’m about to ramble on and on about an example of this done right so forgive me in advance for that. a great example of doing something technically anachronistic that REALLY worked well is the costuming in crimson peak. the sharpe siblings wear clothing from the 1880s, likely belonging to their parents, while the movie is set just nearing the turn of the century, so thats about two decades off. the clothing is absolutely not in fashion, and noticeably so, but the reason behind this choice works on a visual and character level. visually, it sets them apart from the light and flowing costuming of everyone around them-it makes them look out of place, dark, and restricted. relating to character, i believe this was done to emphasize the hold the past has on them, and how trapped they are in it. as their childhood is what eventually will turn them into monsters, it makes a LOT of sense to have their costumes represent the way they are trapped by the past and by the traumas they endured at the hands of the people whose clothing they now wear. THAT is how you use anachronistic costume choices to send a message! and apologies for the mini essay i got carried away here
Can we also acknowledge how Daphne read Simon's letters to his father, totally disregarding his privacy? She spoke about it as it was a perfectly normal and healthy thing to do.
Well, she raped him then played a victim afterward so that’s totally in her character.
The more I find out about this character the more I hate her
This! And then she has the nerve to be like "I know why you have issues now because I violated your privacy, don't worry ☆~it's okay~☆" and it's supposed to be some dramatic moment where she helps him open up or something??? Ew ew ew ew ew
Thing is, THIS COULD HAVE STILL WORKED, if the show then treated this like she was wrong for doing so and she suffers some consequence (i.e, her seriously losing Simons trust). It would really drive home the fact that Daphne is someone who is inherently naive to unspoken social and moral decency, when all her life she's grown up knowing she's kept in the dark about certain things and is somewhat an emotionally driven person. But the show does not do this, which is frustratinggg
Yeah, that was bad. I hated that too. I wish she didn't do it. She could have learned all those things about Simon just from conversations with the housekeeper and the Lady who raised Simon. Then she could have had a realisation that they barely know each other and tried to make a genuine effort to get to know him better, to which he could have responded by opening up to her, develop a real relationship and then consummate their marriage (yes, in this situation I think it would have been better for them to develop an actual relationship before hitting the sheets). When she was talking about her impending wedding night to her mother, when Simon gets two separate rooms at the inn, I really thought that they will end up having a non-physical relationship until they work out their issues. It's just really jarring that Simon talks about how he cannot give Daphne children, but they end up constantly having sex anyway. I know that the trope of "woman fixes man" is old and tired and I hate it and the show wants to have many sex scenes, because the actors look good, but the whole situation makes these characters look immature, selfish dumbasses, especially Daphne.
I guess I will just go back to watching "The Painted Veil" then.
The thing about this show is that it takes itself so seriously... Maybe due the time setting but it should've played with clichés and made fun of them, because when serious stuff happened, like the rape scene, they never adressed it, and they should have, male assault is dismissed so much already...
It reminds of Dickinson, which doesn't take itself entirely seriously, and does the same 'modern spin on old time' but more fully integrated it with some modern slang and just unedited modern songs so it lightens the tone and keeps you focused while still tacking some interesting issues.
Maybe it's part of the DCEU somehow? :D
"The Great" does a great job at not taking itself seriously and it's a fantastic and entertaining show but let's be real, this was an erotica adaptation and nothing more. It exist for the sexual tension, steamy scenes and to set up future stories in the series with the side characters for future seasons where they will repeat the same thing again
It's all about that book porn!
@@loganally4227 I haven't seen Dickinson, but it sounds way more interesting than more seasons of Bridgerton with the same "happily ever after" formula
@@charlesoutthere Sounds like it 👀
"I trapped you in this marriage."
"No, I trapped you"
"NO! You...no I trapped me!"
"Yes, I trapped me too!"
Audience: WTF is this 😒 😭😂
HAHAHHAHAHAH
Lmfao 🤣
"You've activated my TRAP CARD!!!"
Bridgerton is basically Jane Austen for the CW crowd.
Haahahahahahah i died
Bridgerton is a mix between a cheap Pride and Prejudice and Gossip Girl
With a sprinkle of Hamilton on top.
And a bit of twilight too
And 50 shades of grey
Better than gossip girl... Except S1 and the wardrobe there isn't anything in gossip girl... Atleast the Duke of Hastings didn't try to sell his teenage girlfriend to his old uncle in exchange of money...
i was so ANNOYED that they tried to recreate the infamous 2005 p&p hand touch scene
My only issue with this video is that, historically speaking, the London season during the regency period legitimately was constant balls/teas/breakfast parties/private sitting rooms with callers. It was only a small section of the year but these wealthy aristocratic/noble families would be in their country estates the rest of the year so this legitimately was their time to both find a spouse and see al of their friends/build connections. That was just part of the game
Yea thats one of the few things here that i hate for him to not research about bridgerton, hating stuff that are literally in bridgerton, the non stop gossip the very frequent balls+park ,the neutral setting for purity etc
Also he rants literally 2-3 minutes, screaming oMg tHiS sHoW is SO BORING bOrInG bORiNg ! iTS sO bOrInG ,mUsIc bOriNg! bALLs aRe bOring!
And no im not rlly exageratin on that
I also find it annoying that he didn’t even do five minutes research on ‘fallen women’ duels, seconds and forced marriages to ‘save a reputation’ they were all big parts of romance stories of the era and did happen (with less frequency) in real life. Maybe the show could have elaborated better - but wouldn’t that have just been more exposition?
he also didn’t research the fact that the bridgerton books came out before gossip girl so they’re not copying it. And it just feels like he doesn’t like the romance genre overall, bc it’s supposed to be cheesy. Also the story has mini subplots to prepare you for the upcoming seasons
right? a little tiny bit of research would have explained a lot to him. and, gossip girl is inspired by regency era stories, not the other way around. the show has issues, for sure, but a lot of his issues are with the era-specific stuff not the story so much. that said, the show is so much better than the books in my opinion. if one wants to read good regency-era romance novels, there are a million that are better than this series.
Yes, and it was the moment when anyone who wanted to be socially/politically relevant would meet with others and build connections. The constant party is probably the only part of this series that is actually true to the time.
The worst part is that, they could have had the whole unwanted pregnancy plot point without the rape. The pull out method for contraception is the worst - 20% of couples who use it will get pregnant within the year. They could have just gotten pregnant. Simon would have had to have dealt with his feelings about having his bloodline continued in this unexpected turn, whereas Daphne could have dealt with the realisation that he'd lied and this is not the partner she'd expected. No rape required. FFS.
you are a disgusting person. this is literally the law. this is what happens in the uk regularly. in fact its probably sensible to link this to the high male suicide rate in young men. yet you write this disgusting comment but presumably will try to find a way to defend this position in real life. disgusting hypocrite. i mean you literally just wrote a justification for it. forcing somebody into parenthood. and yet this apparently, other than the act of giving birth, does not apply to women? dont people like you always say that a woman should be able to have an abortion 'for whatever reason she wants, maybe she just doesnt want to be a mother, its none of your business'.
@@granolaman4410 who are you responding to? They are talking about a plotline being fixed without including sexual assault. What does this have to do with real laws? Also, unwanted pregnancies have nothing to do with male suicide rates.
@@granolaman4410 The hell are you on about? Simona Seizova
just pointed out that the pull out method is not great at birth control, and that fact could have been used by the writers to do a better version of this plotline WITHOUT sexual assault/rape. Simon was willingly having sex and doing so with the pull out method; having that method fail would not have been forcing him to do anything, it would have been a natural consequence of something he willingly chose to do, while still causing the conflict needed for the plot. Your reply is nonsensical.
@@granolaman4410 ??
Very good point
"guRL, ARE YOU GOOD, DO YOU NEED A KIT KAT" absolutely killed me
Everyone needs a KitKat 😂
I do, in fact, need a kit kat
More Cowbell, I mean Kit Kat!
Fuck the KitKat, I need a V8.
I liked that boxer and his wife, they should have their own story, from a rough poorer life to riches. Still staying the loving couple they are despite all things coming in between.
RIGHT. I was like ok is this gonna be all about those spoiled kids 😐
@@mwillmer6074 Sadly that's what makes the money. But still it could've been such a wholesome story
Think that would be boring
@@miyakakinshasa25 It's nothing serious... but yes it could be, if it were a standard hallmark romcom. But you can add a little spice if you like ;)
Daphne didn't fake her relationship to escape the other guys like, "To all the boys." She literally did it for the opposite reason.
Yeah, he kinda lost me on that. Daphne wanted to become the catch of the season, not avoid unwanted attention like Simon…
Also relevant is that the first Bridgerton book came out 7 years before the first season of Gossip Girl. I'm getting fed up with people complaining about stuff that's been "done before" when the one they complain is the copy is actually the older version.
I think what he’s saying is the show is doing a gossip girl thing not the books because it’s popular.
She did kinda do it to avoid the creepy guy
“It’s just people standing around talking about shit that doesn’t matter and whining”
Me: ah yes the Regency period
I have a big love for the 1995 Pride&Prejudice TV series with Colin Firth, but I find it so interesting, because it is simply hilarious by today’s standard. They are literally taking a walk in the house - up and down, because they don’t have anything to do all day other than gossip when there is no party to attend. :D So, yes, I agree that it is just a description of the Regency period when it comes to the upperclassmen.
I think you mean the Regency as seen on film and in novels. Historically there was a lot more going on than parties and standing around talking.
reminds me of this one P&P review "just a bunch of people going to eachother's houses"
Right? Sounds like Pride and Prejudice, and that book makes me want to stab myself. And I'm an English major.
I have to wonder how much of Bridgerton’s success is due to the year of pandemic self-isolation and the drought of emotional stimulation and social drama
I watched it cuz it had hot people and was hoping it would be decent. I enjoyed it but like. at the end I'm like eh I wouldn't watch a second season
for sure!! as well as the cottagecore revival (also due to the pandemic). idk if they'll be able to adapt all those books into a tv show 5/6 years from now
For real 😂🤣we were not in good judgment
I watched it because simon looked hot and it was sold as a show with a lot of sex, but there is not even that much sex imo…
Sex. Period.
My big issue inaccuracy wise is if they had gone for a straight alternatw universe where, for instance, slavery of African's never happened, that would be one thing, and it would be yet another thing if, in this universe, slavery did happen but it was abolished throughout the Empire much earlier and black people earned titles through merit over a course of several decades; but the show felt the need to qualify the presence of black nobility and their answer to that was something as simplisticly schlocky as "Oh but the king fell in love! And he married a black woman and that solved racism!"
Yeah, I want to know what the American Civil War was over in their universe since the African slave trade apparently didn't happen.
Exactly. The should have not said anything about race. And just let us assume is was an alt universe.
This is so true! That one rushed scene/explanation made the concept of an alternative universe collapse (which was the only thing that actually had my interest in episode 1) and made it super weak and undermining of the actual plight of black people at the time
@Amanda Shirk Yeah that's whitewashing.
It WASN'T really that simplistic though, because Simon actually calls B.S. on that claim and then walks angrily out on that conversation.
(But since Simon wasn't really concerned about their racial differences to begin with, Lady Danbury was basically just trying to guess at why Simon was even possibly SO dang reluctant to properly romance the young lady who'd caught his eye that Lady Danbury just threw that possibility out there and kind of got it a little bit wrong since Simon'd pretty much never told anyone up until then of his plans or determination to not continue his family line the way he was societally expected to, so it doesn't become an entire plotline after that. Lady Danbury brings up race because she's asking Simon if race is the obstacle that is holding Simon back from pursuing Daphne because she doesn't understand why he won't pursue an actual relationship with Daphne, but race ISN'T what’s holding Simon back & he doesn't want to share what's really holding him back instead *and* he personally disagrees with Lady Danbury's claim that love conquers all so he simply objects and leaves. It's only a mention, just to acknowledge that there are racial disparities present at all and that potentially contradictory views about them may or may not exist in the greater more-unexplored areas of the Bridgerton world as well....even though the two main characters - Simon & Daphne - themselves seem to see race as a non-issue personally.)
I don't remember if the word "slave" was ever actually used in that conversation or not though-I would have to rewatch to be sure either way. BUT *"Two separate societies, divided by color"* could, in my opinion, just as easily be referring to two separate & more-homogeneous countries and/or cultures in general as it could refer specifically to slavery. And it could in that vein be saying how after the Queen's marriage to the King, now, their country has become a more unified multiracial culture.
It's just regular historical fiction though, which always runs a wide gamut anywhere _FROM_ imagining fictionalized versions of actual historical characters and/or locations and/or events _TO_ imagining completely original fictional characters &/or places &/or events simply set within or during a historical setting(not entirely unlike regular more modern fiction often does). But it's not specifically alt-history fiction, so it's not really attempting to specifically reimagine any certain thing with the particular intention to explore how that exact change would or wouldn't have theoretically come about and/or would or wouldn't have realistically changed the world from the world as we actually or historically know it with that truly being a main point/purpose of the story or the worldbuilding as a whole.
The showrunner basically said even before Netflix's _Bridgerton_ came out that he wanted to create a kind of historical escapism fantasy with this series that people could turn to for a break from always focusing on the issues of the real world which are evermore present and forefront in the conversations and the issues of current times, but also didn't want to just completely ignore things like race altogether as if they don't matter or aren't important conversations to be had either so would only touch on these kinds of serious issues more lightly without making it a primary focus of the actual plot itself. Basically, because conversations are so intensely sociopolitically charge in reality, he wanted to craft a fictional story where people could kind of press pause on those conversations and just slip away for a little while into an idealized fantasy/historical version of a world and just enjoy themselves. Personally, I think he succeeded at doing that pretty well(with the unfortunately atrocious and mishandled exception of what Daphne does to Simon); although, sure, the showrunner could perhaps have done even better. I think the problem is, however, that many people actually want that conversation or any kind of an actual social commentary on the issue which the showrunner was specifically & intentionally circumventing...rather than simply suspending their disbelief and accepting it for what it was. Which IS fair. But I think the showrunner's intentions were fair too, even if not really something that's going to appeal the same for every viewer.
This show is literally fanfiction come to life. It has so many popular tropes of the medium: Enemies to lovers, arranged marriage, fake dating; you name it. The worst part is that I've read fanfiction that's done all of this better than Bridgerton did, which must be rather embarrassing for the show's writers.
@@kaili_28 Eh. The "Rape/NonCon" tag on AO3 exists for a reason and I have seen it used before, so there's totally fanfic out there with that sort of shit as a subplot.
Ye, it's like fanfiction - except the fanfiction are WAY, WAY BETTER! YIKES! Gives fake dating/fake relationships fics a bad name! Bummer! LMAO!
What I cannot wrap my head around is that in the year of our Lord 2O24 (or 2023 I guess) we're still doing the 'young woman is so sexually naive she doesn't know what masterbation is' trope!?? Like holy shit this isn't a dimestore romance novel from the 1980s!
whats worse is that the stupid Bridgerton AUs are better than actual bridgerton smh
honestly what drew me into bridgerton was the cliché of it all - i had fun with it *because* i knew everything that was gonna happen, it was like reading fanfiction to me lmao
i hadn't realized people were praising it for being so different, that's the most surprising part of this video
Exactly! Bridgerton is the kind of show you know isn't realistic and is probably toxic but you enjoy it anyway because it distracts you from all the shit in the real world. It was tropey down from episode 1, I mean, the episode literally ends with the two love interests fake dating...did anyone expect something unique? Sorry for them then.
100% with this comment. This show was just fluff, which is fine if you enjoy it as just that. But who can seriously enjoy this show as something 'different'?
Their difference lie in being the same as many show you've seen, it's junk food with with pretty colors everywhere
This totally. I thought it was tropey ok purpose. I still think it is, and other people are forcing it into a serious box that it will never fit bc it wasn't made to, lol
Exactly! I went in expecting a highly produced soap opera and I got what I wanted 😩👌
I remember feeling physically sick when Daphne forces Simon during that one time they're intimate. I can't like her after that. It was horrifying to watch, especially when Simon clearly conveyed with his body language and verbally that he did not want it. It was rape, plain and simple.
and somehow that never happened??? towards the end it’s like that never happened and he didn’t seem to care??? he happily gave her a child and i don’t know why he was comfortable doing that
It would be one thing if she actually got consequences for her actions. But they didn't mention it after it. She got no consequences. She got what she wanted.
it is true that it looks not normal BUT on a side note, and as a woman of a quite small weigh, hum there is no way Daphne could force anything, in the way that Simon (who does boxing and look super fit) could have JUST MOVED HER. Come on it's ridiculous
@@florylege sometimes forcing isn't just about physical, its mental too. But also, in here, Daphne manipulates the love Simon has for her as well as clearly clamping down and making sure he finishes inside her. It is forcing because his body language shows he's in shock and clearly doesn't want it.
I wasn't that much bothered about "that scene" ... if anything is the most historically accurate thing in the entire series.
Don't talk to your daughter about sex, leave all the power in the hand of the man, wait until some shit happens.
If Daphne's and Simon's roles were switched, the whole conversation would be different. And a lot of people would be deadass angry at Simon within an instance.
So true.
You are so right about that 💯
Double standards piss me off.🤬
I'm adding nothing new, but I also agree. Rape and sexual assault towards men is just as serious as it is for women. I hate how it's not treating like that.
@@456puff Same for domestic abuse.
Okay a bit embarrassed to admit but I’ve actually read the entire series this show is based off of.
It’s actually not ripping off gossip girl- if anything it’s the other way around: the first bridgerton book came out in 2000 and the gossip girl author was inspired by lady whistledown. Two years later she released her own book
In a round about way we owe the existence of Gossip Girl to the Bridgerton series. So there’s that.
Also all other 7 (😨) books are basically the first books plot with little changes here and there.
Oh and the rape scene was included in the book and it’s kinda worse because as a narrator Daphne is VERY intentional about what she was doing in the moment and then does a 180 immediately afterwards claiming she NEVER intended to to anything like that. Like girly I read the words two chapters ago!!!
When you say Book Daphne was more deliberate with regards to *that* scene, was it actually acknowledged as such by the writing or are you still supposed to root for her?
EDIT- Ah, therein lies the issue. She's the narrator.
If Daphne wanted children and Simon wants his bloodline to end with him they could just adopt. It's that simple.
Not in that era. Adopting wasn’t something you did to raise a child as your own, unless you were concealing an illicit pregnancy and were trying to keep the family name clear. Adopting didn’t create a parent relationship. It would be, at best, like taking in a kid to help a servant in the house, or because you were rich and wanted control of the upbringing of your grandkid. Adopting to have a child to love and raise as your own wasn’t done yet.
@@TacticusPrime Except I think they played the trick of getting rid of the racism, but keeping the patriarchy, which is smart because the particular play of patriarchy at the top is one of the few unique things of that time.
@@M.M.Y.B ... there are a LOT of things unique to the Regency era. I'm not sure what "patriarchy" has to do with the lack of adoption. It's true that adoption as we think of it didn't really exist in England until the 1920s, but orphans were taken into the houses of people in the community and cared for. Found families have always existed in some form or another.
@@TacticusPrime but did they happen in the 1%?
@@M.M.Y.B Yes. Not just orphans either. Famously, Jane Austen's third brother was fostered by their much richer cousins and he inherited their estate. He even took their name, becoming Edward Austen Knight.
I just wanted her to marry the prince. He was nice, he wanted kids, their personalities vibed well...My mom and I were screaming at the screen like
GIRL
NO
Leave that broody rake alone and get yourself a damn prince!
LITERALLY !!!
FACTS
And by marrying the Prince the pressure would be off for sisters.
THIS IT WAS LIKE GIRL GO GET THE BAG NOT THE MAN WHO IS NOT GOOD AND ISNT COMPATIBLE FOR YOU IN ANY WAY WHATSOEVER, i felt so bad for the prince because he was just used as nothing but a pawn in daphne & simon’s sick game, plus he was very pressured by the queen to court daphne.
THIS
When i watched this show and Simon told that he can't have kids i thought: "Oh, maybe, he really can't have kids and it would be a great challenge for them to overcome and they would be together despite this. And then they would take a child from some kind of orphan home. Daphne would face mother's (and maybe even their whole society's) incomprehension. But they would go through it together" But instead writers gave us this shit
Honestly, that plot would have been so much better.
Gave us shit🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Yours sounds ways better
Lol it kinda reminded me of conversion therapy
Here's why I think Bridgerton got popular. It came out right as everyone was spending Christmas alone and realizing that this whole Covid thing was going to last longer than a couple months. People were craving an escape to a "simpler time" before masks and social distancing. I guarantee you if the show had come out 10 months earlier or heck even if it had come out that following May where things were starting to look up the show would have probably been passed over.
Absolutely true! 82 million people were just lonely during Christmas and the Covid-19 and needed an escape. Do you think that if Covid-19 did not happen, people would have watched this show? No, they wouldn't. I agree there is nothing special about this show and the actors and Shondaland got lucky due to a universal virus that kept millions in their homes.
it’s still frightening to me how they had an entirely graphic r@pe scene in this and it was just glossed over and never spoken of again. fandom and show. it’s like it never even happened
Precisely, it's even worse in the original novel, where Simon was drunk, and couldn't consent!
It broke my heart seeing so many people deny that it was rape. If a man had forcibly came inside a women im sure they'd be singing a different tune, and the double standard is really upsetting so im so glad to see comments like this calling out the bullshit!
@@_laurenolo_ I watched the show but I couldn’t remember the part can you please tell in which part?
@@insidesoccer6498 essentially, towards the end of the series when Daphne realises the Duke CAN have children but CHOOSES not to and feels betrayed, she gets on top of him during sex and forces him to stay down as he finishes so that she can try and get pregnant against his will, effectively r*ping him and it was a huge violation that wasn't really addressed. In fact, he kind of apologised later on for lying and yet she didn't really apologise for what she did which was very disturbing
@@_laurenolo_ yes!! seeing him lying there with this distraught look on his face along with the stuttering (something that he hasn’t done since childhood and from what i note, is also a nervous habit) made my stomach sink. i have no idea how production allowed this scene to go through
To be fair: the miscommunication trope is probably in 90% of the novels about romance.
I've come to not expect anything diffrent :D
Grace Draven is your girllll healthy relationships and the conflict is outside the relationship. Radiance is my FAVORITE BOOK EVER
yeah because that's the way drama starts, literally 70% of the issues couples face in things like this would be solved with basic communication skills
@@eowyn-faramir-reads It looks amazing judging from the description, are her other books like this?
Heck if men and women could properly communicate, there would be more marriages, less divorces and Snapped wouldn't be a thing.😏
It's legit a plot device people advise new writers with. Something along the lines of what ever you protagonist wants, don't give it to them. In this case it Daphne wanting kids and the Duke wanting to keep his word. And coincidentally their wants are conflicting which adds to the ✨drama✨
I honestly found the r@pe scene very triggering, as I am in a similar position of not wanting kids. Very concerning to see it so glossed over...
Yeah definitely, I watched a lot of videos on this show and the fact this was the only one to actually address the r@pe scene is worrying. Also same on the not wanting kids and thinking about that happening is freaking anxiety inducing
They could've easily cut that out and written some new scenes were Simon discovers being a dad isn't as bad as he thought or smt. Like maybe a certain someone would lose their life and leave behind a orphaned toddler that Daphne decides to take in, and eventually Simon warms up to them. Idk but would've been a story I would watch...
@@maanlicht8583 There was this scene where Dahne(?) holds a random child and he looks at her contemplating. They could have used and expanded that as you said. Or have an accidental pregnancy where both had no agency in, would fit the whole drama in the show.
@@beccg9421 Yes I remember now, that could work too. I sometimes wonder how the writers ever decided to keep it, the scene was already frowned upon whith the books...
@@maanlicht8583 I've never read the books and only started the show for some light entertainment. But r@pe should never be framed as entertainment without consequences. Glad to see others thinking the same!
Season 2 of Bridgerton was extremely predictable, but that was one of the reasons I liked it so much. It was quite satisfying to watch what I predicted come true in a mostly well written manner, with angst, romance, family - it was like watching a fanfiction when all you want is something stupid and predictable, so you have something which you can be casually involved with while relaxing. Something like Gossip Girl also fits here. It's new enough to be interesting, and the plot is predictable enough to be comforting when life feels unpredictable. And they are definitely an alternate reality, I don't think that the writers ever claim 100% accuracy
The comfort of predictability is honestly why I love watching slasher movies. You know most of the characters will act extraordinarily stupid and throw common sense out of the window the second the plot starts to pick up in order to justify their bloody end.
I totally agree! Season two was way better…and to me it was mainly because the two main characters align personality wise, its not just chemistry for the sake of it. It makes it so much more satisfying to watch when they get together.
Season 2 was horrible. Season 1 was at least visually pleasant. LOL
@@sabcam2000Interesting take. Do you want to elaborate? I know that they were filming season 2 during covid and they had trouble with some parts, but still... I did not notice much of a difference. Arguably, budget seemed bigger and it showed in some scenes.
@@sabcam2000the best bridgeton was the prequel
“It’s the most successful show Netflix has produced”
I’m so glad Squid Game swooped in less than a year later to beat that record. And by “beat” I mean obliterated. It’s nuts the records that show has beaten…
YOU 3 or Bridgerton 2 will take that crown back LMFAO
@@udhav423 yeah no...Squid Game is so huge that no sequel that would require new viewers to watch pre requisite content will beat Squid Game
@@kanyanavanathan3786 it's sad because that means it's probably gonna be irritating and spam my feed for the next 3 years like it has for the past while....
But bro, Squid Game is now Netflix’s most popular show with just one season. You is on season 3 and the Crown season 5 and it’s not as big as Squid Game in terms in how many people have watched it.
Squid game is fucking overrated
"they spend the entire show having the same arguments over and over again and they never really solve any of them" and that's pretty much it. Every scene made me feel uncomfortable and confused I only kept watching it because the aesthetics were visually satisfying.
I kept watching for the Queen. I feel so bad for her and the King.
Maybe I just don't watch enough television, but I have a feeling people are going to look back at shows like Bridgeton and Emily in Paris and say "wow, we were seriously going through something in quarantine, weren't we?" I can't keep but feel that these shows that run almost 100% on escapism wouldn't have been even noticed if the entire world wasn't stuck in quarantine at the time.
I feel exactly the same!!
I share your sentiments!
Historically, the having a party every night during "the Season" was actually pretty realistic.
I have no idea how this is the most successful netflix show ever
13 reasons why was popular, too. Are we really that surprised?
@@krumblemumble8628 at least that show pretended to talk about serious things which made a bunch of people like it?
Really? I'd have thought Stranger Things is, because it's actually good
I thought stranger things was the most popular show on netflix.
Me neither, but I reckon that Stranger Things, Orange is the New Black, and House of Cards are just as popular.
i wrote a fanfiction when i was like 8 about two persons faking a relationship for convenience and then falling in love, im pretty sure it was better than bridgerton
Do you have it?
Edit: I also have characters that are in marriage of convenience, but the love is one sided.
Drop it, i need to read it
but I mean, didn't everyone write a fanfiction about two people faking a relationship and falling in love? (not hating on your comment btw, loved reading those fanfics when I was a teen)
Honestly that's a valid statement
@@bloempotlot trueeeee
Bridgerton has the same vibes as reading a really well written fanfiction with an interesting premise that you end up finishing and enjoying purely bcs ur love of like 1 character
True.
This really explanis my feelings about the show
yes yes yes
Probably the most accurate description 😂
A lot of the issues you seem to have with Bridgerton are issues that would've been commonplace in the Regency era!
They used to have what were called Seasons, where the only purpose *was* to get married & there were multiple parties, soirees, etc... so they could find a suitable (money, power, station, title, etc..) partner.
They did used to duel for honour, so kissing someone in those days of you weren't married, was seen as something major, as now his sister was "sullied" & no longer marriageable.
This was the age where heads would literally roll if you offended the monarch in any way, so meeting the Queen (which *was* a very big deal at the time) & her not believing your story would've had far reaching consequences...
Thanks for summarizing exactly what I was thinking! A lot of the screaming he did was just from him being unfamiliar with the customs.
I didn't like it either, BUT ... "the season" in London was, indeed, "one party after another". That was the whole point.
In Benedict's story, which I think will be season 3, some of the story happens after the season so it will not involve so many parties. Though there are still a few parties. Lol
Yeah some of FSN's confusion stems from the fact that he doesn't know much about Regency romance tropes, or the regency era in general.
Still they didn't need to have a ball on EVERY episode. The writers clearly didn't know where else they could put their characters.
Yes, thats what “the season” is
That's correct, but that doesn't mean it makes for good tv.
I was shocked when a friend of mine told me she didn't think what Daphne did was rape, because if he wanted he could've thrown her of since he is stronger??? Like good job justifying male rape love
The logic of that... If that were true, all rape cases would be decided based on the relative muscle mass of the participants.
In the book it was worse. She did it when he was drunk and passed out. I almost stopped reading after that out of disgust.
This and Luke in The Handmaid's Tale is showing just how much a lot of women don't think about men's consent being an issue.
I had an argument with a family member about it and they said a similar thing. The reason they gave however, was that it was okay because they were married. You can be married to someone and still be raped by them. And even in this circumstance, it was def rape, whether fans of the show like to admit it or not.
@@urlocalfridge2699 According to the laws at that time, it's not rape if they're married.
People trying to paint Bridgerton as an "original" show in 2020, when Jane Austen did it better in the 1810s. Hilarious.
I’m amused how many people don’t understand that Jane was satirizing her own era, basically SNL for the regency era.
The book is worse! Both or just soulless cash grabs at Jane Austin‘s popularity without actually understanding anything about her or the time period she wrote in!
Jane Austen was actually one of the famous writers who had their works immortalised but the tropes and genre of the novels was always huge in reading circles both from that time and after
Exactly! Every Regency romance is a shameless Jane Austen rip-off that lacks her critique on social issues (which makes her work timeless) nor her finesse with language and wit (banter isn't the same as being witty, which sadly many writers forget). I'm no big fan of Austen because I prefer the darker themes and settings of the Brontës, but Jane Austen definitely knows how to write a story of manners without being ridiculously shallow!
@@emmaoliveros4581 bronte for the win!!!!
can you please do a video on Bridgerton season 2? i didn't enjoy season 1 and thought everything about it story-wise was rather underwhelming - but ended up surprisingly very much enjoying the recently released Season 2. i'm genuinely curious if Season 2 offered you a different perspective at all or if you thought it was another sad attempt, and a breakdown of whatever impression you had!
like i felt the character motivations/dynamic between one another were a lot more fleshed out in a way that the audience can empathize with (love for family -> responsibility for family -> therefore, self-interest conflicting with family duty). IDK YOU DON'T HAVE TO AGREE AT ALL AND MAYBE JUST END UP HATING BRIDGERTON EVEN MORE BUT I JUST WANT TO KNOW YOUR THOUGHTS/COMMENTARY ON THEIR ATTEMPT #2 OKAY
Agreed! The romance was significantly better done in s2 imo
The only way this ending with a baby could have worked is if she had helped Simon work through his emotional trauma and once that happened he realized he did want a family.
It was done in detail in the novel. They skipped that part in the show.
@@chimchimsjamkookies4242 I understand that it can be difficult to include certain things but I hate it when they skip important details when adapting books to tv/movies
OH MY GOD! The artificial charisma thing - yes!!! So accurate for this show lmao
RIGHT?! Blew my mind!
Yes! And God, they were all so....boring....
Bridgerton feels to me like it was an excuse for a group of people to cosplay and put on fake accents and pretend to be on downton abbey while making tons of awkward sex jokes, and someone happened to be filming it
YES! this is like downtown abbey, but bad and has sex scenes. the only thing that was cool about this show was the clothes
Downton Abbey is pretty bad too though 😅
Specifically for non-white people to do it, since white actors have been doing it for years. I wish the plot had been more deserving of the occassion, though...
YES!!!
And honestly there's nothing wrong eotb that concept of just a historical fantasy show but I wish the characters had been better
The king didn't have alzheimer's disease. King George the third was believed to have suffered from Acute Intermittent Porphyria. His son, George the fourth ruled as regent during this period which is why it's known as the regency period. George the thirds madness is well known to anyone who knows anything about regency England, including regency romance readers. There is also a movie called The Madness of King George, which leans heavily on the Porphyria theory, from 1994 starring Nigel Hawthorne as George, and Helen Mirran as George's wife Charlotte.
The reason the first season is such a mess is because it's setting up for seasons 2, 3, 4, and 5. 2, now obviously out, with Anthony and the whole ridiculous pronouncement at the end. Benedict with the speech from the artist about being brave in love, so his whole arc in this season was opening that door for him. 3, is Colin and Penelope, though we saw more of the lead in for that in season 2. In season 5 it's Eloise's book and that is all to do with Marina's (Brenda) husband. I guess they wanted to show whoever picked up the show that they had plenty of material, but it really was overstuffed.
Each series could be shorter and accomplish the story better. Daphne is a great character in the book, right up until the rape scene, then it's hard to have any sympathy for her, but I do enjoy the later books, even though they're not particularly accurate or well written. The constant PoV switches, sometimes mid-paragraph, drive me to distraction.
As for the reason everyone got annoyed with having actors of colour in the show, grow up. The only thing that disappointed me about it is that Lady D. brings it up about George, the king, marrying Charlotte and raising PoC up to the aristocracy and changing England in one fell swoop and then the show does absolutely nothing with it. They could have set it up as a fantastic AU and instead it peters away into nothing. The annoys me so much that when I rewatch the show, I always skip that scene. I also hate the modern music and dancing. Do they really think a modern audience are so fickle that they won't be able to watch unless they use modern music?! Again, with AU it might have worked, but they bottled out of that idea almost as soon as they introduced it. It would have been better just to cast actors of colour and then not mention anything at all.
the characters of daphne’s neck tendons and clavicles popping up all the time are the most interesting by far
something a vampire would say ngl
Ahaha true that!
lmao this is all I can focus on now 😂 tal
How this surpassed the masterpiece that is The Queen's Gambit, I will never understand...
It's just the old Netflix spotlight of the month thing. QG was great but had its month of incessant marketing, once everyone had binged it, time to yell about the new show
Queen's Gambit is shite
People don’t like intellectual shows because they want to escape in a world without thinking about it. 🤷🏾♀️
@@AliHasan-14 how come?
@@zerere_ tbh i can see people not liking queen's gambit, i really don't think it's to everyone's taste. but good lord, it hurts to even see clips and gifs of bridgerton, it looks like absolute cringy and nonsensical trash.
edit: at least queen's gambit was cohesive compared to...this.
There's definitely disturbing aspects to the show as well as the books (Colin threw up major red flags in his book) but I think you hate it a lot more if you're not the intended audience. I love trashy romance novels and that's pretty much what this was. So I mostly enjoyed it.
I will say that I read two and a half of the books before giving up in disgust so the show is an improvement 😬
I actually liked it at first, but for some reason, the graphic sex ruined it for me, then the graphic rape scene, well...I couldn't watch it after that. I was actually angry at what Daphne did and was heated that she was allowed to get away with that.
Agreed, there was something video-game animation about the sex scene. I think it was a little too long, but no fun. The SA was weird even after I switched to spanish.
Yes and it’s very weird how the cameras POV is daphne’s... like why would u film a rape scene from the POV of the rapist that’s so disturbing???
@Allison Etzler I'm normally here for sex scenes that are done well, but here it just felt out of place, unnecessary and tacked on. It's like baking the fluffiest Victoria sponge in the world with the most beautiful icing, then pouring hot seminal fluid & shame on top of it.
I'm glad you didn't continue because she gets no repercussions for it and the blame keeps being tossed to Simon for lying to her, we get a whole scene where we're supposed to feel bad because the rape didn't end up in pregnancy like she wanted too...
@@millsrome Horrible. Just fucking awful. It makes me upset that showrunners think this is what progressives want. All I wanted was a show that looked like a cake that was just as substantial, that had folk that looked like me in it. I did not need the clumsy incorporation of politics, nor sex/assault scenes that literally undo what the showrunners are trying to give themselves a pat on the back for.
If you thought Simon's character motivation was stupid, wait until you get to Anthony Bridgerton's in book two. He believes he will die young because his father died suddenly due to a bee sting so now he does not want to commit.
hUH
"blinking guy meme' what type of reasoning is that lol
...
a BEE STING???
anthony, the syphilis is more likely to take you out than a f/cking *bee sting*
I mean yeah but it was more Anthony just never thought he could surpass the greatness that he believed his father was. It wasn't just because of a bee it was because he never thought he could outlive his father who died at 38. So Anthony never wanted to commit or fall in love because he's going to die young. It is silly but I think more than what you're saying 😂
What fucks with me is that everyone in bridgerton looks like they're cosplaying a character I can't remember and it drives me insane.
I'm like "Yeah.... I've seen you before.. but where?"
Daphne is cosplaying goddamn Wendy Darling every time she's in a blue dress, I stg
Jane Austen
I personally found them a parody of every Jane Austen character. Like Daphne is Jane Bennet, Simon is a Mr. Darcy wannabe, while eloise is a mary bennet that is shown as if she could be likeable in any way. The character just straight up feel like a bad comic version of any woman author's character of the time. It's just,,,,, bad...
Ok looking back I worded this poorly. What I mean is that, the actors look super familiar, especially the female lead, it's kind of a mix between the actors themselves looking familiar, and their character being designed in such a way that they resemble other fictional characters (like wendy darling and jane bennet). I think they did a great job of it, because I think some of the live action disney style could benefit from this colorful/stylistic approach to character design and costuming.
Phoebe Dynevor (the actor who plays Daphne) was a big one for me, cause I stg i've seen her before, appparantly ppl think she looks like kiera knightly and kate winslet, and I can totally see the resemblance now.
Finally someone saying that Daphne's a monster.
She literally r*ped Simon... everytime I talk about this show with other people the SA scene is always dismissed as if it's "nothing" and even the show picture it as if Simon is the bad guy because "he lied" and Daphne had no other choice. She freakin' r*ped him and they never adress this.
To me Bridgerton is the story of a poor man that ends up trapped by a psycho in an abusive relationship
The moment you said the basic plot, a million of "friends to lovers" fanfics sprung into my head. Hell, I could probably name ten from the top of my head. That's such a basic basis for a story.
I've read better friends to lovers fanfics written probably by 13 year olds
@@loganally4227 *I* wrote better fanfics at 13
This literally could've been a wattpad story and i wouldn't notice a difference
Deadass when he started describing the plot I thought "this is just every fake-relationship AU"
Except it's based on a book from 2000/2001 so the story came out before fanfics existed. It's not really copying anything
I stopped watching when daphne sexually assaulted Simon. I wasn’t enjoying the show to begin with, but when that happened it cross a line. Hearing that they brushed it off makes me hate this show even more.
They could've easily cut that stupid scene out and written some new scenes were Simon maybe discovers being a dad isn't as bad or smt. For example: a certain someone would lose their life and leave behind a orphaned toddler that Daphne decides to take in, and eventually Simon warms up to them. Idk but would've been a story I would watch...
Yeah so did I. It's so stupid, there's literally no reason for it to be there. It only exists for them to fight (again). There were so many other ways to do it.
I honestly feel like they sexually assaulted each other which makes their relationship ridiculously toxic.
I liked the show but that aggitated me so much!
Simon not telling her that he is able to have children but just doesn't want to have them before he has sex with her, feels very rapey to me. Especially considering the fact that he knew how truly naive she was. Idk ... The show is actually interesting in my opinion but those themes also just rubbed me the wrong way.
Glad to see people like you exist. Thank you for existing, and your comment.
@@YouWillGetThereBuddy Kind of.... I mean technically she doesn't understand the concept of "pulling out" and so yes, she doesn't have informed consent for the style of sex they are having and he knew that. But .... I'm not sure if that's rape or sexual assault.
The toxicity of their relationship made me angry and all my friends loving it made me feel like I was taking crazy pills. Thanks for this video.
SAME
OMG SAME!!!
no one is saying Daphne and Simon ain't toxic, i do think the author of the books wrote the relationship that way considering the complex situation of that time. Girls being reduced to finding a good catch that will care for them, and men deciding for them.
@@alejandroespinosa7085 even if the author was self aware, and knowingly made their relationship toxic, I think that it might have been a mistake. Now I am stuck watching to characters who I don’t care about and am frustrated by because they are terrible people. I am not invested in them or their romance, because it’s plain as day that they should not even be together in the first place.
@@alejandroespinosa7085 YOU DON'T SEE THE PROBLEM OF A WHITE WOMAN RAPING A BLACK MAN SAYS EVERYTHING I NEED TO KNOW WHAT KIND OF PERSON YOU ARE.
I remember reading tweets and articles calling it "jane austen meets gossip girl" and I was genuinely excited about it. after the first episode I was so angry that I watched the pride and prejudice bbc series to cleanse my brain
I was also disturbed that they had sex without daphne knowing anything about the action or anatomy of sex. Like how could she be comfortable? How is that….that’s like scary right?
I listened to Stephen Fry's podcast "Victorian Secrets" on Audible - really good podcast, btw. Anyway, apparently that wasn't uncommon in the Victorian era (Yes I know this is not Victorian) - i.e. for a woman to go off on her wedding night not knowing anything about sex. It wasn't something "polite society" spoke to their girls about.
@@michelemacnab680 even now this happens in some part of India
If it was 21st century, I could understand your feelings, but remember that the show depicts 1800s - almost all women (of the society) went into marriage bed without knowing anything about sex. THat was the norm.
Is that good? No. But that was the reality; and to judge it by our 21st century standards... doesn't make sense.
@@Lina-lq7jm That's just flat out wrong. It was the mother's job to educate her daughter about her duties on her wedding night and to her husband. Same with fathers and their sons.
@@lainiwakura1776 was? Was? No at the time it wasn't. NOW it is, back then it wasn't
15:18 those two seconds of Supernatural while saying "some shows only survive because of the natural charisma of a few characters even tho the writing went to shit" made me burst out laughing BECAUSE IT HURTS!
Legit. The moment Dean walks in and he and Sam look at each other in the pilot. BOOM. Instead chemistry.
I want him to do a video on Supernatural, but at the same time I don't cause I know it will HURT.
@@tiffanyfletcher7430 same
I hear ya...
Concerning the s3xual a55ault scene, I'm not for redeeming that behavior at all, but here's what they could have done if they _reeeally_ wanted to leave it in.
Daphne should have gotten _seriously_ put in her place. If she didn't know anything about sex, then she should've had a character explain, very seriously, what r@pe is and why what she did was extremely violating. Make her beg Simon for forgiveness and let him seriously consider if he wants to forgive her. The scene in which she confronts her mother about not teaching her about sex could have been even more raw and powerful-- because she didn't know about sex, she ended up hurting someone she loves and ruined her relationship and she feels very guilty about it.
And then Simon could have forgiven her (because they have to get together) and explained that they have to decide together if and when they will have children and that she has to respect that.
I'm obviously of the opinion that it never should have happened in the first place, but there's also a way to handle this topic that would make it less horrific.
Agreed
Yes, but that would require for the characters to talk clearly and intelligently for more than 10 seconds. Better have them constantly lie (poorly) and hide important information for... reasons
exactly.
So it's not rape until he came inside of her? 😂😭 What?
@@Jeremy-wp4yh yes, because he consented to have sex, but not to finish in her. He took away his consent in that scene when he said 'wait, wait, Daphne, no'. She held him down and didn't let him pull out. That's at the very least assault.
The thing that I see very clearly on a second watch after having read 7 out of the 8 books in the series, is that the producers didn't know if they'd get more than one season, so they put a bunch of stuff from later books into the first books story. Marina isn't mentioned until book 5. Eloise doesn't look for whistledown until book 4, which is told half from whistledown's perspective. No one pays any attention to Benedict until book 3, etc. The producers took 20 year old books and tried to get as much out of the series as they could in one season, which is why nothing about it is particularly innovative
About the whole party thing, I believe it was due to the period being regency era in the London Season. There were picnics, dinners and balls all day every day
Exactly. It was meant to be a period of the year where members of the nobility could come together in one city (from their own estates which are all over) for the express purpose of social politicking/marriages.
Yeah. People didn't not socialize with the opposite sex outside of such events, it was the custom of the time.
Thank you, I was scrolling to find some comment about this! The London season was serious business, you had over 4 events every day because girls had to have a husband by the end of it. And the wardrobe sent families back a huge amount every season, so it was possible that if the season ended and you didn't have a proposal of marriage you just didn't have the money to go through another one the following year. Even if you did, after 2 or 3 seasons with no proposal of marriage you were at serious risk of becoming a "spinster". It's insane for us, but that aspect of the show is in no way fictional.
Not exactly in 1813 Europe is at war with Napoleonic France and they are all focused on the war effort parties and picnics are only common for both military and aristocrats during the 2nd half of the regency period from 1816 to 1820
@@inigobantok1579 I’m not sure what you know about what war looked like back then, but there were plenty of parties during the war. Read Vanity Fair.
Artificial charisma as in every single Riverdale lead
Especially Veronica.
Exactly 💯
@@drfifteenmd7561 and jughead
Cole Sprouse gives Jughead a little charisma but he’s absolutely the only one
Now I think about it, I never heard much about the plot of this show. It was a lot of people being excited about a diverse period drama.
Yeah and it was barely diverse at that!
i think you'd like the second season much more than the first. the story//main ship was overall much more interesting and gods the chemistry between the lead actor and actress was great! would love to hear your opinions on it in a video !!
He was nominated for an Emmy and her character is a villain by the end I literally couldn’t stand her. I understood WHY she wanted what she wanted but …
When you literally consider Simon had EVERYTHING he stood for basically taken from him. He never wanted to be married-BAM he married. Didn’t want children-BAM he’s a father. He has emotional trauma-BAM they ignore it. There was a point around episode 7 that I just sat there and considered that character literally gave up EVERYTHING he stood for in the beginning … for convenience of the plot to WRAP UP his story arc by the end of the season. It absolutely wasn’t earned. And THEN HES R@PED. No wonder the actor was like ahahaaaaa I’m out
Keep Simon away from this show!
Yes, I think that Phoebe should have been nominated for the Emmy. She seemed to be the better actress. Rege only got the recognition and the nomination because he was handsome and charistmatic. His acting was just mid to me. I agree with his commentary. Finally, someone who didn't like this show actually pointing out the weaknesess in this season.
@@virginiawhidbee8393Phoebe won the Madame Figaro award at Cannes Film festival for her role. ❤❤
Honestly to be honest I expected them to go in the way of 'coitus interruptus' is an incredibly unreliable method of contraception - she thinks she is pregnant and is excited , they argue, they are on the outs, she isn't pregnant, they get back together. No blatant sexual assault to brush off.
that actually would have been an interesting plot. Simon would have been hesitant from there on to have sex with Daphne at all, as he'd seen that coitus interruptus does not work. Daphne would first be really happy when she finds out that she's pregnant, thinking that through some odds Simon is fertile after all, but would find out by telling him that he actually does not want children.
yeah, then it would something other than what it is. which would be great!
Yes ! Honestly, I know they were trying to be "faithful to the book" but at that point they could have scrapped it completely... It makes you wonder thought, Simon is a rake and has only used coitus interruptus as a mean of contraception... How many tiny Simons are running around ? For a man that doesn't want an heir, he is quite reckless, should have used the age old celibacy if he really didn't want any.
It’s the 17th century. Lack of education. It wasn’t a thing back then and would be out of place. Still very wrong tho
@@carmirhodes6851 I completely agree, that was one of my thoughts at the beginning too (where are the illegitimate children if he's such a rake?)
i was kinda weirded out because when i watched the first episode i thought it was colorblind casting but it wasn’t? also why were there barely any dark-skinned women or asian women if it’s supposed to be not colorblind? just very confused.
For them colourblind casting means "light skin black male lead with eurocentric features". Its like other races don't exist other than black and white
@@noonstyles3973 THIS. exactly. the reason beauty standards are still so pressuring on women of color is that we constantly see women of color we’re “supposed” to look like but they fit into euro-centric standards of beauty. diversity isn’t diversity unless we show different kinds of beauty.
@@sahana3177 yeah like a digestible version of coloured people. That have certain features which are considered attractive by the beauty standards but at the same time have don't look white. I think it's called token diversity
apparently we’re getting a darker skinned indian woman as the main female lead in season 2 so...progess?
@@whatthehellisthis is she gonna play kate?
“They hate each other… and then they like each other!?” Oh boy can’t wait for the season 2 video 🤣
This show is a combination of 80% of wattpad fanfiction, to all the boys i loved before, and gossip girl. Nothing new Nothing changed.
Woah you're totally right
+ 10% faint memories of watching Jane Austen adaptations before you're old enough to follow what's going on
It never claimed to present anything new though lol. How many times have we seen the same tropes across texts of the same genre? Forever.
Its all about the execution yall
and the book its based on predates all of the above. I'm not saying that it doesn't have issues. it does and rereading the book 20 years later, makes me notice and cringe at things i skimmed right over back then. but the point is... the novel still predates every piece of media that you have mentioned, so.... of all the valid criticism towards the narrative? this is NOT one of them.
“I’m never listening to you guys again”
Probably not gonna happen but sure
A side note regarding the vendetta of Simon: I did get that tho, out of personal experiences. Even though our dad's out of the picture for a long time, I thought Simon doesn't want to have kids, cause he's afraid he'll copy his dad's behavior. Even if he doesn't want to, I could understand the train of thought.
Yeah, I see this being the case. It's more grey than people describing it as a "oh, abuser's gone, the problem is gone" when talking about trauma.
But that’s not the way it’s described in the show. The literal only reason he gives for not wanting to have children is because he swore it on his fathers deathbed that his bloodline would end with him. I agree that trauma doesn’t die with the abuse es and I think him being afraid of repeating his fathers patterns would’ve made for a great reasoning and a good storyline. But they chose to go with: I said I wouldn’t do it and now therefor I can’t.
@@EstherRab yeah, fair enough.
This entire show had many possibilities for great storytelling, but ends up choosing the vague or superficial (or even virtue signaling) way out.
Same my father is abusive to my mother & also to me cause I am a girl
I don't want a child cause what if I become like my dad
@@deadinside8719 You will not. I have a kid and I'm doing my best to be the parent I wish I had, even though my parents were very cold and my mom would complain and victimize herself instead of teaching us how to do things properly.
"Girl! Are you GOOD?! DO YOU NEED A KIT KAT??" - just killed me 🤣
I am horrified at the whole rape thing. I am SO HORRIFIED.
Very hypocritical that they allowed a woman to rape a man and gloss over that, if the roles were reversed it'd be completely different.
@@summerrose8110 very. The thing is I was familiar with the book series and read a couple from them but not the first book, I just saw reviews for it and no one in the book community talked about it at all either. It’s so weird
@@someoneunknown7259 Never read the book, but that is fucked up that nobody talks about women being rapists. There's another film I've seen(It's a pornographic film), it's called Forbidden Legends of Sex and Chopsticks and there's a sequel too. It takes place in Ancient China before communism, and there's a character named Lotus who rapes her brother-in law, but she gets her karma when Lotus dies.
@@summerrose8110 yeah, that's hypocritical, and A LOT!!
I watched it, not knowing of the books, and literally screamed out of anger at m Pc at this scene.
Like I gone trough a lot and I liked the show so far (in terms of ypu don't know what to watch)
I could not believe seeing a rape scene in such a hyped series and no one, NO ONE said how wrong that is.
I searched for Reviews and could not fond anyone pointing that Out.
That was a rape, he said no and Stop. Til this day I cannot believe how hyped Bridgestone was/is
i hate that people call it a mix of pride and prejudice and gossip girl because apparently everything set in regency era is pride and prejudice + something
This kind of story *tries* to be P&P, completely missing the point of what is it that makes P&P work in first place.
Im fairly sure that’s how it was marketed? Those exact words actually
to be fair, i think what they mean is the enemies to lovers trope. to be honest, Bridgerton, in my opinion, is a mix of a lot of things; p&p, to all the boys, gossip girl and more. i don't know what everyone is talking about about expecting originality. ii mean the show was marketed as a bunch of other things in one already indicating the lack of originality so i don't know why people expected originality. also i don't think it's fair to say the show just ripped off shows like gossip girl because it is an adaptation of a book that didn't come out in this millennium even. so.....
that being said, the show had a lot of issues that people have also rightly pointed out
@Bruno cuci I don’t really see how black panther plays in
@Bruno cuci LOL, a few black characters and now "everyone is black". Okay
I remember the scene where 'Brenda' is heartbroken by the fake letter from her lover
They show the mother who says 'it would seem our efforts were not in vain' which implies she made a false letter, quite clearly.
BUT THEN THEY LITERALY SHOW HER FAKING THE LETTER
In that moment I was like 'damn these writers think we dumb'
Who is Brenda? Lady Featherington faked a letter to Marina, because her lover/man who got Marina pregnant was not responding to any of her letters. Marina being pregnant meant she needed to be out of Lady Featherington's house asap, preferably married, so her daughters could find husbands without the scandal of an unmarried relative living in their house. The reason they couldn't kick Marina out is because Lord Featherington owed Marina's father a shit ton of money he couldn't repay. Lady Featherington faked the letter to get Marina to agree to a marriage asap.
@@virgiliacoriolanus5093 in the video he calls her Brenda cause he forgot her name :p
As someone who works 50 hours a week then comes home to do another kind of work, I’ve got to say I found the slow pace of Bridgerton and fanciful costuming a beautiful escape. I watched it when I had an unexpected two hours to myself last year... it was snowing and I happened to have a box of fancy chocolates from Christmas to open at the same time. It all came together in a perfect two hours spent and I still think back to it whenever I need to remember that momentary escape. Such is life for many people.
My point is that what you see as ‘boring’ might be seen as a welcome alternative to the day to day struggle that many people have to face.
As for the show, I enjoyed it. It was like the box of fancy chocolates, sweet and tasty with no real nutritional value. Too many and you get sick if them, once in a while and it’s a perfect diversion.
bridgerton was beautifully made (especially those elaborate costumes) so people were willing to forget they were essentially watching a mash up of a bunch of mediocre shows/films they’ve already seen.
Lol true, it was the epitome of eye candy
the costumes were actually not beautifully made nor accurate
@@taruuu no one said they were accurate, but thank you for reminding us. If you don’t think they’re nice dresses, that’s cool, but there’s no denying that hours of hard and tedious labour went into placing every intricate and beautiful detail of the wardrobes. The hard work of the costume department shows, and i am not about to write off all of their efforts.
The costumes and sets might be pretty but that's it...no accuracy
I mean making period dramas is expensive enough as it is so you either get a good story or good visuals ....never both X)
Wait, so it ends with him having a kid, despite his whole thing being that he does not want children? And that is the happy ending?
Is the only "happy ending" reliant on him realizing that having a kid was something that he wanted and would make him happy?
Can we not have a happy ending where she instead realizes that simply farting out a tiny human being is not the only key to happiness?
It feels like this "happy" ending is reliant on one character losing out what they actually wanted, and letting the other win and have what they wanted. That is not happy, that is toxic as all hell, and simply having him get some last second "oh wait, I changed my whole way of thinking and sure, I am full on board now!" is not good writing.
i mean he didn't want kids because he wanted to end his father lineage to spite him. Not cause he did not want to be a parent.
@@karlijns4816 idk even if the father died I think parental trauma and spite is REALLY deep for some people and I wasn't all that hyped that they had a child
it's also racist as fuck because the white woman's wishes are treated as valid and the audience should want them to come true and yet Simon's wants and needs are disregarded and he sacrifices his for love
I mean, I agree that I would have liked for them to show that having children is not peak happiness but I still felt like her reasons for wanting children were more reasonable than his reasons for not wanting them . I mean, it wasn't that he didn't really want children, it was just that he was holding on to a very, very, very stupid revenge that actually only affected him. He was sacrificing to get back at a man that doesn't even exist anymore. Like you know that saying that goes "Revenge is drinking poison hoping someone else will die"? Well here it doesn't fucking matter because the other guy is already dead! It was just so fucking pathetic and stupid. If he truly didn't want children I would totally support it but he didn't give a fuck if he had them or not, he was just mad at his dad
@@elizabethdiaz8409 Parental trauma, in my opinion, is a good enough reason to not want kids because it goes deeper than revenge. What happens if he turns out to be a bad father because he himself never had good parenting? Also, children is an area in a relationship where neither party should compromise. Simon had the right idea from the start when he didn't want to marry Daphne at all because she wanted kids and he didn't because that's exactly how that problem should be solved. I don't want kids simply because I don't have the patience to deal with that mess so why would I marry a guy who does want kids only to make him give that up for me and potentially make him unsatisfied in the marriage?
Also, Simon’s actor is leaving the show because he doesn’t want to do it. It’s not a big mystery, he won’t be the lead in future seasons because they plan on changing focus like the books do. He wants to move on to bigger roles, and he didn’t want to commit to anything else.
Good move on his parts bc after the premier of bridgerton he’s been accepting a lot a new high profile projects both in the UK and Hollywood
@@Kevin-rg3yc the fact that producers DIDNT lock him down for at least a few seasons blows my mind. I kinda get why some people are upset, the show gave him a big platform and he won’t even give them a cameo, but at the end of the day this is just a job for him.
@@taylorgayhart9497 I guess they just didn't expect his character to be this popular
IMHO, Simmons actor what is the best one in the show, and I think the season isGoing to suffer after his departure. He’s a talented actor, and I’m glad he is getting greater opportunities.
@@taylorgayhart9497 right maybe they didn’t expect for him to be a international breakout star from the show but still they should’ve done something just in case lol. I believe they might have been some money issues or creative differences
Very interesting video that brings up a lot of valid points! I will say though, I think the part about the characters being annoying is, if not deliberate then at least more or less impossible to avoid. Any regency drama, or period drama in general, that follows rich af people will have mostly annoying characters, because it's pretty difficult to write a character whose biggest problems in life is whether the ball room decor is the right shade of lavender or whether the lace on a new dress is fine enough to properly show off how loaded they are, as anything but a spoiled brat with no personality. Even Downton Abbey which is often hailed as being great (and which I personally enjoy a lot too) has the issue of all the upper class characters being whiny crybabies arguing about things that would make anyone who's ever been forced to work a day in their life scoff.
Soooo it’s not actually that outrageous for them to have at least one party per episode. One thing you have to understand about the Regency Era is they did party, A LOT! Especially during the marriage market season, which is when this series takes place. They would actually often go to parties and balls every single night during this season. The idea of it was to make up for the many months spent at home in their country Estates, without much more than their neighbors and a few neighbors to socialize with, so bored out of their minds. It was also a way for people to find their partner; when they’re at home at their country estates they’re not able to network a lot and will not often run into eligible marriage material. Because of this when they were in town (a.k.a. London) for the marriage market season they would want to go out as much as possible and meet as many people as possible. I think the show does assume at times that people watching have at least some understanding of the Regency, which for many of the book readers that will be the case, but for the general audiences they could’ve explained things a little better.
I haven’t read this series, but my BA is in English Literature, and I spend most of my time re-reading Jane Austen, so for me my enjoyment from this show came from the many historical and literary references, but I will admit I have yet to finish the series.
Why are we getting a next season of THIS and not of Anne with an E?! Bruh.
Well...because netflix is a company and they wanna produce shows that get a lot of ppl to buy the subscription and watch the shows and therefore make a lot of money. This was super popular, soo....
@@astakorpiala9722 I don't doubt the fact that it's popular. I just don't see the reason why IT'S SO POPULAR and even more so than shows like Anne with an E, which actually deals with real issues in the 19 century, such as racism, sexism and does not force anything onto the viewer.
Honestly speaking even book readers HATE book 1 that first season is based on. Book 2 is really popular tho and very funny so I think season 2 will be much better.
@@pat12302 Thanks for the insightful info! Hopefully season 2 is an improvement of season 1.
I still cry over Anne with an E...this was one of the best shows I have ever seen
This guy should watch Reign. Him mentioning how the characters have conversations in the middle of dances reminded me of how I noticed the characters in Reign relay information while walking ALL THE DAMN TIME
Yes and I was always so scared that some one would over hear them or was secretly listening (apart from cassandra) but nope
All the problems in Reign could have been solved with a door lock or people being able to keep a damned secret.
And its historically inaccurate. They could have just not made it and put it in my favorite era and about one of my favorite queens and I will be fine with it. BUT THEY DID.
Hey Reign is awesome. Don't insult it.
@@marie-ez7kc Reign is a good show. I didn't mind it being inaccurate. It's sad that the show got cancelled.
I agree with everything you said apart from the duel bit. It was actually the only historically accurate part of the show. Family honour was still very much the priority during the regency, so his reaction, despite no one seeing, was totally how the man of the family would react. However, duelling was criminalised by this point, even though it was very much still a widespread way of solving grievances, so he would've had to leave the country on the rusk of hanging.
Also, George III suffered with porphyria, not altziemers, so as a history buff, I enjoyed this nod very much. I was more annoyed we didn't get to see his son George (future George IV) as he was regent in the kings stead... The whole reason this is set in the REGENCY era!
Most of the social settings in the show are quite historically accurate, if sometimes exaggerated.
The depiction of "The Season", the dueling, the gossip papers, all done quite well.
A lot of the gripes he had in this video weren't the show's fault. It was just the life of the upper class in Regency England!