Bridgerton Season 4

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've only watched the first two of the last four episodes, but totally agree that so far it's lackluster. I thought the scene where Benedict and Sophie finally do it was so boring, and that Benedict in particular came off as whiny and boring.

In theory, the social conflict of Benedict not being allowed to marry a maid due to social convention, and Sophie being unable to accept being his mistress because of what happened with her mom and her own experience growing up illegitimate, is interesting to me. But the way it's portrayed is so dull. It's too much standing around explaining the unfairness of the situation to each other, not enough action.

I also thought it was very unrealistic when Benedict tells Sophie he's had relationships with men, and she takes like zero beats to be like "sure, yeah, I get that -- what a dumb social convention and I have absorbed and moved on from your bisexuality easily." I'm not saying she needed to object to it, I like the idea of her being open about it. I just think it's incredibly unrealistic that it would be like a side note for these characters. I agree with the PP who said it would have been more interesting to see a transformation in Sophie, where she goes from super restrained (out of necessity) to being willing to buck social rules in pursuit of her own freedom and happiness. The bisexual storyline could have been part of that, but instead I'm supposed to believe that a woman who is freaking out at the idea of being a mistress would be like "oh yeah, sex with men, cool" and then move right along? In Regency England? Sorry, but no. It makes no sense.

I totally agree with this. They just totally glossed over Benedict’s bisexuality. There’s no way Sophie wouldn’t have been shocked.

Also, in the last episode of the season Sophie was a perfect dancer - she knew all the steps. But didn’t she say in episode 1 that’s she’s not a good dancer? How would she have learned that dance while working as a maid? It doesn’t make sense.

Also, Mrs. Mondrich and Lady Danbury had told the Queen that Benedict had fallen in love with a maid. But then when they presented her, they said she was actually nobility. Did the Queen wonder what happened to the maid? Wouldn’t she have been angry with Mrs. Mondrich for lying about the maid story?

I figured she learned how to dance while she was taking Eloise and hyacinth to dance lessons, and she too practiced.

Yes, the queen was informed that Benedict fell for the maid. However, the queen loves love and they gave her a plausible explanation of who Sophie was and Araminith vouched for Sophie nobility. Watch the queen’s face. She knew they were lying, but she accepted it because she loves love. Also, she basically told Mondrich she knew it was a lie. Queen told Mondrich something to the effect that she was playing with fire and took quite a chance.

I thought she was lying about not being able to dance to hide her real identity.

[Anonymous]

Why is this show, which is a weird contradiction of unabashed royalist elitism and virtue signaling modern wokery, so popular?

I suppose I shouldn't care but I actually met a young woman who kept insisting Queen Charlotte was really black.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I appreciated the lesson in power imbalance that Benedict got from the cottage caretaker. Curious if they’re going to revisit that so directly again in the rest of the season.

I like Benedict well enough this season, but then that dolt went ahead and pissed me right off. Ooooo, I wanted to throw something at my TV with that mistress line. Make him crawl, Sophie.

It's realistic though, the most she could hope for due to the limitations of class. It was a different time. However, she'd of course be better off with a stable job for life versus a temporarily-more-luxurious mistress position that could end at any moment.

If you go back to the time period, being the mistress of a powerful man could actually be a pretty good power play and set you up pretty well for life. It depended very much on the couple — sometimes it was a true love situation where the man really did want to take care of her for life. Nelson’s mistress “lady hamilton” was born in poverty but did quite well for herself and his dying wish was that she be taken care of.

I’m not sure there was such a thing as a stable job for life in the 18th century — a housekeeper at a manor house is probably the closest you would get, but even that would depend on the family caring enough to provide for you in old age, as you wouldn’t be able to put much by.

Nelson's wishes were ignored and Lady Hamilton and her and Nelson's daughter were left begging. She died at 49 in massive debt. And this was after Nelson died a national hero.

Who is Nelson and who is Lady Hamilton? This is a thread about Bridgerton.

A) You should definitely know who Nelson is (Battle of Trafalgar?). B) Lady Hamilton was a famous mistress who died right around the time Bridgerton is set, so it is relevant for "what kind of life would a mistress in the Regency era have."

I doubt that battle or nelson person matters to anyone outside of brittain.

Finding out people didn't learn about Napoleon in school is WILD.

this person is lost- meant to be posting in Arkansas moms and dads

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I appreciated the lesson in power imbalance that Benedict got from the cottage caretaker. Curious if they’re going to revisit that so directly again in the rest of the season.

I like Benedict well enough this season, but then that dolt went ahead and pissed me right off. Ooooo, I wanted to throw something at my TV with that mistress line. Make him crawl, Sophie.

It's realistic though, the most she could hope for due to the limitations of class. It was a different time. However, she'd of course be better off with a stable job for life versus a temporarily-more-luxurious mistress position that could end at any moment.

If you go back to the time period, being the mistress of a powerful man could actually be a pretty good power play and set you up pretty well for life. It depended very much on the couple — sometimes it was a true love situation where the man really did want to take care of her for life. Nelson’s mistress “lady hamilton” was born in poverty but did quite well for herself and his dying wish was that she be taken care of.

I’m not sure there was such a thing as a stable job for life in the 18th century — a housekeeper at a manor house is probably the closest you would get, but even that would depend on the family caring enough to provide for you in old age, as you wouldn’t be able to put much by.

Nelson's wishes were ignored and Lady Hamilton and her and Nelson's daughter were left begging. She died at 49 in massive debt. And this was after Nelson died a national hero.

Who is Nelson and who is Lady Hamilton? This is a thread about Bridgerton.

A) You should definitely know who Nelson is (Battle of Trafalgar?). B) Lady Hamilton was a famous mistress who died right around the time Bridgerton is set, so it is relevant for "what kind of life would a mistress in the Regency era have."

I doubt that battle or nelson person matters to anyone outside of brittain.

Finding out people didn't learn about Napoleon in school is WILD.

Also a pretty common plot point in movies and books.

Napoleon, yes.

His generals mistresses, not really.

are 2!! ppl claiming that Lord Nelson was one of Napoleon's generals.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I appreciated the lesson in power imbalance that Benedict got from the cottage caretaker. Curious if they’re going to revisit that so directly again in the rest of the season.

I like Benedict well enough this season, but then that dolt went ahead and pissed me right off. Ooooo, I wanted to throw something at my TV with that mistress line. Make him crawl, Sophie.

It's realistic though, the most she could hope for due to the limitations of class. It was a different time. However, she'd of course be better off with a stable job for life versus a temporarily-more-luxurious mistress position that could end at any moment.

If you go back to the time period, being the mistress of a powerful man could actually be a pretty good power play and set you up pretty well for life. It depended very much on the couple — sometimes it was a true love situation where the man really did want to take care of her for life. Nelson’s mistress “lady hamilton” was born in poverty but did quite well for herself and his dying wish was that she be taken care of.

I’m not sure there was such a thing as a stable job for life in the 18th century — a housekeeper at a manor house is probably the closest you would get, but even that would depend on the family caring enough to provide for you in old age, as you wouldn’t be able to put much by.

Nelson's wishes were ignored and Lady Hamilton and her and Nelson's daughter were left begging. She died at 49 in massive debt. And this was after Nelson died a national hero.

Who is Nelson and who is Lady Hamilton? This is a thread about Bridgerton.

A) You should definitely know who Nelson is (Battle of Trafalgar?). B) Lady Hamilton was a famous mistress who died right around the time Bridgerton is set, so it is relevant for "what kind of life would a mistress in the Regency era have."

I doubt that battle or nelson person matters to anyone outside of brittain.

Finding out people didn't learn about Napoleon in school is WILD.

Also a pretty common plot point in movies and books.

Napoleon, yes.

His generals mistresses, not really.

are 2!! ppl claiming that Lord Nelson was one of Napoleon's generals.

Quit day drinking.

[Anonymous]

Queen Charlotte WAS really black.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Queen Charlotte WAS really black.

Not by any meaningful modern standard. The most that can be said is that she had an ancestor about 500 years back (15 generations ago) who may have been a Moor, which was a broad category that included both blacks and Arabs. I am very white but a quarter Sicilian — there is a really high chance that if you go back 15 generations on my Sicilian side (and maybe even my Irish side), you would find a Moor. But it would be super offensive to Black people if I were to announce that I was Black.

With 15 generations back, it’s pretty unlikely you’d find any genetic trace of it if you did a dna test on her. (Although it might be really interesting if you did!). I don’t know enough about genetics to be sure, but if the line traced back directly matrilineal, then she would have a DNA trace of it though, because mitochondrial DNA is passed directly from mother to daughter so you can always trace a matrilineal line that way, absent mutation.

There are actually a lot of British that have an ancestor of moorish descent — 500 years ago thy didn’t think as much in racial terms and there were a lot of moors that went from Spain to England for various reasons (the reconquista, accompanying Catherine of Aragon etc), and so long as you converted to Christianity, you could intermarry with no problems. I heard a really interesting podcast with someone that did a ton of research into 15th and 16th century English church records. She then contacted the descendants who had no idea that their great grandfather times 25 was Moorish!

I could say more about the Queen charlotte debate but I know I’m already boring most of you with th history stuff.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I appreciated the lesson in power imbalance that Benedict got from the cottage caretaker. Curious if they’re going to revisit that so directly again in the rest of the season.

I like Benedict well enough this season, but then that dolt went ahead and pissed me right off. Ooooo, I wanted to throw something at my TV with that mistress line. Make him crawl, Sophie.

It's realistic though, the most she could hope for due to the limitations of class. It was a different time. However, she'd of course be better off with a stable job for life versus a temporarily-more-luxurious mistress position that could end at any moment.

If you go back to the time period, being the mistress of a powerful man could actually be a pretty good power play and set you up pretty well for life. It depended very much on the couple — sometimes it was a true love situation where the man really did want to take care of her for life. Nelson’s mistress “lady hamilton” was born in poverty but did quite well for herself and his dying wish was that she be taken care of.

I’m not sure there was such a thing as a stable job for life in the 18th century — a housekeeper at a manor house is probably the closest you would get, but even that would depend on the family caring enough to provide for you in old age, as you wouldn’t be able to put much by.

Nelson's wishes were ignored and Lady Hamilton and her and Nelson's daughter were left begging. She died at 49 in massive debt. And this was after Nelson died a national hero.

Who is Nelson and who is Lady Hamilton? This is a thread about Bridgerton.

A) You should definitely know who Nelson is (Battle of Trafalgar?). B) Lady Hamilton was a famous mistress who died right around the time Bridgerton is set, so it is relevant for "what kind of life would a mistress in the Regency era have."

I doubt that battle or nelson person matters to anyone outside of brittain.

Finding out people didn't learn about Napoleon in school is WILD.

Also a pretty common plot point in movies and books.

Napoleon, yes.

His generals mistresses, not really.

are 2!! ppl claiming that Lord Nelson was one of Napoleon's generals.

I think only one person is confused on this point. If they Wikipedia lord Nelson that would clear it up for them but I assume they really don’t care. Some people only watch period romance for the romance, not really the period (beyond the clothes).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Queen Charlotte WAS really black.

Not by any meaningful modern standard. The most that can be said is that she had an ancestor about 500 years back (15 generations ago) who may have been a Moor, which was a broad category that included both blacks and Arabs. I am very white but a quarter Sicilian — there is a really high chance that if you go back 15 generations on my Sicilian side (and maybe even my Irish side), you would find a Moor. But it would be super offensive to Black people if I were to announce that I was Black.

With 15 generations back, it’s pretty unlikely you’d find any genetic trace of it if you did a dna test on her. (Although it might be really interesting if you did!). I don’t know enough about genetics to be sure, but if the line traced back directly matrilineal, then she would have a DNA trace of it though, because mitochondrial DNA is passed directly from mother to daughter so you can always trace a matrilineal line that way, absent mutation.

There are actually a lot of British that have an ancestor of moorish descent — 500 years ago thy didn’t think as much in racial terms and there were a lot of moors that went from Spain to England for various reasons (the reconquista, accompanying Catherine of Aragon etc), and so long as you converted to Christianity, you could intermarry with no problems. I heard a really interesting podcast with someone that did a ton of research into 15th and 16th century English church records. She then contacted the descendants who had no idea that their great grandfather times 25 was Moorish!

I could say more about the Queen charlotte debate but I know I’m already boring most of you with th history stuff.

You are missing the directionality of that claim though. Also no one is talking about modern standards.

Queen Charlotte is dead. She is not walking around claiming she is black for street cred. Agree that if a current British royal started claiming "I'm black" based on ancient lineage, people would rightfully tell them to be quiet. Of course the current British royals are too busy trying to disown some family members who are actually black to make that claim. Just like if you, a white lady, tried to claim you were black.

Rather, the people who say "Queen Charlotte was black" tend to be trying to pierce the assumption that British royalty, or British culture, is purely anglo or even purely European. It's to make a point about what British, or English, heritage really is, and to too challenge engrained notions of white "purity" within British aristocracy.

Bridgerton, which has a black creator, has chosen to engage in that dialogue with a portrayal of Regency England where many people, including the Queen, do not merely have darker skin and hair and rumors of Moorish ancestry, but are visually black. It's unrealistic, of course, but it has also led to many people learning for the first time about how NOT pure most European bloodlines are, including royal ones. That's actually a useful development.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought the season ended with Benedict and Sophie dancing at the ball?

You have to watch post credits. I don't know why they did that. They get married.

Agree, it was stupid to put it at the very end of the credits -- A lot of people have Netflix set to autostart another show during the credits so I bet a ton of people missed it.

Also it doesn't just show their wedding, it also includes some hints about next season.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought the season ended with Benedict and Sophie dancing at the ball?

You have to watch post credits. I don't know why they did that. They get married.

Agree, it was stupid to put it at the very end of the credits -- A lot of people have Netflix set to autostart another show during the credits so I bet a ton of people missed it.

Also it doesn't just show their wedding, it also includes some hints about next season.

Yes! I just went back and saw it! Can’t believe I missed it!

How realistic is it that they would have Sophie (who they are trying to pass off as legitimate) walked down the aisle by another servant? Come on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought the season ended with Benedict and Sophie dancing at the ball?

You have to watch post credits. I don't know why they did that. They get married.

Agree, it was stupid to put it at the very end of the credits -- A lot of people have Netflix set to autostart another show during the credits so I bet a ton of people missed it.

Also it doesn't just show their wedding, it also includes some hints about next season.

Yes! I just went back and saw it! Can’t believe I missed it!

How realistic is it that they would have Sophie (who they are trying to pass off as legitimate) walked down the aisle by another servant? Come on.

What gave you the idea that it’s a realistic show?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought the season ended with Benedict and Sophie dancing at the ball?

You have to watch post credits. I don't know why they did that. They get married.

Agree, it was stupid to put it at the very end of the credits -- A lot of people have Netflix set to autostart another show during the credits so I bet a ton of people missed it.

Also it doesn't just show their wedding, it also includes some hints about next season.

Yes! I just went back and saw it! Can’t believe I missed it!

How realistic is it that they would have Sophie (who they are trying to pass off as legitimate) walked down the aisle by another servant? Come on.

What gave you the idea that it’s a realistic show?

True.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought the season ended with Benedict and Sophie dancing at the ball?

You have to watch post credits. I don't know why they did that. They get married.

Agree, it was stupid to put it at the very end of the credits -- A lot of people have Netflix set to autostart another show during the credits so I bet a ton of people missed it.

Also it doesn't just show their wedding, it also includes some hints about next season.

Yes! I just went back and saw it! Can’t believe I missed it!

How realistic is it that they would have Sophie (who they are trying to pass off as legitimate) walked down the aisle by another servant? Come on.

What gave you the idea that it’s a realistic show?

+1

They dance to Taylor Swift and Billie Eilish.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought the season ended with Benedict and Sophie dancing at the ball?

You have to watch post credits. I don't know why they did that. They get married.

Agree, it was stupid to put it at the very end of the credits -- A lot of people have Netflix set to autostart another show during the credits so I bet a ton of people missed it.

Also it doesn't just show their wedding, it also includes some hints about next season.

Yes! I just went back and saw it! Can’t believe I missed it!

How realistic is it that they would have Sophie (who they are trying to pass off as legitimate) walked down the aisle by another servant? Come on.

What gave you the idea that it’s a realistic show?

You’re missing the point. It doesn’t fit into the storyline they created to hide the fact that Sophie isn’t nobility. They want Sophie to be accepted by the ton so they pass her off as nobility…only to have her walked down the aisle by a servant. It doesn’t fit their own plan to have her legitimized.

That is totally different from saying well they play modern music.