I don’t even know how they are going to twist that cos lord Philip married Eloise, lady Marina’s cousin. How is she going to write Philip after Marina’s death if she isn’t related to Marina
In the books, Edwina didn't care about Anthony. She was off having her own side-story and falling in love with another. It made Kate and Anthony's actions sillier. The TV show made Edwina into a petulant child, and then Kate's betrayal seemed far too cruel. But TV needs as much drama as possible to keep people watching, so I understand the change.
1. forgot to mention *Marina is a Bridgerton cousin* , not a Featherington relation 2. Benedict's storyline is a bit controversial in the modern context hence why it was probably moved up
That's a fair point about Benedict's story. But Book Benedict is pretty night and day from Show Benedict, so hopefully they still keep Sophie. I'd love to see how she weaves into Benedict's story as it's being told in the show. It could be a lot of fun!
@@IshaSingh-zu2whWell uh it doesn’t paint him in the best light and aged horribly. People say it’s a Cinderella story which is why I bought it but when I read it well just sort of made me feel gross.
I’d like to see Benedict’s story start at the end of this season by having the masquerade ball and Benedict’s interactions with Sophie in the final episode.
One change I really like to see is Eloise ending up with Theo. The chemistry is off the charts and he matches Eloise's personality in the series really well! Maybe they can run off and advocate for social justice or something. I would hate to see someone different like Eloise ended up having to put out her spark and become like every other woman in Bridgeton.
For those of you who is wondering why book 3 was skipped… it’s basically 200 pages of Sophie being coerced into being Benedict’s mistress because she was a servant, and Benedict only decided to marry her because turns out she was secretly rich the whole time TLDR Book Benedict sucks
That’s definitely going to need a rewrite for the show. Benedict is my favourite (as someone who hasn’t read the book) so they better not do him dirty like that.
@@exlline the premise is my favorite in the series, it’s a Cinderella retelling, but Benedict is just the WORST. There were multiple occasions where I would literally say “SOPHIE RUN”
Antony tried to suck out the bee venom because his dad was stung and died from an allergic reaction. So, his reaction to Kate being stung isn't weird. He's traumatized from seeing his dad die like that.
the sucking on her chest is weird. the bee stung her chest. if it was her arm or leg or smth it'd be fine because as you say it's a trauma response. the deliberate decision for the author to write the sting to be on her chest and him thence sucking her chest made it weird.
Nobody who watched the show misunderstood that. It’s still weird and you not thinking that is fine, but it’s weird. Also she put the better point in there. Idiots will do as they see.
Of note: in British law at the time (and in both US and British law until the 1980s/90s) you could NOT sexually assault a spouse. The law stated that consent was given upon marriage and was not revocable (Called the Hale doctrine after Jurist Sir Matthew Hale). In 10 US states, it is still part of the defense against marital rape. So, not assault by the accepted standard of time.
Not a question of right or wrong. My reason for pointing out that Spousal assault did not exist in that period of time. words ahve meanings; assault is a legal term. Spousal Assault exists now but not in the Regency. More to the point, there are 10 US states where this scenario is not assault today due to the Hale doctrine. You can't change the past or the beliefs of people long dead. Judging the past by the presents opinions is often counterproductive and tends to be about obscuring the past rather than becoming enlightened ourselves
I haven't read the books yet but honestly all these changes seem to have created one of the rare cases where the movie/tv show is better than the source material. 😅
I’m on book 4 (audiobooks) and the show is by far better than the books. So much more depth in the characters which is normally the opposite when they adapt books to screen.
Read all the books and on Happily ever after now but actually these changes to the series are really fun and make sense. Its fun to see what changes are made and how they work
@@kirstybrown1185 I believe I used the word right because I was stating my opinion. The video talks about the changes being positive but I could disagree if I want so I said actually because I agree even as a person who liked the books more, I like that the series has me guessing so yea
King George and Queen Charlotte infamously did mingle. They would walk into town without guards or chaperones and Charlotte started the entire debutante tradition. King George was a part of it as well until he was no longer sane enough to do so.
I was sad to see how Netflix glossed over the assault in season 1. the book Daphnie's assult is covered in better depth. Julia Quinn did a good job addressing the issue fitting the historical timeframe but catering to modern readers
main difference - well, background - Kate was not from India, her name was Sheffield, she was Brittish. John Stirling was also very XVIIIth British. This world was much less colourfull, and I mean also dresses ;)
Yea, but like 100 years too early 😉 I'm kinda in between, I don't mind the diversity in the show, cause it's fiction. BUT my history loving heart is secretly screaming 'it's SO wrong!!!!'
@@RosovaEvaI agree. A lot of people watching probably actually believe the UK was multi cultural 200 years ago. I sometimes yell out the TV that the majority if not all of the ton where white. I know the cast is multi cultural to appeal to a wider audience appeal. 😊
I would hate to see Marina die for Eloise to find her love match. It would make a great romance if she ends up with the footman. Just look at their interactions together in the first two seasons.
I saw that the actress that played Marina is kinda having a mental break down online and saying she wants to be back on the show and people keep leaving comments telling her to see a professional and that Marina's story is basically over and she should get over it 😬
@@BBhWEENx but if it’s what the books have as the storyline for Eloise to end up with sir Phillip crane then why not bring that actress back to provide that story it’s closure ?
@@michelleflood5843 She never really appeared in the books, she is only mentioned basically. They made her an important character in the first season probably thinking in bringing her back but the actress herself is not well, looks like she is going through something, I don’t think is a good idea to bring her back because of that, she needs help, specially because when the first season came out she complained about they treat the actors, that they were working way too hard and for long periods of time and it was a big deal at the time, I think she was the only one complaining so the people in charge kind of cast her out because of that, I don’t think they would bring her back after all the drama she put them through, she only came back in second season for a bit so Colin would have closure. And it makes sense for her to not appear anymore in the show because in the books she was dead for a while when Eloise and Philip started a relationship, she is the reason they got together and no one in her family even knew they were talking so to bring her back just to kill her wouldn’t make sense in the timeline (if they go by the books)
You missed the fact that Lady D is much older in the books. She's a generation different to Lady Bridgerton, the books describe her as an old cantankerous woman who uses her cane much more than it's used in the series, which is an opportunity missed. I love Adjoa Andoh as an actor, but she's far too young to play the part and doesn't even play it "old" apart from a little greying hair!
Me too. That story was kinda boring and bland, and mostly about Marina's suicide. Eloise is my favorite character in the show. I'm kinda hoping she's the one who ends up with the naturalist/vegan guy in season 3 and that she travels with him to wherever.
I'd never heard of Bridgerton before the show. I like to read the books if there is a show/movie that I like. Those books were sooo BORING. So much so that I couldn't even read the second book and beyond, but listened to them on audiobook instead. I am very happy about the changes the series has made.
It's true that book readers can be quite passionate about adaptations, as they often have strong attachments to the original material. Change can sometimes be met with resistance, especially if it diverges significantly from the source material. However, it's important to remember that adaptations often require adjustments to fit the constraints of a different medium, and can offer fresh perspectives on familiar stories. What are your thoughts on the differences between the Bridgerton series and the books?
Normally I am like that with my favorite stories. However, with these adaptations, I think some of the changes have been necessary for the format and have been really well done. The changes have fleshed out the characters more and made the story more interesting with the additional characters. It actually makes sense that Eloise was the first to realize Pen is Whistledown because that have been friends forever. To have her be oblivious makes her seem less intelligent than she is supposed to be.
while I understand the argument by modern standards, the notion of marital rape was completely unknown and frankly inconceivable in the Regency era when a woman and her property became her husband's property upon marriage; the concept of spousal rape, like date rape, is late 20th century one, and even then not a widely accepted one despite existing laws as many defence attorneys have used to their advantage and many victims have painfully discovered going through investigation and trial
Eloise needs someone challenging, modern or radical. Sir Phillip is boring, traditional…there’s nothing special or unique about him. I read the book and was so disappointed with her book. I just can’t see him with Eloise
A bookreader here. 🙋🏼 I can only speak up for myself, but I liked Eloises story. And I found her match plausible. During Polins courtship it was hinted in their book that her inner self changed (or got more aware of?) a bit regarding emotional needs and resulting lifestyle. He grounded her without changing her bubbly and inquisitive personality. But I’m not sure if their courtship would work on TV and be entertaining enough.
@@maygirlisnosyagain yes i agree with you. I loved her book too. i think she needs to be given a little more time though. and philip wasn't boring. they shared their thoughts through letters. eloise loved his mind first. i think that fits her character perfectly
@@maygirlisnosyagain I've read the books too! but i felt just making her a stepmum doesn't do justice to her character- specially with the turns the series has taken
Other than some main characters names. Thy hav nothing in common. Even the personalities of the characters hav changed. So takes tv series as an entity of its own.
I'm the same - no intention of reading the books after everything I've found out. The opposite of how I am with Game of Thrones. Because I've read the books, I won't ever watch the show.
I too think so, but i am very excited to read francesca's story because its a little dark and unusual than the rest of it idk i just want to but gregory's story is also very fasinating.
I'm curious how they plan to insert more LGBTQ+ relationships. One of my favourite things about the show is how they introduced racial diversity as a now established, but hard-won feature of society. Multiple characters comment on the how racial inclusivity was brought about by the at-the-time unorthodox marriage of Queen Charlotte and King George. Bridgerton is obviously totally fictional, and not based in history, but that narrative felt grounded and echoed the struggles of integration in real life. They've also demonstrated that anything other than a heterosexual reletationship (inluding in particular gay relationships and single females - I see you Brimsley and Eloise) wouldn't be considered acceptable by society, so they can't simply make Benedict bisexual, and say "Happily Ever After, The End", without compromising the world-building, and storyline continuity that makes the show so high-quality. If the inclusions of public, known LGBTQ+ relationships is something they are set on including, they have an uphill climb to make them feel like anything other than a pandering throw-away plot. This rant sounds critical, I know, but my point is only that I hope the writing stays strong, wherever the story goes.
@@medelinmalbe163 Not sure what specifically you're referring to, but I'm always a fan of reading books before watching a show. In this case, I have found there are enough substantial changes between the source material and the show that I can happily treat them as two different stories entirely, and enjoy them both for what they are. That being said, I get so excited when specific moments from books are perfectly translated to the screen!
Yeah.If Benedict is really a bi,series either give up Sophie in books to let him fall in love with a man, or just add the bisexual as a branch to the main storyline....I really don't figure it out what's the meaning of his storyline in Season3.....
@@LilyYan777 I would be disappointed not to see Sophie. I'm happy for the story to be altered to fit the show, but I enjoyed her character in the books and I'd love to see her strength match up with the show's version of Benedict, since he's such a loveable goof. But that's just my opinion
IMO: just to chime in a little on the conversation, I feel that there are few shows/movies where the diversity thing truly works and makes you love the characters. Bridgerton is definitely the show that Dosnt make me feel like an agenda is being shoved down my throat ❤
I love Benedict's book. It's my favorite. I would for them to follow the book and keep it for the show as well. I always think of the movie Ever After when reading an offer from a gentleman.
I read anthony & colin's books after watching the show. And was very surprised with how flat the writing was and some actions by the characters. Some parts felt so over the top, i was relieved that theyd been changed in the show and that id watched first (which is a rare thing for me because ive always been a 'books are better' advocate. But truth is truth). Read benedict's book and was appalled with how desperate, unconstrained, insensitive, and selfish he was. Definitely doesnt fit with the show version, who i very much prefer. I love the rags-to-riches storyline, but can do without benedict's abuse of his and sophie's power imbalance. Id also love to see her not give in to tempatation as she does in the books and stick to her resolve. It would mean a nearly sexless season until after theyre married, so many viewers will probably be upset 😒 but i prefer good writing and consistency of characterization over pandering. I dont particularly hate any of the changes the series has made, but season 3 part 2 has yet to come out so theres still time 😂 i hope the lady whistledown reveal isnt as bland as in the book. Was aweesome to see colin take pride his pen's lifes work and declare it publically, and for people to recognize the significance of her accomplishments. But then the story just ends there (save for the epilogue, which doesnt delve into specific thoughts & reactions, or the aftermath. Like what became of cressida after trying to take credit?). Tldr: books read bland, and secondary characters fall flat. Endings arent satisfying. Tv show is more entertaining and less offensive.
This series is a book series first, which seems to have a loyal fan base and was picked up with them in mind as with many book series converted into shows there is a built in audience. However, I am having a hard time with some things that come up. The diverse cast was odd before I started watching it, but I realized that this is basically an alternative world to our own so to speak. And I see some of the LGBTQIA stuff being added and fine, but I have to ask why. Why make a historical time period make these changes willing in fact really undermine the struggles of real people. Isn’t it an injustice to have the concept of open diversity when there are prominent people who fought for equality of race and their rights to live who they want without being jailed. I find that this whitewashes everything that people fought so hard for. Plus, women don’t have more rights in this series? Seems that the diversity wish didn’t really hit the mark. They seem to want a regency period piece, but to just make it slightly more palatable for some. But then we’re right back to the question of classes, sexism, and other struggles. What to hell! If this series is suppose to be great and it can’t figure out how to be inclusive and still represent the period there is a reason. Don’t get me wrong. I have enjoyed to show, but I can’t help but wonder about uncomfortable topics when the arise will just be brushed aside. Race, gender, and sexuality are part of the political landscape of England at this time. With the slave trade being fought to end as the world is shaping up to fight Napoleon. As within this century women’s rights in England starts really heating up. And in the next century when Alan Turing is the brilliant mind behind the computer and helped win WW2, but is JAILED for being a homosexual. All this is whitewash when you make this era more diverse. This is a story trying for fantasy and realism at the same time, bizarre!
You are quite right in this world they are coulorblind but not genderblind. It is kind of unfair. Plus the dresses are getting more ridiculous in season 3.
Totally agree with all of your comments. I am not against diversity in casting, but trying to do it in a period piece undermines all the hardships and injustice that have occupied our societies for generations.
Honestly seeing some of the book readers talking about how they don’t want diversity or lgbt+ representation is making me sad. I read the prequels to the books when I was in middle school at camp and immediately bought the rest. When the show came out I was so excited to see it and it has been amazing. I love the diverse cast especially how except for one or two comments in s1 has not been talked about in the show which I really enjoy. The characters treat and judge one another still but race doesn’t have to do with it and that makes me actually so happy. Also showing how lgbt people existed during this period is so nice to see as it is never really seen. I have honestly wanted to read a lgbt period piece for years but they are never written because it didn’t happen. From the changes I’ve seen so far in the show I think the whole Daphne and Simon scene (I AM NOT AGREEING WITH THE ACTIONS THERE BTW) as well as Eloise, Penelope and (Pen’s sister who didn’t know when she was trying to get pregnant in S3) shows how problematic it was not having sex education which also teaches the importance of consent. I do wish the show had shown them talking about later and apologizing but was still done better than the books. i also wish they kept Simon’s stutter as that added a lot to his character and showed how even though he had mostly grown past it, he still had his struggles there. I think in s2 the bee scene was done much better but I personally didn’t love the whole Edwina and Anthony thing and liked the book more there, but still it was good and surprising to see what was going to happen next. So far in s3 I have enjoyed it more as it feels like Colin actually deserves Pen more than in the books. I’m interested to see how the rest of the season goes tho. Honestly for s4 I would be okay with a bit of change to either Eloise or Benedict’s story. Both of them are some of my favorites but there stories were so bland in my opinion for the people they seemed to be. I have hope still for Benedict’s story being fruity as a line in s2 discusses a bastard son looking just like his father the Earl(in the books, that’s how Benedict’s wife is described but a girl instead). I think this could add a lot to his story and would be really interesting to see how the writers take that. As for Eloise I hope she gets to be with someone who also wants to make change. Her running off after her bff got married felt very strange in the books and even weirder in the show. I also love seeing Eloise and Pens friendship more in the show and I am loving Cressida’s addition thus far. I really want what’s best for them and that’s what I think they messed up with Daphnes character. In the books she and Colin are close and she doesn’t just fight with her siblings the whole time. I think they did good with Anthony showing the closeness and playfulness he has with his family while still being the strict older brother works really well. They gave Daphne the eldest daughter strictness and pressure but didn’t show her really having a lot of fun moments with them only with Simon, making her seem a little dull. I did like the little moments with her and Eloise because it felt very real, like two sisters who love each other very much just with very different life goals. I wanted more of that with Daph and the others. The show has done a great job at really rounding out the characters and making me kinda love even the worst characters. I feel like it’s definitely found its grove and understood its characters since s1 and I can’t wait to see what comes next. I love the books and hold them dearly in my heart, them being my first romance novels but I think the show has done a pretty good job at fixing some of the toxic behavior rather than romanticizing it. I personally am hoping they’ll add to the universe and bring the prequels up. I really want to see Billie from the prequels who is Edmunds big sister and Cecilia who is Billie’s sister in law whose story takes place in America during the revolutionary war. I would love to hear more options but if the reasoning for hating some changes is b/c it didn’t exist then please don’t. The vibes are there and that’s enough for me and thousands of others. Happy season 3 part 1 release day everyone!
they are not showing You " how lgbt people existed during this period" because they are not showing any historic period, they are showing fantasy world. Come on, You know better
^Well then don’t watch it bc it was already in the first season with Benedict’s male painter friend revealed be with a male companion and his wife knows and is his beard, she can also sleep with anyone she wants too as well. LBTQ+ people are everywhere and have been throughout history get over it.
Seriously. Not everything needs an LGBTQ representation. Why not make a proper show n movie solely based for LGBTQ. Rather thn shoving it here and there. (*Pun intended) For ity bitty representation which is completely unnecessary for the plot.
Quite happy that Daphne was one of the top 10. Among the all the Bridgerton's she is my least favorite. With the constant whining, and the seeking info so she can use it to get what she wants. She really piss me off in the first season when she said "why will you not unfold yourself to me". Then she immediately used the info against her husband. In season 2 at the wedding Grrr. So glad she hasn't shown her @$$ in season 3 yet.
"As she's already died tragically when the 5th book rolls around", Dude, I have 6 more books to read in the series, and you're already spoiling the 5th book?
I would assume that comparisons of the show and book would include some spoilers. But also, the books have been out for over 20 years and the series 1st started 4 years ago. People should be able to talk about it at some point.
Video about differences of Book and show and people still act surprised and offended when some plot points of the books get actually discussed? Get a grip, really 🙄
If that's about Marina, she wasn't even mentioned in ANY book other than the 5th. She was not a character at all. She was a plot device. So, not a spoiler really.
Desperately want to point out how of course, despite it not being legally recognised as sexual assault due to them bwing married it ofcourse still was. However what do you think not teaching women about sex and throwing them into it would lead to?? This was the fault of the patriarchy 500%%%
How about none of Kate and Anthony's love scenes were consensual in the books? How about in the books you don't get to know any other characters than the main characters?
I read the Bridgerton books before there was even talk of a series, and loved them. Was excited to hear that a series was going to be made. Aaaand then I saw a trailer. They seem to have replaced much of the warmth and humour from the books with sexual innuendo (not that there wasn't any sex in the books). I watched season 1 anyway, but noped out after that. Too many side stories (like the gambling story line with Mr. Featherington. If I recall the books correctly, he had actually died before the first book even began. And honestly, the diverse casting really took me out of the story. It's one thing to have a diverse cast, but to change entire story lines to hammer home points about racial equality. I really think that this was the reason for the inclusion of Queen Charlotte as a character. And by the way, contrary to what social media has led people to believe, Queen Charlotte was NOT bi-racial. The marriage of King George and Queen Charlotte was an arranged marriage which took place before he became king. Does anyone honestly think that the British Royal Family would have allowed the heir to marry someone who wasn't white?
Sorry Guys- Still in love with Theo and Eloise. I'm hoping Theo will upgrade his rank overnight, like Will & Alice, and reunite with Eloise. Also, not popular, I want Marina/ Ms. Thompson/ Lady Crane find out about Pen, and come back to Mayfair to cause some trouble, and hook up with Colin.
I really dislike the diversity and I hope they don't do too much LGBTQ+ bla bla, it's just not fitting with the story. The diversity is so "in your face" like all the new disney movies, it's so annoying. I like LGBTQ+ movies when it fits and I like diversity in new stories but I don't like them when it's forced upon a story, not authentic!
“… forgoes the usual trend of having predominantly white casts in period dramas” the term for that, if you are talking about European/English history, is HISTORICAL ACCURACY. The UK population was predominantly white, 99.4%, in 1961. It is still predominantly white today at 82%. This reimagining takes place in a parallel universe.
It depends on the time period. Also, period pieces usually include an erasure of all people of color. People of color have generally been in most nations of the world, including Europe, throughout most of history. IF people of color are depicted throughout period pieces, it's depiction often does not include that there were people of means, which also occurred during that time. So while it may not be the most historically accurate that Queen Charlotte was visibly darker (although there is historical debate about how dark she was), it is possible that other families of means during that time were people of color, especially in the arts, business, and trading). Given that it's about a fictional family as a whole, the Bridgertons themselves could have been a family of color
@@BlackQueenA1825 not really; if there was, the numbers must have been so vanishingly small their `genetic’ or cultural legacy must have been subsumed into that of the host population weather it be the East Indies or China, or Europe without leaving a trace. The `accepted estimate ‘ is that there were approximately 10,000 black people in the UK out of a population of 9million in 1800 (which is when the stories take place). Although, estimates using parish registry actually put the figure significantly lower at between 4-5000. In 1900 the population rises to approximately 20, 000 where it stayed until `mass’ immigration began in the 1950’s. The port towns and larger cities would be where most of the people would have been concentrated, but merchants and sailors, of all races, tend to wander into countries and wander out. The two most well know black people of the 18th century, Nathanial Well and Dido Belle were biracial whose fathers were member of the gentry, giving them access. The same hand full of known or successful black people get brought up repeatedly. The `ton’, the 100 or so families of the fashionable elite were notoriously insular. Land (and social position) was king, and if you didn’t own land you were `nothing’- you also had no political voice. Those same families still own most of the land in the UK today. They socialized and married within their group, unless they were broke, in which case they might marry some rich merchants daughter to shore up their crumbling homes. The children would be accepted into the `ton’ but the wife, probably not. There is no historical debate as to if Queen Charlotte was black; most historians, from her genealogy, reject such claims. Jamaican American writer JA Roger first brought up idea in the 1940’s, then in 1997 Mario de Valdes y Cocom who worked for PBS ran with it. Neither appears to have any actual accreditation. Queen Charlotte was known to be plain, and frumpy, some went so far to say, ugly-she was acknowledged to be very kind. If Queen Charlotte had appeared to look `sub-saharan african’ then satirical cartoonist would have gone to town on it. They had no problem mocking the royals and would not have hesitated. Hogarth did depict black people in his prints. She was described as having broad nostrils and heavy lips; but broad nostrils and heavy lips occur across `racial’ lines. Her rather prominent eyes are still with the Royal Family today . And don’t get me started on the clothes, no chemise, synching a corset in at the waist when the fashion was tubular, no hats, no stockings, the hair styles, the prom dresses with synthetic material, the fabric itself ….. Queen Charlotte was known to dress fashionably , she didn’t wear panniers all her life, but moved with the times. And what the hell was Queen Charlotte wearing on her head a lighted crystal thing that moved?, okay mechanical movements but light? That would have been a candle, she’d of been the late Queen Charlotte.
The serie charlotte wasn't well recieved. Because the real queen Charlotte is white and not black. And the series is way different then the books. And they are making it more queer and so on. And the clothing is for that time period wrong as well. These clothing are more french style.
The whole “violation of Simon” is a little annoying….they were married! So what if she took advantage of his drunken state in the books, you know how many wives have done this?? It would be different if he was struggling and telling her to stop, but half asleep is fair game! LOL
I hope Season 4 is Benedict's bc I want more Eloise, and I'm afraid she'll leave or at least will have much to less screen time when her season is over
The cast are lovely but they have moved so far away from the storylines that it has become disappointing and cringey. Hollywood is not good at regency. Will stick to the books. 😬
I personally loved Penelope and Colin’s story in the books, and I feel that the show ruined Pen’s character. She was not malicious in the book, but she did seek societal justice ( so to speak). I was so very disappointed after watching season 2. I still watched the first part of the third season, but it is more out of curiosity in how they are going to fix the mess they made with Pen. Not mad anymore, but not truly invested either.
They already over-“diversified” the show by making regency aristocracy integrated, already something unthinkable in historical reality; there is no need to add more stuff that not only is not historically accurate but doesn’t even exist in Julia Quinn’s books. And it’s not a questions of bad feeling towards LGBTQ+….it’s a question of respect towards the source material.
I always wonder what would be better. I know quite a few people unable to make the distinction between historical reality and stories set in an historical context different from reality. I had in the past a lot of discussion with them where they thought the stories were telling the truth, which they were not. I always think back to 1984 where they rewrite history. It is already difficult to have an unbiased version of historical events. At one point, it seems to me that the hardships of the past are erased bit by bit.
there is a reason why Shogun was such a hit - telling a story that is historicly believeble is something people crave! Paying attenion to details was impressive, comparring it to Bridgertons now is just sad
Hate when people just focus on Daphne’s assault of Simon. Sex while lying to someone to implicate something else, also the same thing, it’s considered, legally speaking rape. Which he did to her for longer. That conversation is grating now. Talk about the books, but talk about what he did to her. Taking advantage of the naivety he was aware of. 😒 I don’t believe what either of them did was wrong. The biggest shame of it so far for me is that they’re only sexualising the white girls as if they’re making a point, while ignoring it. Daphne vs Kate is a completely different story for how they’re shown, body wise.
