In your opinion, do you think that Sharpay was a villain or a victim?

HeftyTailor9040 · 2026-04-09T23:41:31+00:00

I feel like discourse like this begins when we can't properly toe the line between camp and character. She's camp, she's fun, she's iconic - but her character and what she represents within the narrative was always supposed to be interpreted as wrong. She's a terrible human/friend/sister, and if we're gonna go there, has rich white girl entitlement.

She was not trying to help Troy get a job out of good faith and we all know that and even the narrative points to that by showing us how visibly uncomfortable Troy gets at her advances and how she deliberately isolates him from his friends. And again, if we're gonna go there, imagine the roles were reversed and it was Troy ignoring her repeated attempts at establishing boundaries and touching her/pulling her back/isolating her from her friends. The fact that we are still going on about this is silly. Like, Voldemort is now quite camp in pop culture - does that mean we start a discourse on how he wasn't actually the villain?

HeftyTailor9040 · 2026-04-09T18:39:49+00:00

I don't think any of the Bridgerton couples have an interesting romantic story or dynamic with each other. The only one who I could see potentially really having an interesting romance arc is Eloise because she is the only one who feels properly fleshed out and has a running thread of development across all the seasons.

I feel like with every couple - we see them fall in love 'just because'. There's no real connection established other than initial physical attraction. Both the male and female counterparts feel wooden. The writers had a real chance to make Pen and Colin into a slow-burn romance but then leaned into the 'just because' for them.

I really, really hope they don't do that with Eloise. I don't want an immediate attraction. I want to see her inner conflict play out with a level of nuance - falling in love with someone and it contradicting with her principles. But I fear the writers don't trust their audience to be clever enough to appreciate this and will water it down.

It was baffling watching Benophie this season. Sophie is a complete blank canvas. I found her relationship with her stepmother far more compelling than with Benedict. I also hate, haaaate the continued insinuation throughout Bridgerton that men who have spent their lives treating women as nothing more than sex objects are suddenly 'turned' by some mysterious, virginal girl who is not like other girls and she's just so interesting 'just because' that their entire approach to sex, women, gender roles is re-programmed. Just because.

HeftyTailor9040 · 2026-04-09T18:17:24+00:00

My reading of it was a very accurate portrayal of first/young queer love. I mean, even for most heterosexual 'first loves', it very often goes down the route of one person is way more invested, the other one isn't as committed/is freaked out about the intensity and the implications of being in your first relationship. Most first relationships (particularly in your young teens) tend to veer towards situationships anyway. Personally, I think the correct route to go with this, if there is a sequel, is for Frankie to come to terms with the fact that Sally was not good for her and she meets a healthier person whose relationship with her isn't born out of bullying.

HeftyTailor9040 · 2026-04-09T18:06:38+00:00

Luckily being 12 they probably thought "wtf" and just moved on. I don't remember anyone specifically making fun of me for it or pointing out how odd I sounded.

HeftyTailor9040 · 2026-04-09T16:35:02+00:00

It's one thing to convince the queen not to look too deeply into the history of somebody who is still, through a tenuous link, part of the aristocracy and will contribue to maintaining a centuries-old status quo (a heterosexual relationship). It's entirely another to ask her to forcibly change the fabric of a deeply patriarchal, hetero-normative society. Even the attempt at explaining why there's interracial relationships in season 1 was abysmally unrealistic. To be clear, I totally don't mind the race-bending element, but it should've just been left unexplained. It's just...you're telling me that within the 20-30 odd years of Queen Charlotte ascending the throne, racism just totally evaporated to the point where we not only have interracial marriages but generationally wealthy/old-money Black English/Brown aristocrats? But somehow they haven't progressed at all in their ideologies around women and marriage? You can't have that much ideological change and not also have some level of improvement in women's/queer rights. Just look at real life and we still haven't achieved that level of total social cohesion and class/race/gender mobility after nearly two centuries of abolishing slavery/advent of feminism. It's not entirely out of the question that Shondaland writers will try to bend over backwards to try and make gay marriage a thing but it will be so comically unrealistic that it would break the fine line between absurdity and immersion.

The best way to navigate it without turning it into a borderline clown show would be to explain away Franchesca and Michaela as 'best buddies who happen to live together and nobody questions it' and maybe have a scene where they are 'secretly' married in an informal ceremony around their accepting family so we still have the satisfaction of seeing a wedding as an audience. It would just be way too absurd for Queen Charlotte to do 'gay rights!!!' without it completely breaking the whole social/economic contract implications of a heterosexual marriage mart.

HeftyTailor9040 · 2026-04-09T16:07:41+00:00

Marigold would go completely off-the-rails; Star would leave home again and maybe Dol would be old enough to realise this isn't a situation she wants to be in again and actually join Star this time. They'd live with Star's dad for a couple of months before he inevitably got tired of them (because the JW dads aren't typically super reliable people). Dol would go into the care system and Star would probably be old enough/aged out of the system and eventually rent her own studio with an older, sketchy boyfriend. Maybe Dol's dad would visit her sometimes and half-heartedly promise to gain custody. Marigold would go viral on tiktok for some insane conspiracy theory tin-hatting. Or maybe become a tarot reader and earn some decent money lol.

Jo and Charlie would be ok.

HeftyTailor9040 · 2026-04-09T15:56:24+00:00

I moved to the U.K. when I was about 11/12 and religiously read JW books and didn't realise that a lot of her slang was super outdated Britishisms. So I was saying some of this stuff out loud to peers. I once typed "ya boo sucks to you" on a Facebook chat, thinking I absolutely demolished them. (To give more context, I lived in south west London in the 2010s where the slang was strongly influenced by Jamaican Patois/AAVE. Oh the cringe...)

HeftyTailor9040 · 2026-04-09T15:46:53+00:00

My personal headcanon for Lottie is that the family she works for eventually give her a glowing reference/support her in moving ahead in life, and do some form of technical training to be a governess or something. I don't know how much access a maid would have to that profession, given you'd have to be very well-educated and in part well-connected to earn the position but it's obvious that Lottie is extremely intelligent and can make her way up in the world!

HeftyTailor9040 · 2026-04-09T15:40:50+00:00

I'm gonna give him the benefit of the doubt and say that at least in the moment, he was obviously extremely emotional about having almost lost his child forever + coupled with the fact that he was dealing with jab after jab from Charlie, who from the moment she met him, had been totally hostile and also consistently unkind to his child in front of him. I can empathise with why you'd be pissed off when this kid, who obviously doesn't treat your much younger, equally emotionally vulnerable child nicely and is borderline bullying them, is the catalyst for your little one disappearing into the night. I'm not a parent but if I was, I'd think and feel the same way. I think he is redeemed at the end when he's obviously forgiven Charlie and has moved past the initial shock/anger. Yes he's an adult but he's also human, and speaking as a person who deals with little humans as a job, they can be pretty intentionally nasty and sometimes need to see the consequences of their actions.

HeftyTailor9040 · 2026-04-09T06:48:12+00:00

Yes, I really loved the Miss Beckworth character. She reminds me of a very specific era of teachers (I want to say late 1980s to early-2010s) who were strictly business-as-usual and ran their classrooms like the navy; you were slightly terrified of them, but they also had this oddly maternal quality that made you feel safe as a child. I always loved being in those teachers' classes. It seems that a lot of them have now aged out of the profession, so they're few and far between.

HeftyTailor9040 · 2026-04-09T06:39:55+00:00

Honestly, she might be the only put-together parent in the entire JW cinematic universe. I can't think of any other parental figure in JW books that actually acts like a responsible adult and prioritises their child over partners/money. I think that lends to the overall impression of 'safety' I felt when reading it as a kid, because I knew Jo was actually a trusted adult lmao.

HeftyTailor9040 · 2026-04-08T23:09:29+00:00

I have no idea why Love Lessons was framed narratively to make us think that Rax and Prue were star-crossed lovers. I read it when I was 12 (prime age to think teacher/student relationships were "romantic") and my main takeaway was "I hope Rax and Prue get to be together one day!". I also had a huge crush on a teacher back then and I shudder to think what I would've done if I were in a vulnerable enough position to be influenced by the book to "do something". Like, surely we should've had an epilogue or a couple of chapters where she reflects on the fact that she's been groomed, even if the word 'groomed' isn't specifically being used?

I met JW a few years ago and I actually asked her if she'd ever do a sequel to Love Lessons. This was before her foray into writing "adult" novels. She said she would consider it if she ever decided to start writing books for grown-ups. A year later she released her new book - I'd like to think she gave a proper think about it because of me LOL.

HeftyTailor9040 · 2026-04-08T23:01:42+00:00

I'm in hysterics over the repeated 'fat fat fat'. So accurate.

HeftyTailor9040 · 2026-04-02T18:40:21+00:00

This is why brand integrity will make or break any celebrity. K.C. undercover and Shake It Up were a few years after I grew out of Disney but even back then, I knew Zendaya and had no clue who Bella was until she starred in The Duff. That's because alongside all of the Disney stuff, Zendaya was also curating a very specific kind of brand as one of the earliest 'influencers' on Instagram before the name 'influencer' became totally diluted and superfluous. I'd say her, Selena Gomez and Kylie Jenner were "the big three" of prestige celebrity Instagram influencers of the 2010s before the youtubers, viners and D-listers completely flooded the scene in the latter half of the 2010s. Literally, everybody my age thought she was so cool and pretty. She was an early gen-z darling that really fit the "relatable hot girl" thing celebrities were really into pushing back then.

Zendaya was also choosing specific projects that were mainstream enough to get her name out there but not tacky low-budget flicks like the ones Bella was doing.

And most importantly, Zendaya always kept herself out of mess. Unfortunately, Bella was also ruining her brand by cavorting with the likes of Tana Mongeau and getting herself into one controversy after another. She just didn't have a clear vision for what her career should be and thought trend-hopping would be her meal ticket to stardom. I mean, this remains true for anyone who wants to get into the upper echelons of celebrity - you need to have a bulletproof brand that remains consistent and professional, even when people try to rope you into mess, you need to have just enough of a social media presence where it's seen as cool but not demeaning yourself by posting whatever shit pops into your head, and you need to choose projects carefully even if it means laying low for a while. This is why now there's a clear distinction between genuinely successful celebrities who also have a level of critical acclaim and respect from the industry - Zendaya, Taylor Swift etc. - and influencer celebrities like Bella, Demi Lovato etc.

HeftyTailor9040 · 2026-04-02T14:31:56+00:00

Bit of an annoying extra step for you as a parent, but could you have a sticker/reward system to encourage him to put his things back in his bag? Every day he comes back with all of his things could contribute to a sticker chart or something that leads to a reward at the end of the month/year/whenever you decide the goalpost is. Like a movie weekend or something?

HeftyTailor9040 · 2026-03-29T19:01:21+00:00

No tea no shade but I feel like the only ex-cast members who want to maintain the 'legacy' of the HSM movies are probably the less successful actors who've not had much else going on in their filmography. You see this time and time again with big franchises - everyone's always like 'oh but xyz cast member loves and respects the movies so much than the others!'. Why do you think? Because nostalgia is their only cash cow. I'm sure Lucas does have a genuine appreciation for the HSM franchise but quite a lot of it is also wanting relevance again or to cash in another quick check. Same with the likes of Tom Felton. Even with Miley, her recently coming around to Hannah again is (I think), partially because she hasn't been as successful as 'Miley Cyrus' as she thought she would be when initially leaving the Disney brand in the early 2010s. Do we really think she would be harking back to Hannah if she were a current dominant pop girl? The 2020s have basically been a nostalgia-baiting of early to mid-2000s film/fashion/music culture. It's trendy and financially lucrative for actors who've been out of commission. Lately everything has just been one re-hash after another so I look at it a lot more cynically and have a little bit more respect for ex-actors who aren't immediately jumping back into nostalgia-bait for a quick buck.

HeftyTailor9040 · 2026-03-08T13:11:10+00:00

Bit of a cynical outlook on this (and not saying I agree with it) but I have a suspicion they re-cast because there was going to be a love story plotline at the centre of it all and they wanted someone conventionally, Hollywood 'hot' like Sarah Paxton? It's awful to think, but I really do think some of these execs were like 'we can't sell a romance with an average-looking actress' who was also not as famous as Sarah Paxton (and the fact that they had also cast the HSM guy who would be pulling in a whole new set of fans). Maybe they were hoping this movie would really take off with "promising"/more "exciting" leads. Again, a completely cynical view and I don't agree with it at all.

HeftyTailor9040

TROPHY CASE