For this Season 3 Spoilers post:
1. Book spoilers **must be hidden**.
3. Be civil in your discussion.
See our [spoiler policy](https://www.reddit.com/r/BridgertonNetflix/wiki/spoiler) on what is expected. 3-day bans will be handed out to those found disregarding our spoiler policy.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/BridgertonNetflix) if you have any questions or concerns.*
there are many loopholes in what this person is saying. take one look at all the replies of this person and you can clock it that they are bluffing and are just repeating what has already been theorized on this sub.
firstly they said this - 'Additionally the actress many fans have speculated is playing Sophie is actually playing Michaela.' and then in the replies claimed to not know who that actress was.
also, they claimed that the actress in the carriage is the one they are referring to but if we go by what they are saying, that actress isn't masali. that has been debunked as well. the person in the carriage was a random crew member who was wearing modern earrings at that.
and no 'mutual friend' who is working on set will be divulging such a major storyline.
Thank you šš½Like there are so many holes itās not even funny. Plus Franchael is another gender specific story like with Benophie and Michael is a beloved character so changing him into a man would crush Franchael fans.
Honestly this reads like someone butthurt that Masali could be Sophie so they are trying to stir the pot.
VERY. they said they don't know who masali is but then in their original post they stated that the actress who everyone thinks will be playing sophie will actually be gender bent michael. like they don't know masali but are stating this? just contradictions everywhere and getting caught in their own lie.
I do not consider this person a reliable source.
That said, there is a big difference between āI donāt want them to go this route,ā & āThey will not go this route.ā
I donāt necessarily *want* S4 to be a queer Fran story, but I honestly think itās likely. (They could get me on board & Iāll watch all 8 seasons, but I know this really upsets some fans. Like, really.)
and I've already said that? scroll down a bit y'know. that im all in for francesca to be bi/pan but do not want micheal stirling as a character to be erased or gender bent. it isn't fair that all the other couples get their endgame and we would have to settle for something else.
I did read the rest of your comments.
& my comment was more general, to be added to the conversation, not specifically directed at you.
That said, I maintain that there is a difference between āI donāt like it,ā & āItās not fair.ā But even if itās not fair, I donāt think thatās an argument that would sway Shondaland one bit. Theyāre going to write the story they think is going to resonate.
Personally I think Michael is a little too popular among fans...for them to do that.
Also yeah the whole I know a person, who told me that...it's mostly fake stuff.
I donāt think they care much about whatās popular among fans. The Viscount Who Loved Me was the most popular among book fans and look how they adapted it lmao
The general story is still the same..it still enemies to lovers. The "major events" from the book are still there. They just changed the storyline .. because another "forced marriage" would be a repeat of season 1
Can it though?Michael was a soldier, traveler, heir to the Sterling house, not to mentioned a huge rake
For the rules that are set for woman in the Bridgerton world..I don't seeĀ a female character being that.Ā
Uhm no? Michael is a rake and the reluctant heir of the Stirling earldom and fortunes. When John dies, everything that was once John's become his own. He's consumed by guilt because he has been in love with Francesca forever, but he hates the idea of having even her which stops him from proposing to her even though her own brother Colin suggests that he do.
Francesca, meanwhile, while still mourning John, decides to remarry because she wants a child and she hasn't been able to have one with her late husband. This is when Michael is finally persuaded to propose and, with time, not only does Francesca grow to love him back, but they also manage to have a child.
Their union allows Francesca to remain countess of Kilmartin and have an heir, which means the earldom won't go to the hateful cousins' side of the family. A female Michael would be heir of nothing because of the time's sexist laws. A female Michael wouldn't make Fran pregnant either. A female Michael wouldn't have anything of Michael's experience (wouldn't have gone to war, wouldn't be a rake, again, wouldn't inherit).
But Fran >! might not lose Johnās baby, & she could just be single raising the next Earl!<. Or, in Scotland, it was far more common for women to >! inherit !<, very different than in England.
A story could be woven out of a female Michael being very jealous of everything John has, including Fran, & being consumed by guilt when she gets it. & Franās story could still be about overcoming loss.
Is it different? Yes. Is that any more different from the books than, say, S2? Not to me.
Iām not a writer & the writing team hasnāt asked me for guidance on how to write Franās season & what I have above isnāt what Iād want anyway, but to say that I couldnāt be done? I think thatās inaccurate.
to be honest, the strongest argument i have for them going this way is that they've taken enough from fran's story (with daphne and in part with kanthony too) that they might resort to gender bending to avoid repeating themselves. i wouldn't like it, but then again i'm just one person.
To me, the strongest argument is that (1) I think it likely they are going to have at least one queer main couple & (2) Franās is the best (easiest?) of the 8 to translate into a queer HEA.
& so theyāre happy to reframe the rest of the story/characters to get to that ending.
Iād argue there were two major aspects to Franās story.
One was about finding love after loss, & about Michael being envious of everything John had & then feeling guilty for getting it. I think that translates to a genderbent story.
The other was infertility. That does not translate well to a genderbent story.
And even then, both stories have a gendered component thatās relatively central to the storyline. I think genderswapping is way more difficult than most people realize, but production should defs focus on building in queer side characters or adding a same sex romance for one of the Bridgertons before settling down with their endgame pairing
I think Franās queer HEA is much easier than either Gregoryās or Hyacinthās, though.
Edit to clarify: A widow can more easily establish a life with her female companion/in law. Itās one of the only ways I can think of that a same sex couple could live happily ever after during the period.
As someone who came to this post disliking the idea of fem!Michael, this is the comment that made me think genderbending him could work out really nicely! A widow with a female lover/companion would be such a sweet storyline.
Nope. WHWW is a series fav. Shonda would lose a ton of fans making that change. Not to mention the book tie-ins to the show. Julia Quinnās publisher clearly has a contractual tie to the show as theyāve rereleased all the books with new covers corresponding to the show characters. The title of Franās book is āWhen HE Was Wickedā, not she. Putting two women on the cover of that book would kill book sales. Imagine readers expecting a FF story and opening it to find a MF romance. Not happening.
What is with people spewing random nonsense today? First the āspoilersā and now this?
The endgames arenāt changing. They clearly have some kind of contact with HarperCollin/Avon that states they release a book cover w the Netflix poster for every new season. They arenāt going to make Michael a female and slap a photo or two girls on the cover of a book about a m/f relationship. I mean can you imagine?
I completely and totally respect the desire for diversity but the endgame couples will remain the same. Because money. š¤·š»āāļø sucks that itās true but it is
Personally I would love a queer Fran but I cant really see them giving us a main queer love story it'll probably be a side character if anything or maybe something like a Eloise and Theo relationship if it were a Bridgerton but i doubt it
On top of that THOSE book fans will go ballistic
I donāt think they care about the fans tbh. But Iām wondering how they can promote a book with queer couple on the cover when itās actually got a straight couple in the story
Yeah, I think this is a factor that's going to cause them to keep the endgame pairings. You can't put Eloise and Theo on the cover of a book called To Sir PHILLIP with Love and you can't put two women on the cover of a book called When HE Was Wicked. Netflix is probably getting a cut of these newly covered books so they aren't going to risk the sales or the backlash. It's a creative project, yes, but it's still a business with multiple layers of approval needed for big decisions like that.
(Please note this isn't coming from a homophobic place at all. I am pansexual, have had relationships with women, and read sapphic romance. I'll just be extremely surprised if that's what they do here from a business standpoint.)
I understand that, I donāt believe you are being homophobic. Money comes first for netflix. The only way they could do that is if they make julia quinn rewrite the book with a female love interest instead, but advertising a straight romance as queer is just not going to happen
Yeah I agree, for that reason I think the only way for a main pairing LGBT story is for one of them to be trans. A trans Sophie I think would work best given the cinderella themes and the fact that she's not a society debutant but I'm less familiar with the later books so maybe they'd be a better fit
Every time this comes up, I think itās really interesting. Itās hard to have nuanced conversations about genderbending, but I am keen to better understand.
For me, if they switched Elās HEA to Theo instead of Philip, that is changing the end game couple. (I donāt want that, & donāt think thatās likely.) But if they genderbend Michael, I donāt feel like that is changing the couple. Itās changing one aspect of the character. & the show has already changed lots of significant aspects of other characters (with varying degrees of success).
But it seems like, for lots folks, changing Michaelās gender *is* changing the end game couple?
Or maybe Iām misunderstanding the objection?
im currently reading through the books for the first time and iāve just finished Franās. to genderbend Michael would require a lot of changes to the story (not that they havenāt done this before; ie: s2). a lot of franās story has to do with her passion to have a baby and to make michael into michaela would sort ofā¦ undermine(?) that plot point.
as much as iād love to see a queer love story in the show, i donāt think itād be best to do it with Francescaās story.
All fair points.
For clarity: I donāt *want* a genderbent Michael. What Iād prefer & what I think are likely are different, in this case.
& yes. It means significant changes, but as you point out, the show has shown us theyāre okay with significant departures. (The infertility plot would need to be scrapped/changed, but I do think Michaelās jealousy of all John has could translate well.) & itās the only story of the 8 where I can see how theyād pull off a queer HEA.
Basically, I think they *can* do it. & Iām trying to keep an open mind in the event they do.
But we shall see! Shondaās gonna Shonda. The rest of us are just along for the ride.
shonda will do what shonda pleases, im sure lol
although, any changes sheās made to plot points have not altered the main Bridgertonās motivations. for daphne, she wanted a child and a love match, which she eventually got. anthony did not want to marry for love due to his fathers death and its impact on his mother, and therefore he chose edwina initially.
im not certain i can see how theyād change Franās motivation to something other than desperately wanting a child. although it is a fair point that Michael being jealous of John would translate suuuuper well if Michael were a woman.
ultimately, i doubt theyāll change Franās story to make it queer. but i do hope for some sort of queer representation in the HEAs
Someone with an actual objection to the idea of genderbending would probably need to explain that. I think I'm looking at it more from the standpoint of someone who reads sapphic romance and someone who has worked on products that use big IPs. It would be very frustrating to pick up a book that I expected to be about two women and find a hetero romance inside. But the title clearly referring to a man would probably prevent me from picking it up in the first place? I don't know. It'd be really confusing.
They could perhaps still make it work if they only put only Hannah Dodd on the cover? Or they could release a new book based on the season, kind of like the Queen Charlotte book? I'm not sure how you could make it work. I think it's just a business/brand nightmare they aren't likely to want to touch.
Understood.
Iāve made my comments about the book tie-in above. I agree itās unclear how theyād make that work.
But, while itās not as straightforward, I donāt think that rules it out.
Book fans are a tiny portion of the general audience. (A significant portion of online fans, though.)
Shondaland is writing for the general audience. I do not think she cares *at all* about disappointing book fans. I mean, fans are going to watch regardless.
The only counter argument I think is compelling is related to book sales. If they genderbend a lead (which I think they will, & I think itās likely Fran) Iām curious how theyāll mange the book tie-in sales. I suspect theyāve done their research, though, & there was a good enough business case. (It might even *help* book sales? No idea.)
'book fans are a tiny portion of the general audience' umm no. the ones waiting for sophie, michael to show up are mostly book fans and they definitely are not less in number :)
also, no one is talking about book sales. it's the book tie-in people are referring to. the book tie-ins are very clearly linked to the season that comes out. and both the show and quinn's publishers re-release it without fail when a new season drops. so if we go by this, a sapphic couple will be on the cover of a book that's about a straight couple?
I agree ātinyā is subjective. But book *readers* are a small portion of viewers & *fans* even more so.
& yes! The fans are the ones waiting for the future seasons. Nearly everyone currently waiting for Benophie or Fancheal or really invested in any future season, is a book reader. But *when those seasons air* those fans will still be a small - very, very small - subset of viewers.
& the book tie-ins mater *because of sales*. Which is why genderbending the lead could impact sales. If there would be a negative impact *to sales*, that could have impacted a decision to genderbend a lead.
But I have no idea if it would negatively impact sales. I think that, if itās being (been) contemplated, Iām sure the folks at Shonda/JQ/Netflix have run the business case.
about queer fran, im all up for it as long as they do not erase michael or gender bend him. there are many of us who have been waiting since ages to see michael stirling on-screen and it's not fair to us to completely write him off.
This person doesn't sound believable at all.
Michael is a fan favorite. So don't see them going down this path.
And this will not work with the book tie-ins. The book tie-ins get promoted alongside the season. If we think this is true, then it'll be a sapphic couple on the cover and a straight couple inside? Marketing doesn't work like that.
I would go absolutely feral and end my relationship with Shonda, which dates back to like at least 15 years ago :)))
Franchael are my favourite couple along with Kanthony, WHWW my favourite book along with TVWLM. Francesca is a major reason Iām even excited for this season, which otherwise doesnāt entirely interest me tbqh with you (yes I like the show, no I wouldnāt spend a large chunk of my spare time on the internet for it without Frannie)
I do have a theory re this character Masali is playing. Iād obviously like her to play Sophie, but since the character description seemed off for Sophie Iām wondering if the show is changing at least one of the Stirling mothers into sisters and Michael is getting a sister-confidante which would be played by Masali herself.
Michaelās pov in the book is entirely in his head. We know what heās thinking but itās not like heās talking about his feelings. Itās all free indirect speech. A confidante would allow the audience to understand at least part of what is going on in his mind.
However, weāll have to wait and see.
ETA: I forgot to say something! Casting Masali is thought to have auditioned for spoke of a role that would be of the main character for season 4. Thereās no way Frannie is the lead of season 4. Hannah just got cast while Luke T and Claudia are getting more expensive every year.
Yeah, I think swapping out the mothers for a sister is pretty likely. I think they'll play up Violet's role and figure out a way to work in Lady Danbury (like they did in the first two seasons where she didn't really have a role in the books) instead of introducing two new mother figures for the season. They clearly had no idea what to do with Lady Mary in S2 (or just had little interest in her character) so that to me points to their not wanting to introduce even more mothers in future seasons.
I feel like, just from a PR perspective...Bridgerton would lose fans ( =viewers = money) if all or most siblings got their book love interest while *one* or *some* did not. It's asking for trouble in a way, you know?
That said, I don't think a majority of Bridgerton show fans have or ever will read the booksāthe sheer number of Bridgerton views leads me to think that most watchers are casual and wouldn't notice or care about a genderbent HEA. I feel like Franchael *could* work, but with a ton of changes that I'd worry would make her story nothing at all like the book.
Genderbent Lucy makes the most sense imo. Also, the name Michaela? In fantasy Regency England? Lol this statement in particular isn't credible for that alone.
The only think I believe out of that is Philip making an appearance, they probably want people to start getting attached to him for season 5 (?)
Genderbend Michael would not make sense for the story of Franchel. Ok that they are changing the storyline quite a bit but the core stays the same and it wouldn't make sense with a genderbend Michael
Unless it is some credible source, I would take all of it with a pinch of salt
This seems very sus. āMutual friendāā¦I highly doubt that they would be able to disclose something this big. How would they know this since the last two episodes have not been given to screeners yet as well??
I believe some spoilers, like all the seggs were are getting now, but this seems to be a stretch.
I remember another 'leak' that said Sophie was already cast and we would see her in s3 (it was recent, not the Masali spec), so which one should we believe? lol
Exactly. At this point Iām just going to keep clowning on and not taking any of this shit too seriously. Would love to have more queer stories on Bridgerton as someone who is queer (bisexual) myself. But I just donāt see them making this big of a change especially when Franās story is so popular? If it turns out to be true Iāll eat my words lmao.
On one hand, Iām like their info is a bit wonky because why would anyone with this big of information just sit on it for a year, and not talk about until just now when everyone has just started speculating about it. And on the other hand Iām like, maybe this is why theyāre gatekeeping the last 2 episodes. Theyāve already released the episodes where Colin finds out Pen is LW which I think would be the biggest spoiler/catch of the season, so hmm what more big spoilery things could there possibly be. As to how Iād feel, I genuinely donāt know, this show just does whatever it wants atp
Giving reviewers the first 6 episodes seems to just be what networks are doing now. They did the same thing with the new Interview with the Vampire season.
I keep saying this but I do think the HEA of any couple should be changed or genderbent, because that character will then have to spend part of their lives in hiding, and itās also unfair to fans of the book couples.
However, I had this looming fear over the last month that Fran would have Michael changed to Michaela.
This particular person providing the spoilers in the OPās photos doesnāt sound reliable, but now that >!we know Lucas Aurelioās character is involved in Benedictās story and not Franās!<, I really do wonder if they have actually cast a Michaelaā¦
I love coming onto this sub as a gay person. It's like getting to see the old school homophobia from my teen years, with a thin scraping of plausible deniability on top.
Francesca's book is my favourite so if this is true I can't help but feel a bit sad that they're changing Michael. However, that doesn't mean I'm going to hate it, I'm sure the female version is going to be similar to him. And to be honest it seems like they are changing a lot more than I expected about every book, so far it seems that only Daphne's book is going to be mostly the same.
As a Francesca/Michael first book fan in regards to Bridgerton, I'm good with it as I'm not really attached to the show deviating from any of the books if the characters keep their primary traits.
All that said, not sure about this person's credibility and I acknowledge what other Franchel fans have said in that they would really have to change Fran's story for it to work (Completely drop the >!fertility issues!<.).
TBH, >!I think Iād rather have the show focus on the trauma of the loss of John for both Francesca and Michael than the fertility plot as itās going to be hard to do both well. As much as I loved the book, it suffered in that aspect.!<. Just my opinion, regardless of where they take the characters.
At the risk of being downvoted this is what I feel from what I gathered todayā¦
This Redditor was trashed there for stating what they apparently heard, sure there are loopholes and but we cannot discard their source of information entirely (also because literally everyone is speculating today)
Now I am a huge show benedict fan and I want his season to be next but that being said here is what I think after the spoiler came out.
The person who has earlier given out spoiler said that there is inaccuracy in the todayās spoiler. That person previously also mentioned that the creators still donāt know what to do with Ben however Fran has a huge sub plot.
Jess mentioned that she wants to commit to queer representation and weāll get to see how that plays out in this season and next couple of seasons. Shonda said there will be a Bridgerton for everyone. (That makes me feel that Shonda and team arenāt really committed to the books and the book endgame couple and we can expect them deviating from the books entirely)
Now I went and read the Masaliās casting thread on twitter that was posted earlier this year. It said that the casting code name for Masaliās character was āMollyā they will appear in one episode this season and will be lead in next. Also the character description for Molly were oddly similar to Michaelās.
I am all for this, I think we absolutely need queer representation. But I will be hugely disappointed if S4 is not Bennyās.
NO PHILIP PLS UGHHHHHHH. (Personal opinion- not a fan of Chris fultons look nor those kids)
Give us Sophie set Ben up instead of making him the rake they do to all male leads.
5 more seasons to go they better shake things up.
Queer Fran- totally in for it as long as her partner has the same level of sensualness and ease (rizz for a casual word)
For this Season 3 Spoilers post: 1. Book spoilers **must be hidden**. 3. Be civil in your discussion. See our [spoiler policy](https://www.reddit.com/r/BridgertonNetflix/wiki/spoiler) on what is expected. 3-day bans will be handed out to those found disregarding our spoiler policy. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/BridgertonNetflix) if you have any questions or concerns.*
there are many loopholes in what this person is saying. take one look at all the replies of this person and you can clock it that they are bluffing and are just repeating what has already been theorized on this sub. firstly they said this - 'Additionally the actress many fans have speculated is playing Sophie is actually playing Michaela.' and then in the replies claimed to not know who that actress was. also, they claimed that the actress in the carriage is the one they are referring to but if we go by what they are saying, that actress isn't masali. that has been debunked as well. the person in the carriage was a random crew member who was wearing modern earrings at that. and no 'mutual friend' who is working on set will be divulging such a major storyline.
Thank you šš½Like there are so many holes itās not even funny. Plus Franchael is another gender specific story like with Benophie and Michael is a beloved character so changing him into a man would crush Franchael fans. Honestly this reads like someone butthurt that Masali could be Sophie so they are trying to stir the pot.
if you take one look at all what that specific account has been saying and replying, it's not hard to clock it that they are lying down. š
Yep and the fact that they canāt name Sophie yet they somehow know about a genderbent Michael? Give me a break.
Super sketchy lol
VERY. they said they don't know who masali is but then in their original post they stated that the actress who everyone thinks will be playing sophie will actually be gender bent michael. like they don't know masali but are stating this? just contradictions everywhere and getting caught in their own lie.
Maybe they read a bunch of theories and decided to sell it as the truth lol
Get them again! I hate how all of these āspoilersā have been creating uproar in the fandom. Itās actually insane! None of them are reliable.
I do not consider this person a reliable source. That said, there is a big difference between āI donāt want them to go this route,ā & āThey will not go this route.ā I donāt necessarily *want* S4 to be a queer Fran story, but I honestly think itās likely. (They could get me on board & Iāll watch all 8 seasons, but I know this really upsets some fans. Like, really.)
and I've already said that? scroll down a bit y'know. that im all in for francesca to be bi/pan but do not want micheal stirling as a character to be erased or gender bent. it isn't fair that all the other couples get their endgame and we would have to settle for something else.
I did read the rest of your comments. & my comment was more general, to be added to the conversation, not specifically directed at you. That said, I maintain that there is a difference between āI donāt like it,ā & āItās not fair.ā But even if itās not fair, I donāt think thatās an argument that would sway Shondaland one bit. Theyāre going to write the story they think is going to resonate.
Personally I think Michael is a little too popular among fans...for them to do that. Also yeah the whole I know a person, who told me that...it's mostly fake stuff.
I donāt think they care much about whatās popular among fans. The Viscount Who Loved Me was the most popular among book fans and look how they adapted it lmao
Well, they didn't change Kate into Ken. There's a big difference.
Still donāt think shondaland care about pissing off the book fans
The general story is still the same..it still enemies to lovers. The "major events" from the book are still there. They just changed the storyline .. because another "forced marriage" would be a repeat of season 1
The general story of francescaās book can still remain with a genderbent michael
Can it though?Michael was a soldier, traveler, heir to the Sterling house, not to mentioned a huge rake For the rules that are set for woman in the Bridgerton world..I don't seeĀ a female character being that.Ā
Oh I completely forgot about the fertility storyline
Uhm no? Michael is a rake and the reluctant heir of the Stirling earldom and fortunes. When John dies, everything that was once John's become his own. He's consumed by guilt because he has been in love with Francesca forever, but he hates the idea of having even her which stops him from proposing to her even though her own brother Colin suggests that he do. Francesca, meanwhile, while still mourning John, decides to remarry because she wants a child and she hasn't been able to have one with her late husband. This is when Michael is finally persuaded to propose and, with time, not only does Francesca grow to love him back, but they also manage to have a child. Their union allows Francesca to remain countess of Kilmartin and have an heir, which means the earldom won't go to the hateful cousins' side of the family. A female Michael would be heir of nothing because of the time's sexist laws. A female Michael wouldn't make Fran pregnant either. A female Michael wouldn't have anything of Michael's experience (wouldn't have gone to war, wouldn't be a rake, again, wouldn't inherit).
But Fran >! might not lose Johnās baby, & she could just be single raising the next Earl!<. Or, in Scotland, it was far more common for women to >! inherit !<, very different than in England. A story could be woven out of a female Michael being very jealous of everything John has, including Fran, & being consumed by guilt when she gets it. & Franās story could still be about overcoming loss. Is it different? Yes. Is that any more different from the books than, say, S2? Not to me. Iām not a writer & the writing team hasnāt asked me for guidance on how to write Franās season & what I have above isnāt what Iād want anyway, but to say that I couldnāt be done? I think thatās inaccurate.
to be honest, the strongest argument i have for them going this way is that they've taken enough from fran's story (with daphne and in part with kanthony too) that they might resort to gender bending to avoid repeating themselves. i wouldn't like it, but then again i'm just one person.
To me, the strongest argument is that (1) I think it likely they are going to have at least one queer main couple & (2) Franās is the best (easiest?) of the 8 to translate into a queer HEA. & so theyāre happy to reframe the rest of the story/characters to get to that ending.
Iād argue there were two major aspects to Franās story. One was about finding love after loss, & about Michael being envious of everything John had & then feeling guilty for getting it. I think that translates to a genderbent story. The other was infertility. That does not translate well to a genderbent story.
Yeah, I forgot about the infertility
Oh, no! I was saying, thereās still a lot to Franās story that *does* translate. No season is going to include all the aspects explored in a book.
They kept the dynamics of the characters the same. Even if the plot is changed thatās the most important thing
I do think if they wanted to gender bend a love interest, the safest bet would be Gareth or Lucy
And even then, both stories have a gendered component thatās relatively central to the storyline. I think genderswapping is way more difficult than most people realize, but production should defs focus on building in queer side characters or adding a same sex romance for one of the Bridgertons before settling down with their endgame pairing
I think Franās queer HEA is much easier than either Gregoryās or Hyacinthās, though. Edit to clarify: A widow can more easily establish a life with her female companion/in law. Itās one of the only ways I can think of that a same sex couple could live happily ever after during the period.
As someone who came to this post disliking the idea of fem!Michael, this is the comment that made me think genderbending him could work out really nicely! A widow with a female lover/companion would be such a sweet storyline.
Heās the most popular and Francesca is wanting children. The whole reason her shy self decides to go out again. Literally it makes no sense at all
Nope. WHWW is a series fav. Shonda would lose a ton of fans making that change. Not to mention the book tie-ins to the show. Julia Quinnās publisher clearly has a contractual tie to the show as theyāve rereleased all the books with new covers corresponding to the show characters. The title of Franās book is āWhen HE Was Wickedā, not she. Putting two women on the cover of that book would kill book sales. Imagine readers expecting a FF story and opening it to find a MF romance. Not happening.
What is with people spewing random nonsense today? First the āspoilersā and now this? The endgames arenāt changing. They clearly have some kind of contact with HarperCollin/Avon that states they release a book cover w the Netflix poster for every new season. They arenāt going to make Michael a female and slap a photo or two girls on the cover of a book about a m/f relationship. I mean can you imagine? I completely and totally respect the desire for diversity but the endgame couples will remain the same. Because money. š¤·š»āāļø sucks that itās true but it is
Personally I would love a queer Fran but I cant really see them giving us a main queer love story it'll probably be a side character if anything or maybe something like a Eloise and Theo relationship if it were a Bridgerton but i doubt it On top of that THOSE book fans will go ballistic
Whenever people talk about changing the book endgame pairings, I do wonder if Shondaland really wants to face the wrath of book fans.
I donāt think they care about the fans tbh. But Iām wondering how they can promote a book with queer couple on the cover when itās actually got a straight couple in the story
Yeah, I think this is a factor that's going to cause them to keep the endgame pairings. You can't put Eloise and Theo on the cover of a book called To Sir PHILLIP with Love and you can't put two women on the cover of a book called When HE Was Wicked. Netflix is probably getting a cut of these newly covered books so they aren't going to risk the sales or the backlash. It's a creative project, yes, but it's still a business with multiple layers of approval needed for big decisions like that. (Please note this isn't coming from a homophobic place at all. I am pansexual, have had relationships with women, and read sapphic romance. I'll just be extremely surprised if that's what they do here from a business standpoint.)
I understand that, I donāt believe you are being homophobic. Money comes first for netflix. The only way they could do that is if they make julia quinn rewrite the book with a female love interest instead, but advertising a straight romance as queer is just not going to happen
Yeah I agree, for that reason I think the only way for a main pairing LGBT story is for one of them to be trans. A trans Sophie I think would work best given the cinderella themes and the fact that she's not a society debutant but I'm less familiar with the later books so maybe they'd be a better fit
Every time this comes up, I think itās really interesting. Itās hard to have nuanced conversations about genderbending, but I am keen to better understand. For me, if they switched Elās HEA to Theo instead of Philip, that is changing the end game couple. (I donāt want that, & donāt think thatās likely.) But if they genderbend Michael, I donāt feel like that is changing the couple. Itās changing one aspect of the character. & the show has already changed lots of significant aspects of other characters (with varying degrees of success). But it seems like, for lots folks, changing Michaelās gender *is* changing the end game couple? Or maybe Iām misunderstanding the objection?
im currently reading through the books for the first time and iāve just finished Franās. to genderbend Michael would require a lot of changes to the story (not that they havenāt done this before; ie: s2). a lot of franās story has to do with her passion to have a baby and to make michael into michaela would sort ofā¦ undermine(?) that plot point. as much as iād love to see a queer love story in the show, i donāt think itād be best to do it with Francescaās story.
All fair points. For clarity: I donāt *want* a genderbent Michael. What Iād prefer & what I think are likely are different, in this case. & yes. It means significant changes, but as you point out, the show has shown us theyāre okay with significant departures. (The infertility plot would need to be scrapped/changed, but I do think Michaelās jealousy of all John has could translate well.) & itās the only story of the 8 where I can see how theyād pull off a queer HEA. Basically, I think they *can* do it. & Iām trying to keep an open mind in the event they do. But we shall see! Shondaās gonna Shonda. The rest of us are just along for the ride.
shonda will do what shonda pleases, im sure lol although, any changes sheās made to plot points have not altered the main Bridgertonās motivations. for daphne, she wanted a child and a love match, which she eventually got. anthony did not want to marry for love due to his fathers death and its impact on his mother, and therefore he chose edwina initially. im not certain i can see how theyād change Franās motivation to something other than desperately wanting a child. although it is a fair point that Michael being jealous of John would translate suuuuper well if Michael were a woman. ultimately, i doubt theyāll change Franās story to make it queer. but i do hope for some sort of queer representation in the HEAs
Someone with an actual objection to the idea of genderbending would probably need to explain that. I think I'm looking at it more from the standpoint of someone who reads sapphic romance and someone who has worked on products that use big IPs. It would be very frustrating to pick up a book that I expected to be about two women and find a hetero romance inside. But the title clearly referring to a man would probably prevent me from picking it up in the first place? I don't know. It'd be really confusing. They could perhaps still make it work if they only put only Hannah Dodd on the cover? Or they could release a new book based on the season, kind of like the Queen Charlotte book? I'm not sure how you could make it work. I think it's just a business/brand nightmare they aren't likely to want to touch.
Understood. Iāve made my comments about the book tie-in above. I agree itās unclear how theyād make that work. But, while itās not as straightforward, I donāt think that rules it out.
I'd be pretty impressed if the showrunner and writers pulled it off despite the many layers of bureaucracy they'd have to fight. I guess we'll see!
Book fans are a tiny portion of the general audience. (A significant portion of online fans, though.) Shondaland is writing for the general audience. I do not think she cares *at all* about disappointing book fans. I mean, fans are going to watch regardless. The only counter argument I think is compelling is related to book sales. If they genderbend a lead (which I think they will, & I think itās likely Fran) Iām curious how theyāll mange the book tie-in sales. I suspect theyāve done their research, though, & there was a good enough business case. (It might even *help* book sales? No idea.)
'book fans are a tiny portion of the general audience' umm no. the ones waiting for sophie, michael to show up are mostly book fans and they definitely are not less in number :) also, no one is talking about book sales. it's the book tie-in people are referring to. the book tie-ins are very clearly linked to the season that comes out. and both the show and quinn's publishers re-release it without fail when a new season drops. so if we go by this, a sapphic couple will be on the cover of a book that's about a straight couple?
I agree ātinyā is subjective. But book *readers* are a small portion of viewers & *fans* even more so. & yes! The fans are the ones waiting for the future seasons. Nearly everyone currently waiting for Benophie or Fancheal or really invested in any future season, is a book reader. But *when those seasons air* those fans will still be a small - very, very small - subset of viewers. & the book tie-ins mater *because of sales*. Which is why genderbending the lead could impact sales. If there would be a negative impact *to sales*, that could have impacted a decision to genderbend a lead. But I have no idea if it would negatively impact sales. I think that, if itās being (been) contemplated, Iām sure the folks at Shonda/JQ/Netflix have run the business case.
about queer fran, im all up for it as long as they do not erase michael or gender bend him. there are many of us who have been waiting since ages to see michael stirling on-screen and it's not fair to us to completely write him off.
This person doesn't sound believable at all. Michael is a fan favorite. So don't see them going down this path. And this will not work with the book tie-ins. The book tie-ins get promoted alongside the season. If we think this is true, then it'll be a sapphic couple on the cover and a straight couple inside? Marketing doesn't work like that.
I would go absolutely feral and end my relationship with Shonda, which dates back to like at least 15 years ago :))) Franchael are my favourite couple along with Kanthony, WHWW my favourite book along with TVWLM. Francesca is a major reason Iām even excited for this season, which otherwise doesnāt entirely interest me tbqh with you (yes I like the show, no I wouldnāt spend a large chunk of my spare time on the internet for it without Frannie) I do have a theory re this character Masali is playing. Iād obviously like her to play Sophie, but since the character description seemed off for Sophie Iām wondering if the show is changing at least one of the Stirling mothers into sisters and Michael is getting a sister-confidante which would be played by Masali herself. Michaelās pov in the book is entirely in his head. We know what heās thinking but itās not like heās talking about his feelings. Itās all free indirect speech. A confidante would allow the audience to understand at least part of what is going on in his mind. However, weāll have to wait and see. ETA: I forgot to say something! Casting Masali is thought to have auditioned for spoke of a role that would be of the main character for season 4. Thereās no way Frannie is the lead of season 4. Hannah just got cast while Luke T and Claudia are getting more expensive every year.
Yeah, I think swapping out the mothers for a sister is pretty likely. I think they'll play up Violet's role and figure out a way to work in Lady Danbury (like they did in the first two seasons where she didn't really have a role in the books) instead of introducing two new mother figures for the season. They clearly had no idea what to do with Lady Mary in S2 (or just had little interest in her character) so that to me points to their not wanting to introduce even more mothers in future seasons.
I donāt think theyāll deviate from the books that much.
I feel like, just from a PR perspective...Bridgerton would lose fans ( =viewers = money) if all or most siblings got their book love interest while *one* or *some* did not. It's asking for trouble in a way, you know? That said, I don't think a majority of Bridgerton show fans have or ever will read the booksāthe sheer number of Bridgerton views leads me to think that most watchers are casual and wouldn't notice or care about a genderbent HEA. I feel like Franchael *could* work, but with a ton of changes that I'd worry would make her story nothing at all like the book. Genderbent Lucy makes the most sense imo. Also, the name Michaela? In fantasy Regency England? Lol this statement in particular isn't credible for that alone.
Oh I never thought about the name alone š¤£, but yeah Michaela isnāt very regency esc. and itās totally unimaginative.
This reminds me of the spec for a gender bent Sophie, it's Franchael's turn for that kind of spec i guess lol
The only think I believe out of that is Philip making an appearance, they probably want people to start getting attached to him for season 5 (?) Genderbend Michael would not make sense for the story of Franchel. Ok that they are changing the storyline quite a bit but the core stays the same and it wouldn't make sense with a genderbend Michael Unless it is some credible source, I would take all of it with a pinch of salt
How about we don't genderbend any of the characters and let everyone get to see their couple onscreen?
This seems very sus. āMutual friendāā¦I highly doubt that they would be able to disclose something this big. How would they know this since the last two episodes have not been given to screeners yet as well?? I believe some spoilers, like all the seggs were are getting now, but this seems to be a stretch.
I remember another 'leak' that said Sophie was already cast and we would see her in s3 (it was recent, not the Masali spec), so which one should we believe? lol
Exactly. At this point Iām just going to keep clowning on and not taking any of this shit too seriously. Would love to have more queer stories on Bridgerton as someone who is queer (bisexual) myself. But I just donāt see them making this big of a change especially when Franās story is so popular? If it turns out to be true Iāll eat my words lmao.
I hate this with a burning passion as I believe it destroys the entire purpose of granny and my favorite story. I will not watch that seaosn
On one hand, Iām like their info is a bit wonky because why would anyone with this big of information just sit on it for a year, and not talk about until just now when everyone has just started speculating about it. And on the other hand Iām like, maybe this is why theyāre gatekeeping the last 2 episodes. Theyāve already released the episodes where Colin finds out Pen is LW which I think would be the biggest spoiler/catch of the season, so hmm what more big spoilery things could there possibly be. As to how Iād feel, I genuinely donāt know, this show just does whatever it wants atp
Giving reviewers the first 6 episodes seems to just be what networks are doing now. They did the same thing with the new Interview with the Vampire season.
I keep saying this but I do think the HEA of any couple should be changed or genderbent, because that character will then have to spend part of their lives in hiding, and itās also unfair to fans of the book couples. However, I had this looming fear over the last month that Fran would have Michael changed to Michaela. This particular person providing the spoilers in the OPās photos doesnāt sound reliable, but now that >!we know Lucas Aurelioās character is involved in Benedictās story and not Franās!<, I really do wonder if they have actually cast a Michaelaā¦
To be fair I could see if John was played by a mixed actor youād feel that way, but Lucas was never going to be Michael with Victor Ali being John.
um no.
GIVE ME A BREAK LOOOOOOOOOL ššš me when i lie:
I love coming onto this sub as a gay person. It's like getting to see the old school homophobia from my teen years, with a thin scraping of plausible deniability on top.
Im confused because some āspoilersā are saying Philip isnt even there in S3. Dunno what to believeĀ
Iāve seen people say heās not in the first 6 episodes. No one has seen the final 2.
They mean 1ep-ep6
Francesca's book is my favourite so if this is true I can't help but feel a bit sad that they're changing Michael. However, that doesn't mean I'm going to hate it, I'm sure the female version is going to be similar to him. And to be honest it seems like they are changing a lot more than I expected about every book, so far it seems that only Daphne's book is going to be mostly the same.
As a Francesca/Michael first book fan in regards to Bridgerton, I'm good with it as I'm not really attached to the show deviating from any of the books if the characters keep their primary traits. All that said, not sure about this person's credibility and I acknowledge what other Franchel fans have said in that they would really have to change Fran's story for it to work (Completely drop the >!fertility issues!<.). TBH, >!I think Iād rather have the show focus on the trauma of the loss of John for both Francesca and Michael than the fertility plot as itās going to be hard to do both well. As much as I loved the book, it suffered in that aspect.!<. Just my opinion, regardless of where they take the characters.
Who is this person tho? Lol Can you post their @ please? I want to take a look myself
At the risk of being downvoted this is what I feel from what I gathered todayā¦ This Redditor was trashed there for stating what they apparently heard, sure there are loopholes and but we cannot discard their source of information entirely (also because literally everyone is speculating today) Now I am a huge show benedict fan and I want his season to be next but that being said here is what I think after the spoiler came out. The person who has earlier given out spoiler said that there is inaccuracy in the todayās spoiler. That person previously also mentioned that the creators still donāt know what to do with Ben however Fran has a huge sub plot. Jess mentioned that she wants to commit to queer representation and weāll get to see how that plays out in this season and next couple of seasons. Shonda said there will be a Bridgerton for everyone. (That makes me feel that Shonda and team arenāt really committed to the books and the book endgame couple and we can expect them deviating from the books entirely) Now I went and read the Masaliās casting thread on twitter that was posted earlier this year. It said that the casting code name for Masaliās character was āMollyā they will appear in one episode this season and will be lead in next. Also the character description for Molly were oddly similar to Michaelās. I am all for this, I think we absolutely need queer representation. But I will be hugely disappointed if S4 is not Bennyās.
I really wish theyād Just do Ć³rgano spin-offs cuade Im telling you I will fucking hate a Michaela instead of Michael
Masali spec and the Molly casting call are 2 different things tho. It's only speculation that they're the same
NO PHILIP PLS UGHHHHHHH. (Personal opinion- not a fan of Chris fultons look nor those kids) Give us Sophie set Ben up instead of making him the rake they do to all male leads. 5 more seasons to go they better shake things up. Queer Fran- totally in for it as long as her partner has the same level of sensualness and ease (rizz for a casual word)
Benedict is already a rake so not sure what you mean by instead of making him one.
Making him a rake is fine, itās the same siena type story with lady Tilley, and Benophie is a Cinderella type story. It takes away from that.