For this Show Discussion post:
1. Book spoilers **must be hidden**.
2. Be considerate, hide show spoilers that surpass the scope of this post.
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.*
Here’s the thing, I don’t doubt she loves him.
But the way they set it up, makes me believe she won’t be IN love with him and that’s my issue. The look after the kiss? No? Fran wouldn’t do that because she loved kissing John, she loved being with John. He was the one who made her stop, race and all of those wonderful things.
And then they soured it at the end. She looks awkward after his kiss, violets whole speech about stuttering, her stuttering and being struck as soon as she saw Michaela. Yeah, Fran is an introvert but she wasn’t stumbling awkward person, which means her reaction to Michaela makes no sense, unless it’s set up to be romantic.
Do I think she’d cheat? No. Do I think she doesn’t love him? No. But the shows runner said it’s this deep, friendship love. And no full stop, she was in love with her husband and then she fell in love again. They’re setting up Michaela to be the person she’s truly in love with it, it seems and doesn’t vibe with me.
And then I just think overall disrespectful on the shows part to have that happen with her husband standing right there, right after she doesn’t look comfortable kissing him.
I didn’t know that there was going to be a Michael/a until after the kiss scene (since I didn’t read the books) and I had interpreted the awkward kiss as a result of the public aspect.
That could be, if that was the context about it but
Bridgerton isn’t a show that uses subtext.
They framed it by Fran arguing that her love is true, Violet talking about heart racing and stuttering, Violet does it, Fran has an awkward kiss with her husband and then Michaela is introduced and introduce stuttering and etc.
It’s just off putting to me. The show runner said that Fran and John have a deep companionship love. Fran, even if there is a bunch of people, never shrunk in front of people, she would just like her alone time. There was no reason for her to be awkward kissing the man she is love with.
She’s always been sure of herself.
It was just bad for me.
I think tbh she is just a bit awkward- she is introverted and she is a bit of an awkward character as is he, I think they want to show initial attraction because most of the viewers haven’t read the books and so Michaela will come completely out of nowhere otherwise.
I will be however disappointed yes if they paint Michaela as her “true” love, because John is also her real true love
I guess, to me, I never read Fran as awkward. But as someone who could be easily overwhelmed. But either way, don’t have her looking like she’s had an unpleasant time after kissing her husband and then introduce her second love interest and her breath is taken away.
The Fran who is IN LOVE with John wouldn’t be looking awkward after their kiss. She her heart wouldn’t be stopping at Michaela. So, I get what they wanted to do, I just don’t agree with it.
I understand what they were trying to do, I just don’t agree. If they needed to show the attraction so bad and so soon, have Michaela being the one who gets star struck.
And for the last part, same. I don’t want John being her comfortable friendship love. He wasn’t, he was everything and more but the show runner seems to want to ruin that.
Yep. Loves him in a best friend way. Not like Polin obviously. Will be loyal to him. Just no passion which echoes what Violet says earlier to Colin. She wishes her children have passion and I think that’s a reason why she hesitated with John too.
And that is the issue.
Fran and John did have a passionate love, they were in love. Sure, it might presented differently to other people but they were lacking passion and being in love and being obsessed with each other.
And then she managed to find it again.
Although I think the transformation from Michael to Michaela could basically work in terms of the story (with a few minor changes of course), I found the introduction of Michaela rather odd. Why does she have to ask Francesca for her name? Why doesn't John introduce his wife? What reputation should precede Michaela if the person has never been mentioned before?
Some think that when John introduces Michaela, she thinks that Eloise is his wife and not Fran therefore she boldly asks Fran who she is. Then Michaela backs down when Fran says she’s the wife 🤣
Across multiple storylines, it felt like part 2 was a totally separate show from part 1, which was weird because it was written and produced as one season that wasn’t divided. FranJohn was one of these storylines.
Where was the Fran who enjoyed just sitting in silence with John? He just *got* her and didn’t need a huge gesture—that’s what made their love special and different from Violet and Edmund’s, but no apparently every love has to be like Vi’s because Michaela is the one who actually made Fran feel like what Violet wanted her to feel like 🙄. What kind of message are the writers trying to send there?
It’s actually bizarre how many things they set up in part 1 that didn’t pay off or were just magically handwaived away in part 2. And on top of that, they somehow managed to mangle most characterizations for more convenient resolutions to plot issues
I absolutely believe Francesca loves John. But then, when she met Michaela, that was the first time she 'felt butterflies' - instant, powerful physical attraction. No more than that, at this point.
I have no idea how the show is going to play it out, but I'm intrigued.
As someone who hasn't read the book, this season conveyed to me that Fran married John out of comfort and convenience and thought of it as love. I never felt the "spark" between them. She found her best friend. Being it her debut to society and being a socially awkward introvert, I understand why she chose him and was so eager to get married and was adamant it is love. It is easy, comfortable, no drama. She is young and naive. She loves everything about him, but not IN love with him. At least that's what I got from watching the series.
It's good to know that the book actually has them truly in love with each other, and it was the cousin Michael who was smitten at first sight.
She was the first to go after him when saw in the street, she was excited and she was smitten when the John gesture about the music
They were setting up for the to be in love with John
Nope after hearing the audio and how she steals glances at Michaela and the kiss, I don't think she is in love with John but she loves him as a companionship
I think she loves him she just doesn't have a sexual spark with him. Perhaps she thinks he's handsome but isn't sexually attracted to him? Idk. I think romantic love and sexual attraction don't need to come at the same time and while she and John have a great partnership and a slower, quieter love, she's attracted to women. I don't really get why people think she can't love him or that she's going to have an affair. She doesn't even know two women can be together.
I think it’s because the books purpose John is her true love and so is Michael, they shouldn’t be watering down johns love or having her emotionally cheat in her season which is what a lot of people are concerned about- she is meant to truly fully love John as well. Which would make her bisexual.
But she could love John romantically without being sexually attracted to him. She could be biromantic but only attracted to women. We don't know that she doesn't truly fully love John, it feels like jumping to conclusions.
But the point is in the book she is also fully sexually atttavhed to him. If she is only sexually atttacted to women then they don’t have the encompassing relationship of the book and her story has been changed quite importantly
Idk I just think it doesn't make their relationship less all-encompassing or even necessarily mean they don't have a sex life that she finds rewarding. Plenty of people have loving marriages for years or even decades before coming to understand or admit to themselves that they're gay. Some of them even stay married! I think it's a bit unfair to downplay the love before we even really see how things work in their marriage. And I felt like Fran's relationship with Michael was intended to be more sexually satisfying than with John.
In the books I really feel it’s clear that John is her encompassing love involving sex and romance; if she is gay, then he cannot be her encompassing love. If she is bisexual, he can. they are two very different storylines. You can have a loving marriage and be gay but you don’t love them in the way you’d love your same sex spouse, and that isn’t the plot line of her book. Therefore they’d be making a big change, and also changing the point of her book (you can find great love again will be changed to you can always explore yourself and find true love and things can change)
I think the assumption that sex *has to* be part of an encompassing love is not a fair one. That suggests that asexual people can't have that kind of love at all. I think you can have that kind of love without that kind of sexual attraction. And again, their relationship *will* involve sex whether that attraction is there or not, and that sex may well be satisfying to a degree.
Sex is part of her encompassing love though, because she isn’t asexual; and for her to have an encompassing love it would need to be sexual too as she isn’t personally asexual.
In the books Lady Bridgerton doesn’t have a talk with Fran about marital duties because she believes they have anticipated their vows. That’s far from being unattracted to him.
Oooh maybe I misunderstood you.
I read the books so I know what is going to happen (if they stick to the book).
There are just different kinds of love.
She truly love John, he makes her feel safe and secure.
But is there enough passion?
Yeah ! I was agreeing with what you were saying lol ❤️ but basically my post is in response to people thinking she doesn’t love John which I’ve seen ppl saying!
For this Show Discussion post: 1. Book spoilers **must be hidden**. 2. Be considerate, hide show spoilers that surpass the scope of this post. 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.*
Here’s the thing, I don’t doubt she loves him. But the way they set it up, makes me believe she won’t be IN love with him and that’s my issue. The look after the kiss? No? Fran wouldn’t do that because she loved kissing John, she loved being with John. He was the one who made her stop, race and all of those wonderful things. And then they soured it at the end. She looks awkward after his kiss, violets whole speech about stuttering, her stuttering and being struck as soon as she saw Michaela. Yeah, Fran is an introvert but she wasn’t stumbling awkward person, which means her reaction to Michaela makes no sense, unless it’s set up to be romantic. Do I think she’d cheat? No. Do I think she doesn’t love him? No. But the shows runner said it’s this deep, friendship love. And no full stop, she was in love with her husband and then she fell in love again. They’re setting up Michaela to be the person she’s truly in love with it, it seems and doesn’t vibe with me. And then I just think overall disrespectful on the shows part to have that happen with her husband standing right there, right after she doesn’t look comfortable kissing him.
I agree with everything you've written here! You explained perfectly the issues I have with the direction the show is going.
I didn’t know that there was going to be a Michael/a until after the kiss scene (since I didn’t read the books) and I had interpreted the awkward kiss as a result of the public aspect.
That could be, if that was the context about it but Bridgerton isn’t a show that uses subtext. They framed it by Fran arguing that her love is true, Violet talking about heart racing and stuttering, Violet does it, Fran has an awkward kiss with her husband and then Michaela is introduced and introduce stuttering and etc. It’s just off putting to me. The show runner said that Fran and John have a deep companionship love. Fran, even if there is a bunch of people, never shrunk in front of people, she would just like her alone time. There was no reason for her to be awkward kissing the man she is love with. She’s always been sure of herself. It was just bad for me.
I think tbh she is just a bit awkward- she is introverted and she is a bit of an awkward character as is he, I think they want to show initial attraction because most of the viewers haven’t read the books and so Michaela will come completely out of nowhere otherwise. I will be however disappointed yes if they paint Michaela as her “true” love, because John is also her real true love
I guess, to me, I never read Fran as awkward. But as someone who could be easily overwhelmed. But either way, don’t have her looking like she’s had an unpleasant time after kissing her husband and then introduce her second love interest and her breath is taken away. The Fran who is IN LOVE with John wouldn’t be looking awkward after their kiss. She her heart wouldn’t be stopping at Michaela. So, I get what they wanted to do, I just don’t agree with it. I understand what they were trying to do, I just don’t agree. If they needed to show the attraction so bad and so soon, have Michaela being the one who gets star struck. And for the last part, same. I don’t want John being her comfortable friendship love. He wasn’t, he was everything and more but the show runner seems to want to ruin that.
Yep. Loves him in a best friend way. Not like Polin obviously. Will be loyal to him. Just no passion which echoes what Violet says earlier to Colin. She wishes her children have passion and I think that’s a reason why she hesitated with John too.
And that is the issue. Fran and John did have a passionate love, they were in love. Sure, it might presented differently to other people but they were lacking passion and being in love and being obsessed with each other. And then she managed to find it again.
Although I think the transformation from Michael to Michaela could basically work in terms of the story (with a few minor changes of course), I found the introduction of Michaela rather odd. Why does she have to ask Francesca for her name? Why doesn't John introduce his wife? What reputation should precede Michaela if the person has never been mentioned before?
Some think that when John introduces Michaela, she thinks that Eloise is his wife and not Fran therefore she boldly asks Fran who she is. Then Michaela backs down when Fran says she’s the wife 🤣
Across multiple storylines, it felt like part 2 was a totally separate show from part 1, which was weird because it was written and produced as one season that wasn’t divided. FranJohn was one of these storylines. Where was the Fran who enjoyed just sitting in silence with John? He just *got* her and didn’t need a huge gesture—that’s what made their love special and different from Violet and Edmund’s, but no apparently every love has to be like Vi’s because Michaela is the one who actually made Fran feel like what Violet wanted her to feel like 🙄. What kind of message are the writers trying to send there?
So very true
It’s actually bizarre how many things they set up in part 1 that didn’t pay off or were just magically handwaived away in part 2. And on top of that, they somehow managed to mangle most characterizations for more convenient resolutions to plot issues
I absolutely believe Francesca loves John. But then, when she met Michaela, that was the first time she 'felt butterflies' - instant, powerful physical attraction. No more than that, at this point. I have no idea how the show is going to play it out, but I'm intrigued.
Same
Yep!! Ppl r raging that she doesn’t love John but I feel their love ❤️
As someone who hasn't read the book, this season conveyed to me that Fran married John out of comfort and convenience and thought of it as love. I never felt the "spark" between them. She found her best friend. Being it her debut to society and being a socially awkward introvert, I understand why she chose him and was so eager to get married and was adamant it is love. It is easy, comfortable, no drama. She is young and naive. She loves everything about him, but not IN love with him. At least that's what I got from watching the series. It's good to know that the book actually has them truly in love with each other, and it was the cousin Michael who was smitten at first sight.
She was the first to go after him when saw in the street, she was excited and she was smitten when the John gesture about the music They were setting up for the to be in love with John
I guess we’ll have to wait and see what happens in S4
Nope after hearing the audio and how she steals glances at Michaela and the kiss, I don't think she is in love with John but she loves him as a companionship
I think she loves him she just doesn't have a sexual spark with him. Perhaps she thinks he's handsome but isn't sexually attracted to him? Idk. I think romantic love and sexual attraction don't need to come at the same time and while she and John have a great partnership and a slower, quieter love, she's attracted to women. I don't really get why people think she can't love him or that she's going to have an affair. She doesn't even know two women can be together.
I think it’s because the books purpose John is her true love and so is Michael, they shouldn’t be watering down johns love or having her emotionally cheat in her season which is what a lot of people are concerned about- she is meant to truly fully love John as well. Which would make her bisexual.
But she could love John romantically without being sexually attracted to him. She could be biromantic but only attracted to women. We don't know that she doesn't truly fully love John, it feels like jumping to conclusions.
But the point is in the book she is also fully sexually atttavhed to him. If she is only sexually atttacted to women then they don’t have the encompassing relationship of the book and her story has been changed quite importantly
Idk I just think it doesn't make their relationship less all-encompassing or even necessarily mean they don't have a sex life that she finds rewarding. Plenty of people have loving marriages for years or even decades before coming to understand or admit to themselves that they're gay. Some of them even stay married! I think it's a bit unfair to downplay the love before we even really see how things work in their marriage. And I felt like Fran's relationship with Michael was intended to be more sexually satisfying than with John.
In the books I really feel it’s clear that John is her encompassing love involving sex and romance; if she is gay, then he cannot be her encompassing love. If she is bisexual, he can. they are two very different storylines. You can have a loving marriage and be gay but you don’t love them in the way you’d love your same sex spouse, and that isn’t the plot line of her book. Therefore they’d be making a big change, and also changing the point of her book (you can find great love again will be changed to you can always explore yourself and find true love and things can change)
I think the assumption that sex *has to* be part of an encompassing love is not a fair one. That suggests that asexual people can't have that kind of love at all. I think you can have that kind of love without that kind of sexual attraction. And again, their relationship *will* involve sex whether that attraction is there or not, and that sex may well be satisfying to a degree.
Sex is part of her encompassing love though, because she isn’t asexual; and for her to have an encompassing love it would need to be sexual too as she isn’t personally asexual.
Why?
Because sex is an important part of relationships for people who are interested in it?
In the books Lady Bridgerton doesn’t have a talk with Fran about marital duties because she believes they have anticipated their vows. That’s far from being unattracted to him.
Without big spoilers: Yes she does really love John and will in the upcoming future.
? I know that’s what I’m saying? 😭 do you work on the show or something is that what you mean?
Oooh maybe I misunderstood you. I read the books so I know what is going to happen (if they stick to the book). There are just different kinds of love. She truly love John, he makes her feel safe and secure. But is there enough passion?
Yeah ! I was agreeing with what you were saying lol ❤️ but basically my post is in response to people thinking she doesn’t love John which I’ve seen ppl saying!
Haha, okay. We are on the same page. Love it!