“Bridgerton” transports viewers to a different world; one full of operas and balls and without a facemask in sight. It’s an eight-hour respite from the current state of events.

The show, based on the “Bridgerton” book series by Julia Quinn, takes place in London in the early 19th century. It focuses on the wealthy Daphne Bridgerton (Phoebe Dynevor)’s quest to find a suitor. Gossip, drama and romance lie ahead.

At first, the juxtaposition of historical and modern elements threw me off. For example, recent popular music is arranged to fit the time period. As I kept watching, I got used to the contrast. The elaborate costumes and sets accurately reflect the extravagance of high society as well as the impossible expectations set for the characters.

I enjoyed the complexity of the characters because it made me care for them. Their secrets and desires slowly unfold as the show progresses. The relationships between the characters were what really kept me intrigued. Their secrets have the power to bring them together and push them apart. However, many characters border on immature, which reduced my sympathy for them. The Featherington and Bridgerton families compete against one another like animals and the characters are poor communicators in general.

Related Stories

‘The Crown’ season 4 royally surpasses expectations

The casting is well-done. Dynevor conveys Daphne’s innocence as well as her strong spirit. Julie Andrews as Lady Whistledown and Golda Rosheuvel as Queen Charlotte add humor and fun. The incorporation of a racially diverse cast into a historical time period is refreshing.

“Bridgerton” explores sexism and gender roles. The female characters are usually forced into marriages and have to fight for control over their lives. It’s shown that society pitted women against each other. Female characters often put each other down to try to clamber their way to the top. Scenes that depict women being squeezed into corsets show that women at that time felt suffocated, literally and figuratively.

The show misses out on the opportunity to expose class differences. I was disappointed that the cast of characters consists almost entirely of members of high society. It largely leaves out the perspective of England’s poor.

“Bridgerton” lacks substance and is full of clichés and predictable plot lines. Its historical accuracy is questionable, but it’s entertaining. I’d recommend it for someone looking for a frivolous diversion.

“Bridgerton”: ★★★☆☆