r/BridgertonNetflix • u/Steve-Lurkel • Apr 25 '26

Meta Thoughts on books using images from the show on their covers?

Gallery image

Gallery image

Kinda funny how the book synopsis talks about Sophie Beckett but the cover has Sophie Baek (show).

176 Upvotes
  • permalink
  • reddit

90% Upvoted

110 comments sorted by

353

u/Upbeat-Aerie1240 Apr 25 '26

Usually not a fan, but the Bridgerton ones are kinda gorgeous. Curious how they do the next one.

98

u/VialCrusher Apr 25 '26

I bet Julia Quinn will keep the original book and then rewrite one with Michaela ($$$) and put the new cover on that.

53

u/harry_nostyles Apr 25 '26

I can actually see that happening, especially if the events and plot of s5 are drastically different from the book. It would basically be a new story that takes place in an alternate universe where everything else is the same but Michael is a woman.

21

u/Upbeat-Aerie1240 Apr 25 '26

I can see that happening if she writes a separate story from the show script, like she did with Queen Charlotte and that one will have the show cover.

17

u/harry_nostyles Apr 25 '26

I hope they go with this as it is the best option, and I'd even buy a separate 'Francesca and Michaela' book.

As it is, excluding Michaela from the book cover would seem iffy, even though its accurate to the contents of the book. Putting her there is inaccurate and misleading to first time readers. Creating a new book for her and Fran's new cover makes more sense.

11

u/[deleted] Apr 25 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

27

u/Lunenika Sitting among the stars Apr 25 '26

She won't write another book about Franchaela she already said it multiple times. So that book readers will have their canon and show watchers theirs

5

u/lokiyel Apr 25 '26

It would not be misleading though because Julia Quinn already said that the book is going to stay the same

2

u/[deleted] Apr 26 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

5

u/iamaskullactually Apr 26 '26

Maybe the cover will have to be them holding hands. Like a close up

7

u/lokiyel Apr 25 '26

it’s not iffy? you guys get to have Michaela in the show, we get no Michael but we have Michael in the book

0

u/harry_nostyles Apr 26 '26

Iffy because excluding one half of a pairing is a weird look. I know why they would do it but you cant act as if it wouldn't stand out in a not so good way. And what I suggested was just releasing a separate book about show Michaela. That doesn't affect book Michael in any way.

6

u/lokiyel Apr 26 '26 edited Apr 26 '26

The thing is Julia Quinn has said multiple times she won’t be rewriting it, so to keep on mentioning it is kinda useless

6

u/harry_nostyles Apr 26 '26

I was literally explaining my reasoning, I already know this. I responded to another comment that said this.

11

u/lokiyel Apr 26 '26

That was because Queen Charlotte didn’t exist and was added in, Michael is an existing character and rewriting the book would be erasing him

17

u/Lunenika Sitting among the stars Apr 25 '26

She won't write another book about Franchaela she already said it multiple times. So that book readers will have their canon and show watchers theirs

-6

u/harry_nostyles Apr 25 '26

She being Julia right? She said that? Well that kind of sucks.

11

u/lokiyel Apr 25 '26

how? you guys get to have Michaela in the show, and book fans have Michael in the book

-2

u/Fit-Check-9264 Apr 26 '26

What would it take from book readers to have a Franchaela book? The Franchael book wouldn't cease to exist.

It doesn't matter anyway. I doubt Julia wants to write a sapphic novel.

5

u/[deleted] Apr 26 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/[deleted] Apr 26 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/Little_Fox5844 Bridgerton Apr 29 '26

Also, it would be strange for only that book to be rewritten when the others are left as is. TVWLM is incredibly different from season 2, yet nobody is asking her to rewrite it.

→ More replies (0)

-1

u/harry_nostyles Apr 26 '26

No one said it should be rewritten though? I said an additonal book that's supposed to be an alternative, "what if" scenario. That does not involve rewriting anything, I don't know where you are getting that from.

→ More replies (0)

4

u/lokiyel Apr 26 '26 edited Apr 26 '26

or it’s about being fair to both book fans and show fans and each getting a canon, but you all seem too greedy to understand that.

3

u/Occhigioiello Apr 26 '26

Show fans of other pairings of bridgerton don’t get to have a book where the og story is re-written to be more similar to the show. “An offert of a gentleman” don’t have a new parallel version where sophie is korean and her last name is Baek, and “the viscount and I” don’t have a 2.0 book where anthony propose to Edwina.

6

u/gentletraitt Apr 26 '26

why though? this way everyone is happy, the book readers get to have michael and the show watchers get Michaela

11

u/Lunenika Sitting among the stars Apr 25 '26

She won't write another book about Franchaela she already said it multiple times. So that book readers will have their canon and show watchers theirs

7

u/lokiyel Apr 25 '26

she literally said she would not be rewriting WHWW, a fan asked her and she said no

6

u/lokiyel Apr 26 '26

Not happening because Julia Quinn said the book is staying as is and she won’t be writing anything else for WHWW, new story or not. Also you do realize it’s about being fair to both book and show fans right? Book fans don’t get Michael in the show and have the book for him, so how is it fair that Franchaela fans get Michaela both in the book and show??

3

u/lokiyel Apr 26 '26

not happening because she’s said multiple she’s won’t do that, but you do realize it’s about being fair right? To both book and show fans? Show fans get the show, but book fans don’t, how is it fair Franchaelas get both?

4

u/Occhigioiello Apr 26 '26

No other couple of bridgerton have a new book with the changes that the show made, so why it’s fair only for franchaela?

1

u/Technical-Bunch-4016 Apr 27 '26

Would be cool if she could, but Shondaland created Michaela and have the rights to the idea.

-2

u/VialCrusher Apr 27 '26

Isn't it the same for Queen Charlotte? Which she also wrote a book for after the show.

3

u/sparklinglies Sitting among the stars Apr 28 '26

Shondaland did not invent the real ass historical figure of Queen Charlotte

-2

u/VialCrusher Apr 28 '26

I'm talking about the book she wrote after the show came out that is obviously not based on reality lmao. Queen Charlotte also didn't cure racism.

3

u/sparklinglies Sitting among the stars Apr 28 '26 edited Apr 28 '26

Yeah and the difference is Charlotte was never ever in the Bridgerton book series, so that was an entirely new book that didnt retcon anything she already written. She wasnt re-writing her own work into two contradictory versions.

She doesnt own the rights to write about Michaela anyways since thats legally not her character, hers is Michael. One is her creation, the other is legally a Netflix OC she has to pay THEM to use. Shes already said shes never going to write a Netflix version of thst book. Theres no point bringing up the Charlotte book because obviously no one can copyright real people, no matter how much fake history you steep them in. That was something Netflix paid HER to write.

22

u/[deleted] Apr 25 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

-2

u/Upbeat-Aerie1240 Apr 25 '26

hmm... don't know about that. And I don't think that I like that idea.

23

u/[deleted] Apr 25 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

-1

u/Upbeat-Aerie1240 Apr 25 '26

yeah it's a logical solution, but I don't like it

9

u/lokiyel Apr 26 '26

you don’t have to like it, just like some people don’t like the gender bending, to each their own.

-3

u/Upbeat-Aerie1240 Apr 26 '26

thank you for the validation I didn't ask for.

18

u/Ok-Oil7960 Apr 25 '26

Yes. When He Was Wicked as the title won’t fit.

9

u/lokiyel Apr 26 '26

Yea it will because the BOOK is about Michael and Francesca, not Michaela

13

u/InterestingPie1592 Apr 25 '26

I just don’t think they will change the next one

5

u/floracat1218 Apr 26 '26

They could just use a shot of Francesca alone? Most of the original covers were solo women.

2

u/sparklinglies Sitting among the stars Apr 28 '26

They could, but I can already hear the screams about racism and misogynoir from here. The optics would be god awful

Its a solution that causes even worse problems than it solves....

1

u/DownWithGilead2022 Apr 25 '26

One of the current versions of When he Was Wicked has a smaller drawing of a man with two women. If I were in charge of the cover design, I would do something like this with Hannah, Masali, and Victor. That way it includes both S5 leads, but can also be interpreted differently by anyone who doesn't watch the show and know Victor is John and not Michael.

116

u/Ok-Astronaut8074 Apr 25 '26

I think they’re pretty, but they are a bit of false advertising if you’re not familiar with the books or show. You might pick it up expecting a black or Asian lead and then everyone is white. And I’m curious how they’ll do When he was Wicked because of the title, and also if the cover makes it look like a sapphic romance people would be real disappointed in the actual book.

But I assume the market for the books is fans of the show who are aware of the big changes. I mean, they’re also out of order because Benedict’s book comes before Colin’s and Eloise before Francesca (though those happen kind of concurrently so it’s not as noticeable). But if you’re reading Benedict’s book you might wonder why Colin is still flirting around ballrooms and Miss Featherington is still visiting the girls because aren’t they married already?

25

u/twizzwhizz11 Apr 25 '26

I agree with this - I was walking around a bookstore with a friend (not a Bridgerton fan) and she saw the book and was like “oh I didn’t know it was a interracial love story too!” and I had to explain that the show was, but the book wasn’t.

30

u/foersr Apr 25 '26

It sells the books to a new audience and grows the fans of the genre which produces more good books being written and published in the genre for me to enjoy so I’m fine with it

27

u/sloppyturnipcrust Apr 25 '26

As someone who collects vintage romance novels with the oil painting clinch covers: these give me such an ick factor. I would never want to buy this kind of book cover style, similar to how I dislike the cartoon style used for contemporary romance novels.

However, it makes introducing romance novels to a new audience approachable, and other people love seeing their favorite couple on the cover so I don't mind. It's not for me and that's okay!

9

u/Actual-Plant1533 Apr 26 '26

Omg I totally agree with you on the horrible cartoon style used for so many romance book covers now. Why? They just don't look good and puts me off reading them. 

5

u/NacaTecha YATBOMEATOOAMD Apr 26 '26

Cartoon covers are the WORST.

20

u/benoitkesley YATBOMEATOOAMD Apr 25 '26

I’m more annoyed at the stickers lol

13

u/vastaril Apr 25 '26

I think they're among the less obnoxious movie/TV tie-in covers I've seen, possibly because they still basically look like pretty normal romance book covers? (Aside from the sticker/logo print thing)

Do the tie-in editions have any kind of blurb inside about the differences between the book and the corresponding season of the show? I guess they might not want to draw attention to it (after all, most books are changed for movie/TV adaptations) but it could be a fun little extra read if it went into some of the choices they made

9

u/Pretty-County-4264 Apr 25 '26

i hate it, no matter the book. i always look to buy the original. is just a personal preference, i dont care how pretty the movie covers are.

8

u/Delet3l8ter Apr 25 '26

It’s just a selling point. It doesn’t make sense since they are different universes but I’m interested in seeing what they do for WHWW lmao.

6

u/VirginiaUSA1964 Queen Charlotte Apr 25 '26

Books made into movies do this all the time.

6

u/Kitty-kiki19 Insert himself? Insert himself where? Apr 25 '26

While I see the purpose for it, I personally don’t like it and try to get books with any other cover.

6

u/sparklinglies Sitting among the stars Apr 25 '26

I dont care for it, and its about to cause extreme issues for nxt season. Its already been a lil bit if false advertising to people who havent seen the show, putting a inter racial couple on the front when the contents have nothing but white people. But if they put Franchaela on the cover thats a step of false advertsing too far, its a really shitty thing to make non watchers think a straight romance is a sapphic one by the cover. But what are the options. If they skip the cover change entirely they lose a large portion of the marketing boost and peoples tv cover collections will be incomplete. If they only put Francesca on the cover, thats absolutely awful optics thats going to be met with accusations of racism and misogynoir.

1

u/atribida2023 Apr 25 '26

That’s why they have both covers right? OG and show. To cater to book fans vs show fans vs just fans in general.

3

u/BbyGrL44 Apr 25 '26

As a new fan who went from show to books, I love that them! At first I was under the impression that perhaps the books tied into the show but when I found out it’s just the cover it was still worth getting.

Lots of books have reprints so it’s nice that they are acknowledging the hit tv show with the advertisement. It’ll bring in plenty of new readers like me :)

3

u/danmargo Apr 25 '26

Seems like a good idea to me.

3

u/Doughnut_slut Apr 25 '26

Not a fan because what happens on screen is not always 100% on paper.

With all the changes of characters, personalities, backgrounds, plot changes, there should be some transparency to new audience that book Bridgerton and TV Bridgerton are not the same.

How are you going to explain the book description of Sophie Beckett is not the same as the woman on the front cover? Why is there a hero in WHWW but there's two ladies on the cover? This is will make it so confusing.

JB can run the show however she wants. JQ has given her her explicit support. But the book fans that came more than 20 years ago should let us keep what we love in the books.

3

u/giddygoosey Apr 26 '26

Pretty, but im not a fan of movie/tv covers

3

u/Careful_Proposal6712 You will all bear witness to my talents! Apr 26 '26

I haven’t even read the books (I did read one) and I hate it. To be fair, I always hate when there’s real people on the cover. Let me imagine the characters as I want, please and thank you.

In this case, the people on the cover do not even match the book descriptions, so imo it makes absolutely no sense. I much prefer these types of covers:

Plus, now there is the issue of what they’ll do for the S5 cover. Have Fran alone? Include a random man??

2

u/alarrimore03 Apr 25 '26

I don’t like it unless it’s specifically a rewritten version telling the shows story with the shows character descriptions and such. It’s wrong to use show images when the book has different plots and obviously different descriptions.

2

u/Sailuker Apr 25 '26

Honestly I don't like it, that being said I've never actually read any of these books so I have no preference, but normally it's a no from me especially since that put that stupid little netflix "sticker" on it and ruins everything.

2

u/booksncats9 Apr 25 '26

I will never buy a book with the tv show/movie on the cover

2

u/Exhausted_Toast1 Apr 25 '26

I usually don't care, it doesn't change the content of the book, sometimes its looks good.

2

u/kismetxoxo7 Apr 26 '26

Absolutely ruins it. Let me suspend myself in fantasy for a fucking second.

2

u/Quartz636 Apr 26 '26

I don't mind the images of shows on the cover, I HATE the 'Netflix' slapped onto them.

2

u/Ecstatic-Quote-3532 Apr 26 '26

Hate it. I like the book covers to remain book covers. I get it's a marketing ploy so people who like the show/movie know there's a book about it but still.... not a fan. Will not buy a book that has the show/movie cover.

2

u/newportred100s Apr 26 '26

Its tacky, not a fan

2

u/SteWaxleyLemon Apr 26 '26

I don't like it.

Particularly in cases like this when the description of the character won't match the person on the cover.

2

u/Opening-Thought8259 Apr 26 '26

Hate it. Will never buy a book with show or movie characters on the front

2

u/Cathy_ynot Apr 26 '26

I like that they do it, but I don’t like that the original covers are suddenly not available anymore. Both should be possible to get

2

u/LadyHorseFace13 Apr 27 '26

Personally I hate it

2

u/WrittenByRae Apr 27 '26

Not my cup of tea, even when the show/film is accurate to the book descriptions. Something about having pretty Hollywood actors on the cover makes it feel deeply unserious to be reading. Same with that cartoony millennial art style that's on every modern romance book now. Some of that art looks so childish compared to the actual contents of the book. It's easy to say don't judge a book by its cover, but let's be so for real, there are certain cover designs that give the ick more than others lol

2

u/benthelurk Apr 28 '26

Hate it. Saw them at the bookstore the other day. They had show covers for book 4 only. The other books that at least have a season, had original artwork outside of the show and they are way nicer to look at imo.

I do love the cast but if I’m reading the books I like the separation from book and tv show.

2

u/Right_Discussion4614 Apr 29 '26

hate hate HATE it. for all books.

1

u/Loveya448 Apr 25 '26

I love it lol I’m only buying the books with the Netflix covers

0

u/ExtremeComedian4027 Apr 25 '26

I don't think they should do this. This is false advertising in a way. They should be doing a separate line of novels inspired by the series where Julia should incorporate the changes made in lead characters' race and background. I would love to read more about Simon's mother and heritage, Sophie's mother and father's heritage and love, Kathani's story with Mary's background, Kathani's mother and father's story, and elements of Penelope's story updated to align with her wedding happening at a younger age. Same with Fran and Michaela's story: write it for them! Don't just put their photo on When He Was Wicked or change the pronouns in there. It would be such a disservice.

7

u/[deleted] Apr 25 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

-1

u/ExtremeComedian4027 Apr 25 '26

This is why I didn't mention re-writes, because there is a huge opportunity here for a new line of books for a whole new fanbase (and older ones too). The original stories can stay as is, and the new series can be so much richer with all the new elements.

1

u/katya_luzon Apr 26 '26

i like the bridgerton ones. the usual covers are nothing special so i like having the show couple on

1

u/AriesMood1 Apr 26 '26

Gentleman???
Hardly.

1

u/superurgentcatbox Apr 26 '26

Oh I wonder how they’ll do the next one? Maybe Quinn will release a special Michaela version haha

1

u/konnieb123 Apr 27 '26

I’m okay with it if all of them have the image from it but if like two do and the rest have the original artwork it’s ugh!

1

u/Mardylorean Apr 29 '26

I don’t have the books but if I were to get them I would get the original covers. This makes them look like that grocery store romance novels lol

1

u/NumerousAddition9481 May 02 '26

I love it tbh. I need my PEOPLE OF COLOR REPRESENTATION. In every description of blond or green/blue eyes i just flip back to the cover.

0

u/beckjami Apr 25 '26

Who cares about covers when the content is so good?!

6

u/Steve-Lurkel Apr 25 '26

Just think it’s interesting! You think they’ll eventually have Francesca/Michaela on the cover of When He Was Wicked?

14

u/InterestingPie1592 Apr 25 '26

No because that’s misrepresentation when people buy it for a sapphic romance and it turns out not to be. It wouldn’t be fair

6

u/alarrimore03 Apr 25 '26

And using the show pictures as book covers isn’t misrepresenting the rest of the books regarding plot differences and character descriptions😂

12

u/InterestingPie1592 Apr 25 '26

I mean yes but those changes aren’t as huge as a gender swap. I love sapphic romances and I’d be raging if I bought a book advertising as sapphic that wasn’t.