Harry Potter star Bonnie Wright has announced that she and her husband, Andrew Lococo, are expecting their first child.
The actor, who played wizard Ron Weasley’s younger sister Ginny in the Harry Potter films, took to Instagram to share a photo of herself cradling her baby bump, as she posed next to her spouse. She expressed her excitement over the news in the caption.
“We’re having a baby! So excited to share this beautiful land with them,” she wrote. “What a wild and humbling journey pregnancy is, transforming to make space for new life.”
She hinted at her baby’s due date and acknowledged how thrilled she is to become a mother.
“Andrew and I can’t wait to meet our baby later this year and become parents,” she added, along with a rainbow emoji. “It feels like they’re coming to say hello in the little rainbow orb across my belly.”
In the comments, many famous faces celebrated the soon-to-be parents.
“Congratulations to you both! So exciting,” Harry Potter star Scarlett Hefner wrote, while James Phelps, who played Fred Weasley in the movie franchise, added: “Congratulations.”
Actor Erin Moriarty wrote: “Love you both so much.”
Wright and Lococo first announced that they got married in March 2022, when the actor shared a photo of their wedding rings on Instagram. ”Yesterday was the best day of my life,” she wrote in the caption at the time. “Thanks to my husband!!”
During an interview with Brides last month, Wright shared more details about her big day, which took place on 19 March 2022 at a farm in California. The outdoor ceremony was held “among rows of growing vegetables” and included 110 guests.
The writer, who published her first book, Go Gently: Actionable Steps to Nurture Yourself and the Planet last year, also spoke about her wedding dress, which was 100 years old.
“It only took two visits to the salon and I found my dress,” she said, noting that she got the gown at a vintage bridal shop in California. “It was surreal at first actually making the official decision, but it felt so right and easy.”
However, she said that when she bought the gown, she did have to make a few changes to it, as it was missing its “original underdress”.
“The dress didn’t have the original underdress with it as it had likely perished - it being 100 years old!” she explained. “So when I was first trying it on, it was completely see-through. It was quite funny having to imagine the underdress we would end up making for it.”
