Why are romantic comedies so awful?
Among the most fundamental obligations of romantic comedy is that there must be an obstacle to nuptial bliss for the budding couple to overcome. And, put simply, such obstacles are getting harder and harder to come by. They used to lie thick on the ground: parental disapproval, difference in social class, a promise made to another. But society has spent decades busily uprooting any impediment to the marriage of true minds. Love is increasingly presumed—perhaps in Hollywood most of all—to transcend class, profession, faith, age, race, gender, and (on occasion) marital status.
When Sydney Pollack, for example, made the disastrous decision to update the Billy Wilder classic Sabrina in 1995, one of the remake’s (many) flaws was its failure to modernize the obsolete dilemma of the rags-and-riches romance. As Samuel Taylor, who wrote the original Broadway play and collaborated on Wilder’s script, told The New Yorker at the time, “If they really wanted to make it interesting, they’d find a really good black actress to play [Sabrina].” Eighteen years later, of course, that wouldn’t be enough. She’d have to be a mummy.
Perhaps the most obvious social constraint that’s fallen by the wayside is also the most significant: the taboo against premarital sex. There was a time when carnal knowledge was the (implied) endpoint of the romantic comedy; today, it’s just as likely to be the opening premise. In 2005’s A Lot Like Love—a dull, joyless rip-off of When Harry Met Sally—Amanda Peet and Ashton Kutcher meet cute by having sex in an airplane lavatory before they’ve spoken a single word to each other. Where’s a film to go when the “happy ending” takes place at the beginning?









Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Because American film writers write only to make 10-year-olds laugh. So, its all pee pee, doo doo, and butt jokes.
Warner Todd Huston on February 22, 2013 at 9:47 PM
Because there’s nothing funny about romance, and there’s nothing romantic about comedy.
James on February 22, 2013 at 9:52 PM
What’s love got to do with it?
OldEnglish on February 22, 2013 at 10:08 PM
We have a winner.
Exactly.
Just not funny.
CW on February 22, 2013 at 10:16 PM
Well, for one thing, Cary Grant’s not around anymore.
SagebrushPuppet on February 22, 2013 at 10:17 PM
You said what I was going to say far better than I could have with far less words.
Chaz706 on February 22, 2013 at 10:26 PM
You’ve never talked to my better half. She laughs all the time.
CW on February 22, 2013 at 10:27 PM
It’s not that the obstacles are harder to come by. It’s that they always make the obstacle be the two people themselves, rather than something external to them.
It’s far more interesting watching two people trying to overcome a mutual obstacle which keeps them apart, than resolve the obstacle created when one of them does something boorish, then makes a fake apology, declares their undying love, and it’s all better and we can roll credits.
The standard romcom plot line is that everything proceeds as if upon rails until near the end, where there is a devastating separation caused by the actions of one or both characters, and the big issue is whether they will forgive each other in time before some other terrible plot device–generally one of them getting married to someone else or somesuch–keeps them apart forever.
Capra really understood that the conflict needed to come from outside the two characters. It may be true that the traditional societal boundaries made handy conflicts, but that’s not to say writers couldn’t come up with them now.
TexasDan on February 22, 2013 at 10:37 PM
Everything you need to know about RomCom suckage is in Red Letter Media’s What’s Your Number review.
Dongemaharu on February 22, 2013 at 10:53 PM
Are we allowed to suggest that it’s because womyn have terrible taste? I mean, they’re into homosexual sparkle-vampires FFS.
Jeddite on February 22, 2013 at 10:58 PM
Women do have terrible tastes. In almost everything. Indeed, I’d not have a woman who would have me. She’d have no taste.
wildcat72 on February 22, 2013 at 11:09 PM
I’ve ranted about this for a good long while. NOTHING is taboo any more… the only thing writers can think as an obstacle for a couple to overcome is their distaste for each other.
We’ve come a long way, baby. Sigh.
Sarjex on February 22, 2013 at 11:10 PM
Barriers?
Trust me, when little Jennifer comes home with ICE-T in an open 1968 Cadillac with Bling around his neck, calling Jennifer “my lil’Ho” and talking about all his past baby mamas, there is plenty of opportunities for conflict.
It is just hard in that situation to work the story around to blame the White father, but give ‘em time. They were able to make homosexuals “funny” in a non-threatening way to the audience and that is a mental illness.
Bulletchaser on February 22, 2013 at 11:23 PM
Lighten up, Francid. Rom-coms are pure light-hearted escapism. They are date movies. They’re supposed to be insipid and tug on the heart strings.
John the Libertarian on February 22, 2013 at 11:41 PM
Oh, so because womyn have terrible taste. Weird.
Jeddite on February 22, 2013 at 11:50 PM
Not that I’m defending the romantic comedy genre, but why single that one out? You could also argue most comedies period are awful. Same with movies from the action, drama, horror, sci-fi, and sports genres.
Doughboy on February 22, 2013 at 11:58 PM
Any time I think of romcoms I’m reminded of the episode of the Simpsons in which Homer gets a crayon stuck too far up his nose, making him much smarter.
He’s sitting in a movie theater watching a movie obviously parodying a Julia Roberts romcom. During a wedding in the movie two grooms show up, bringing the wedding to halt. Homer stands up to loudly complain about the predictability and poor quality of the movie, getting boos and catcalls from fellow movie-goers, then yells “Is there no room in this world for a man with a 105 IQ?”
JimRich on February 23, 2013 at 12:02 AM
Reading what you’ve written, I agree.
Capitalist Hog on February 23, 2013 at 12:09 AM
ICE-T
ho
baby mama
bling
gold chain
cadillac
You’re a mixed bag of bigotry. Save the BS retort. You make your point clearly by calling out your “white father” grievance and anti-gay weirdness. You pick obvious black-stereotypes drawing parity between them and your odd remarks about homosexuals.
Be careful what you wish for Buddy. My top night-shift earner is like you. He’s um…kinda salty. He has it out for anybody who speaks Spanish or looks remotely Hispanic. Guess which guys his daughter flirts with EVERY TIME she comes in to swap cars or say hi.
Little Jennifer could probably teach you a thing or two about diversity…not that there’s anything wrong with that.
Capitalist Hog on February 23, 2013 at 12:23 AM
Rom com describes the last presidential ballot I cast.
Capitalist Hog on February 23, 2013 at 12:25 AM
Most romcoms are ridiculously fake. A bit of fantasy & escapism is welcome, but with no boundaries it blunts any possible goodness of the movie/story.
In real life, true and proper romance usually occurs within the confines of a marriage relationship – not as a series of “clever” plot devices designed to fatefully bring two people together.
When the rare movie comes out that depicts the life of a married couple, e.g. Julie & Julia, it scores far more points with me than its counterparts – presuming that the story is interesting.
22044 on February 23, 2013 at 1:16 AM
Oh, come on. How do those married couples get married in the first place? Romance can and does happen before marriage and truly great love stores (comedic or dramatic) can be told about how those relationships formed.
MikeknaJ on February 23, 2013 at 1:41 AM
Wait. ‘Battleship’ wasn’t a romantic comedy?
trigon on February 23, 2013 at 1:54 AM
I know all I need to know about “diversity” from the crime stats, the National Felon League and the total implosion of Detroit, Birmingham, Phildelphia, Chicago, Atlanta; books like “White Girl Bleeds A Lot“, and Elderly rape Statistics.
Did you know that in modern times there has never been a rape of an elderly black woman by a White, but that Elderly rape of White grandmothers is common. I quote from the FBI top profiler:
(Special Agent Mark E. Safarik, a profiler in the Behavioral Analysis Unit at the FBI Academy, published in the May issue of the Journal of Interpersonal Violence)
I know all I need to know about “diversity”…spit.
Bulletchaser on February 23, 2013 at 1:58 AM
Your citation can be found at some very interesting sites. By interesting I mean white-supremacist, hate-sites.
But you already knew that.
Capitalist Hog on February 23, 2013 at 5:18 AM
Romantic comedies are “so awful” for the same reason that porn is “so awful.”
The plots suck, and the stories are unoriginal and stupid. But plot and storyline is not the point of either. The intent for porn is to get men off. The intent of RomComs is to get women off.
Nomennovum on February 23, 2013 at 6:53 AM
Brooklyn Decker was the second prettiest lady on the set (after the USS Missouri) and was almost as badly under-utilized.
Alberta_Patriot on February 23, 2013 at 6:59 AM
Because it’s an isolated factory town and they do the same thing over and over again.
vityas on February 23, 2013 at 7:20 AM
Romantic comedies are aimed at a pretty lowbrow audience to begin with so what do you think you are going to get?
tommyboy on February 23, 2013 at 7:32 AM
Fair enough…I’m just proposing an alternative.
Nearly all of the dating/wooing relationships I’ve seen for real that led to marriage – the two people usually liked each other from the get-go. The stories are nice to hear, but rarely approach the fantastical levels seen on the screen.
22044 on February 23, 2013 at 7:54 AM
The first mainstream gay romcom is probably already in the works (if “Boys on the Side” doesn’t already count), and a transsexual one is probably not far off.
Not exactly looking forward to it.
Count to 10 on February 23, 2013 at 8:51 AM
Good point.
There was a time, you know, when romance didn’t happen until after the wedding. “Lady Jane” was fairly interesting, for as short a time-frame as it covered.
Count to 10 on February 23, 2013 at 8:56 AM