As far as real RomComs go, I have to admit I was really tickled by Music and Lyrics, and French Kiss is a fantastically funny film.
What can I say, happy endings depress me.
I really can’t stand movies where rich people have immensely trivial problems, and the first rule of romantic comedies is that while there might be a poor character, that character doesn’t have money problems. They are happy and proud to be poor and self-sufficient, and they don’t need your money.
Oh, I miss The Wire so badly.
Struggles with poverty, malnutrition, and classism in America are fucking hysterical. There need to be more movies about poor people!
So “The Breakup” is kind of like the opposite of “High Fidelity”? As brilliant as that film is, each time I watch it I’m bothered by the fact that it concludes with Cusack’s character getting back together with Laura. Aside from one scene where he outlines the top five things he liked about her, I never really understood their connection. The cute music critic he meets near the end would be a much better match for him, and a more fitting conclusion would be his character finally getting over his past relationship and moving on. The ending of “Swingers” pulled this off perfectly with Jon Favreau hanging up on his ex just as she’s saying “I love you”.
“Reality Bites” also suffers from this same problem. I watched it again recently now that I’m married and ostensibly more “grown up” after not seeing it since I was in my early 20s, and it struck me that Ben Stiller’s character really got a raw deal. I just don’t understand why the writer made him into such a chump at the end and why Wynona Ryder hooked up with Ethan Hawke, a relationship that is undoubtedly doomed for failure.
Hey, “Say Anything” was pretty much a slacker romantic comedy, too, now that I think about it…
My first thought after reading that New Yorker article is that its failure to mention “Say Anything” was a glaring omission, given that it established the archetypes for the slacker romantic comedy. Lloyd Dobbler doesn’t want to “buy anything, sell anything, or process anything” and his career ambition is to become a professional kickboxer; Diane Court is a Rhodes Scholar. True to the article’s description, when he’s dumped, Cusack hangs out in a 7-11 parking lot with “the guys” who give him this sage advice:
Denny: Man, all you gotta do is find a girl that looks just like her, nail her, and then dump her, man. Get her of your mind.
Mark: Your only mistake is that you didn’t dump her first. Diane Court is a show pony. You need a stallion, my friend. Walk with us and you walk tall.
Luke: Bitches, man.
Comedies like these makes me glad that there are real comedies like Hot Fuzz that contain actual humor not saccharine bullshit.
(although Shawn of the Dead did have the slacker get the girl…)
Yeah, Ethan was so cool and honest to himself and was not going to bow to society’s demands of him with lines like, “And Mr. Brady died of AIDS”. But then, a lot of people have lofty ideals growing up and then realize to support a family and basically survive you cannot eat noodles and play your guitar forever.
Was going to interject Music and Lyrics myself. Seemed to me to be a very ‘throwback’ sort of RomCom at heart and not what RomComs have become according to the article.
Isn’t that what I said? For that matter, don’t chicks fantasize about bagging someone out of their league? Wasn’t that the appeal of “16 Candles” way back when?
But I didn’t make my original point clearly: “romantic comedy” is a genre which is typically marketed towards women (i.e., part of the the so-called “chick flick” pantheon); and yet there are a surprising number of these “scruffy guy bags hot babe” RomCom flicks these days, which are clearly geared more towards male fantasies than female ones. Compare the male leads from “40-Year-Old Virgin” or “Knocked Up” to, say, the aforementioned “No Reservations.” It’s clear Aaron Eckhart’s character isn’t meant to be some emotionally stunted (if sweet-natured) man-child like Carrell or Rogan are.
I think it’s also safe to bet that these “romantic comedies for guys” tend to have more crude humor than the ones aimed at women: e.g., the Farrelly brothers.
I just find it a curious trend, is all.
Curiously enough, I thought SotD did a better job of showing the main protagonist maturing than “real” slacker RomComs: he becomes brave, assertive, and decisive; he toughens up the way only a zombie invasion can force a man to toughen up.
I don’t consider 40 Year Old Virgin and Knocked Up to be RomComs any more than High Fidelity or Swingers, though. I think the author of this article is really painting with a goddamn 18" heavy-nap roller when he calls these movies romantic comedies.
With French Kiss or Music and Lyrics, the romance is the heart of the movie, and it’s a comedy.
40 Year Old Virgin may have heart, and a better developed sense of romance that most juvenile, fart-joke comedies, but in the end, it’s a comedy that contains romance elements, not the other way around.
Call 40 Year a Romcom, and you might as well say that Wedding Crashers is too. And if you make that argument, then you’re right off your rocker as far as I’m concerned.
Wedding Crashers is very much a romantic comedy. It’s boy meets girl, boy loses girl, boy gets girl back at the end, standard stuff. It starts out as more of a sex comedy but it really fully mutates into romantic comedy by the end of it.
Clearly you have a narrower definition of “romantic comedy” than some of us do. Apart from having romance and humor, what does it take to be a RomCom?
Okay, bad example. I’ll concede Wedding Crashers enters romcom territory. I don’t know why it’s hard for me to put that label on it though.
That’s because it really should have been just a straight up sex comedy.
I read the article this morning, and I’ve got to say that Denby is bending over backwards to avoid movies that don’t fit in with his thesis.
The 90’s were a renaissance for the “classic” romantic comedy, and Hugh Grant made a career out of it. Starting with Four Weddings and a Funeral and going through Notting Hill we saw a ton of comedies that fit this bill. That travels right through to Love Actually which is sort of a farewell to that era of films.
I’d also point out that City Lights and other Chaplain romantic comedies are about a character “The Little Tramp” who’s essentially the equivalent of the modern slacker.
Finally I think it’s criminal to talk about these kinds of movies and not mention Something about Mary. The Farrely brothers essentially invented this genre with that film. The fact that he doesn’t acknowledge that essentially nullifies the whole article.
Congrats, Andrew, I think you hit the nail on the head.
Methinks this author’s argument can be summed up by two phrases:
“These whippersnappers don’t know how to make a RomCom! Why, in my day…”
And
“ROMCOMS ARE D0MED!”
Do you people actually say “Romcom” out loud? Irregardless, I want to throatpunch you all at this point in time.
You are a monster.
Yay Andrew. I cannot remember a time when I have agreed so completely with you. : )
Every time I see an article where someone is trying so hard to indict something they simply do not like and proceed to painstakingly hand pick facts from here and there to support that dislike, I am reminded of Southern Baptist ministers who like to single out biblical verses to support some act or thought they believe is a sin. The same tired verses are taken out of context and are “artfully interpreted” to support whatever 30 minute thesis is being presented that day to keep folks in their place. Blinders are always firmly in place so that all the other silly little ideas that could be counterpoints are ignored.
Never, ever, read Variety in the presence of people you love.