So far I have viewed and reviewed 3 romantic comedies for The Rom-Com Project – only 49-99 to go (depending on the time I have). This weekend I had a conversation about my project at a birthday party. One of the party guests immediately and passionately expressed his dislike for romantic comedies and how they’re all contrived, stupid, and “always have posters with two people facing back-to-back with their arms crossed and smirks on their faces” (and then, quite amusingly, demonstrated said back-to-back smirkiness).
His reaction was rather typical of people who I tell about my rom-com project. I tell them I plan to spend a year reviewing romantic comedies, and they usually say, “God, why?” (And after watching something like Valentine’s Day, I’m asking myself the same question.) I tell them that these movies are marketed towards women, supposedly appeal to women, and I want to examine the feminist or social implications of these stories.
You know all this, so why am I repeating it? Because I have another motive for examining the romantic comedy that I’m divulging to all of you now: I’m in the process of writing my own. Two of them, in fact.
I’m not going to reveal the plot or characters or even concepts right now because I don’t want someone else on the ‘net stealing my awesome ideas, so I’ll give you the basic facts: one is a screenplay, the other is a novel that would make a really good movie eventually (but I’m writing it as a novel anyway). The screenplay is a modernized adaptation of a classic text, set in a high school (think 10 Things I Hate About You/The Taming of the Shrew and Clueless/Emma) and the novel is (what I hope is) an original story about grownups (well, people in their mid-twenties. They count as grownups, right?) In writing these stories, I’m trying to avoid some of the contrivances that seem to frustrate people with the romantic comedy genre: namely, the stupid reasons for keeping people apart until the very end.
There’s something inherently problematic with the modern romantic comedy structure, at least in terms of believability. Most romantic comedies center on getting the male and female lead together by the end of the movie. They can’t get together at the halfway point because then the movie will be over, so writers have to construct ridiculous contrivances to keep the characters apart. Usually, there’s some sort of stupid misunderstanding between the two characters that cause the couple to NOT get together, or break up for awhile, until someone makes a grand romantic gesture to win the person back.
Usually, these contrivances are over-the-top and don’t resemble what people do in real life: have a fight and then make up shortly afterwards. The movies where the characters don’t even get together at all are even worse. Those romantic comedies would have you believe that getting together with your true love is really hard where you face seemingly insurmountable obstacles (obstacles that are somehow still overcome by a public declaration of love or chase through the airport). It bears no resemblance to what usually happens in real life: you meet someone you like who likes you back, you start dating, and either stay together or break up and meet someone else.
I’ve noticed that some recent romantic comedies are starting to break away from this formula. Recent romantic comedies like Going the Distance, (500) Days of Summer, and the upcoming The Five-Year Engagement all follow couples over the course of time, where they get together or are already together at the beginning of the movie. The stories look at their relationships after the getting-together phase. I’d like to see more romantic comedies follow this structure.
Still, the more traditional romantic comedy has its appeal. Sometimes they do well commercially despite not being very good, and sometimes they make Oscar history. On the other hand, It Happened One Night was made almost eighty years ago – would that same movie with different stars be as critically successful today? I doubt it. If romantic comedy writers want to bring in the critical praise along with the big bucks when writing a more traditional script, they need to raise the stakes. They need to come up with logical, believable reasons why the two characters wouldn’t get together until the end of the movie.
In other words, they need to reread their Jane Austen.
Jane Austen’s novels have been called the predecessor to modern romantic comedies, and with good reason. All of her books have a romantic relationship at the center of the story, and the main character never gets together with her love interest until the end of the story. Yet all of her books are more entertaining and insightful than most of the romantic comedies we see in film. One of these reasons is obviously because her dialogue and biting social commentary is so witty and clever, but I also think her stories are successful because the characters have actual reasons for not getting together until the end of the story.
Take Sense and Sensibility. When Elinor Dashwood meets Edward Ferrars, he is already engaged to Lucy Steele. They obviously can’t get together when Edward is unwilling to break off his engagement (even though he loves Elinor) because he doesn’t want to leave Lucy in the lurch. Getting married was a very serious business and Lucy could have no future or financial stability if she didn’t make a good match, and Edward wants to do the honorable thing.
Or look at Persuasion. The obstacle that keeps Captain Wentworth from marrying Anne Elliot was their past relationship where she broke his heart after feeling pressure from her family. They haven’t seen each other for awhile and he needs to learn how to trust her again. The conflict is internally motivated and more sophisticated than a lot of romantic comedy films.
Or look at Pride and Prejudice. Elizabeth doesn’t accept Mr. Darcy’s proposal the first time because she just plain doesn’t like him. Some of her dislike is based on incorrect rumors, and some of her dislike is based on the fact that, well, Mr. Darcy can be a total jerk sometimes. They get together only after she’s known him for a longer period of time, where her dislike turns to appreciation which turns into love.
Her other major novels are a little more contrived – In Mansfield Park and Emma, the characters (Edmund and Emma) don’t realize that they’ve been in love with their love interests all along! And in Northanger Abbey, Catherine Morland can’t get together with Henry Tilney because she thinks Henry’s father is a murderer (awwwwkward!) Still, that story is more of a parody of Gothic literature than a straight-up romantic comedy, so it works in the novel.
I try to think of Jane Austen when writing my own romantic comedies. The “teen adaptation of a classic text” screenplay combines the Persuasion method with the Emma method: there’s a past fling between the two characters that ended badly and forgiveness has to be earned, but they are also in deep denial that they have feelings for each other at all (with – I hope – hilarious results!)
The novel I’m writing uses a bit of the Sense and Sensibility method of outside, social problems keeping the main characters apart – but they still get together at the end of the first third of the story. That’s because the story is more about the female protagonist’s struggle to find a work/life balance and maintain her relationship while advancing her career. In fact, you could argue that it’s not a romantic comedy at all, but a coming-of-age story about self-discovery and identity that happens to have a romance as a very, very prominent subplot.
Then again, sometimes I wonder if any romantic comedy will be able to truly reinvent the genre. After all, there are no 100% original story ideas anymore. Most stories follow a particular structure and all stories follow a particular structure to a certain extent. Maybe the romantic comedy doesn’t need to be entirely reinvented in terms of structure. Maybe a romantic comedy can be entirely structurally predictable but still be enjoyable and artistic due to strengths in characterization and dialogue.
Anyway, these are the the things I think about instead of actually working on said novel or screenplay.
Articles
Interviews
Novels, Fiction & Silliness
Reviews
Romantic comedies are my guilty pleasure (guilty because of the un-feminist messages they normally have). I think a romantic comedy can definitely fit the general formula of Meeting-Dating-Break Up due to misunderstanding- Grand Gesture- Happily Ever After and yet still be awesome if it’s funny and the characters are sharp and witty. A feminist romantic comedy is just what I’m looking for!
Feminist romantic comedies are hard to come by, even though the rom-com is one of the few genres where you’re almost guaranteed a female protagonist. How’s that for irony?
I can’t wait for both your works!
I agree that there is a huge difference between Jane Austen’s reasons for keeping her heroines unmarried to the heroes for so long and the stereotypical “I’m not with him because I think I saw him with that slut/I think he is a jerk because he looked at her/I can’t let go of my stockbroker fiancé who i boring and allergic to everything.”
Did you notice that there are no grand romantic gestures in Austen? Mr. Darcy does do a great thing for Elizabeth, but he does not want her to know it, just tries to quietly win her affection. Henry Tilney just does the gentlemanly thing by coming to apologise for his father’s behaviour, Edward comes to propose as soon as he knows he is free to do so, Colonel Brandon’s engagement is handled behind the scenes, as well as Fanny and Edmund’s. Of course, Captain Wentworth does write the letter… but it’s subtler than running around Bath Airport. I think Mr. Knightley came closest to a GRG (the abbreviation sounds like some medical test) by offering to live with Mr.Woodhouse, giving up all his habits and privileges of Donwell for Emma. Henry Crawford’s GRG of buying the commission for William and then coming to see Fanny in Portsmouth is rejected and shown as inappropriate.
Thanks! I can’t wait for them, either. The editing phase is hard.
And that’s a great point about Jane Austen. Mr. Darcy saves Lydia because he loves Elizabeth, but not because he expects to change Elizabeth’s mind or “win her over.” The fact that he doesn’t even want her to know speaks volumes about his character.
Of course, Captain Wentworth does write the letter… but it’s subtler than running around Bath Airport.
And what a letter it is! *swoon*
Henry Crawford’s GRG of buying the commission for William and then coming to see Fanny in Portsmouth is rejected and shown as inappropriate.
A lot of people give Fanny a hard time, and I admit that she gets on my nerves, but I do admire her for sticking to her instincts about Henry Crawford despite the pressure she receives.
One of the methods I dislike the most for keeping the main characters from getting together is having one of them be in a relationship with someone who happens to be a huge jerk. And somehow, the main character doesn’t realize this until the end and then they break up because their boyfriend/girlfriend did something really awful.
Maybe this is to make sure we root for the intended couple to get together, but I feel like it portrays break-ups as a very different thing than it usually is in real life. Most people don’t end relationships because they suddenly notice that their significant other is pretty much Satan.
I agree – that’s one of the more annoying contrivances. We’re supposed to find the characters more sympathetic for being in relationships with jerks, but instead I find them annoying and stupid for being with said jerks.
Some rom-coms try for a different angle, where the love interest is with a genuinely good person who’s just not right for him/her. It’s harder to pull off without making the love interest look bad, but I appreciate the attempt more, at least.
I think you’ve mentioned before that rom-coms are generally no more contrived than, say, action movies or other general genres. I completely agree with that statement, and in every genre there’s gonna be a large amount of movies that are very similiar in formula (that’s why we can have genres in the first place). Doesn’t mean there aren’t movies in the genre that break rules and are actually thought provoking. I’ve found quite a few rom-coms that I feel break out of the traditional mold and actually have new stories to tell. Same as any other genre. It’s just that since rom-coms are generally frowned upon as not good (like romance novels) no one bothers to look any further than the surface or the most recent summer blockbusters (which, let’s face it, aren’t usually a sea of originality on any front). I’ll cruise through Netflix watch instantly rom com selection and find movies I’ve never even heard of that are really very good. Something positive to be said for Netflix streaming generally never having anything new or “popular” in its selection, almost everyting is something I’ve never heard of. A couple of my recent favorites are Timer and My Girlfriend’s Boyfriend. Both very good rom-coms with believable characters and stories that bend and play with the rom-com genre’s cliches.
Honestly, I think the people who scoff at rom-coms for being too formulaic are just people who don’t like rom-coms. I don’t particularly like action movies and I find most of them to be formulaic and predictable. Doesn’t mean I’m going to write the entire genre off simply because I don’t see enough action movies to see any that do not follow the same old tired formula and play with the action genre rules. Plus I hate speaking in absolutes. But then again, actions movies aren’t generally maligned as a whole by our culture, so I doubt you’d get as many people speaking out the same way against the cliches of action and sci-fi and westerns and sports movies as people do against rom-coms. The cliches in THOSE types of movies seem to be seen as noble and good for whatever reason, I guess, since you don’t see the same ire towards those cliches as you do towards rom-com cliches. It’s only rom-com cliches that are stupid and simple minded…
A couple of my recent favorites are Timer and My Girlfriend’s Boyfriend. Both very good rom-coms with believable characters and stories that bend and play with the rom-com genre’s cliches.
I saw the trailer for MGB and I thought it looked a little iffy, but I’ve also found that trailers tend to be worse than the movies themselves, so I’ll check it out. Thanks for the recommendation.
The cliches in THOSE types of movies seem to be seen as noble and good for whatever reason, I guess, since you don’t see the same ire towards those cliches as you do towards rom-com cliches. It’s only rom-com cliches that are stupid and simple minded…
I’ve mentioned this before, but I do find rom-com cliches a little more annoying simply because I expect rom-coms to tell me more about the human condition than an action movie would. I have higher expectations for it, and therefore, I’m more critical when they fail. I’m sure that’s not the case for everyone, though.
I think another successful, believable rom-com angle is a story which actually explores the characters getting to know each other. Maybe they start off as friends, acquaintances, workmates, etc, but then romantic interest grows. “When Harry Met Sally” and “Before Sunrise” come to mind.
Jane Austen used this also… the characters aren’t “kept apart” by circumstances always so much as their feelings grow over time as they get to know each other by being in the same social circle. This is more reflective of reality also. People don’t often immediately fall for someone & are only kept from dating them due to situational obstacles.
Also, if you really want a script to be feminist-friendly, always include some scenes with two or more female characters having a discussion which is NOT about a man or romantic relationship. You probably know about the “Bechdel Test” though.