Featured Posts

Up In The Air (2010) Rating: MMM+ New slick comedy-drama from the award-winning director of Juno, Jason Reitman. Director: Jason Reitman Starring: George Clooney, Vera Farmiga, Anna Kendrick Running time: 109 mins In...

Readmore

Sherlock Holmes (2009) Rating: MMMM Review of 'geezer' director Guy Ritchie's adaptation of Arthur Conan Doyle's classic character (and the world's most famous detective) the inimitable Sherlock Holmes. Director: Guy Ritchie Starring:...

Readmore

Avatar (2009) Rating: MM Review of James Cameron's uber-blockbuster and long anticipated space adventure epic, Avatar. Director: James Cameron Starring: Sam Worthington, Sigourney Weaver, Giovanni Ribisi, Zoe Saldana,...

Readmore

The 53rd BFI London Film Festival - Special Report In a special report for Maz's Movie Memorandum, former Film Editor of Spark* and loyal Werner Herzog fan Ashley Carter looks back at his experience of the British Film Institute's 53rd London Film Festival...

Readmore

Avatar (2009) Rating: MM Review of James Cameron's uber-blockbuster and long anticipated space adventure epic, Avatar. Director: James Cameron Starring: Sam Worthington, Sigourney Weaver, Giovanni Ribisi, Zoe...

Readmore

  • Prev
  • Next

Rom-coms: surely we’ve reached saturation point?

Posted on : 07-07-2009 | By : Maz | In : Features, Films

Tags: , , , , , , ,

4

Watching last week’s Friday Night with Jonathan Ross, I was struck by the eponymous host interviewing Hollywood screen actress Sandra Bullock, promoting her new film The Proposal. In their conversation, Ross and Bullock briefly discussed the romantic comedy genre (to which The Proposal supposedly belongs) and how the name has morphed into the word ‘rom-com’ which Ms. Bullock suggested refers to how these types of films cannot be called ‘romantic comedies’ anymore as they are neither romantic or funny – therefore ‘rom-com’ can be used to categorise them as it represents “a little bit of what they have”.

Katherine Heigl and James Marsden in 27 Dresses

The remarks in the interview certainly ring true when looking at the plethora of ‘rom-coms’ that I myself have been subjected to in recent memory that I can only describe as tedious, throwaway slush that serves its purpose and no more (and can be bought in bulk in 2,3 and 4 disc box sets from many a retail outlet). These films are shamelessly formulaic and predictable, nearly all of which share the same basic premise (boy/girl meets girl/boy, they get to know each other – cue plot device that means that the two have to separate/have a fight/reason that they cannot be together/token ‘betting’ incident  – the problem is resolved and the film ends with the two miraculously and blissfully happy together). Having said this, sadly I am as guilty as the next twenty-something female for actually going in search of this drivel, seeking it out in times of woe, boredom and self-indulgent girlishness. But I have to ask myself why I watch these films, sometimes again and again (or a film that seems like every other one of the same ilk) when I know that they are plot-lite and cliche ridden with endlessly contrived scenarios and poorly scripted dialogue. As Ms Bullock pointed out in her conversation with Wossy, rom-coms are neither funny or romantic. Some of them barely pass as entertainment.

Renee Zellweger as the titular heroine of Bridget Jones's Diary

And I have to say that I don’t really know why I watch them, arguably wasting time (and sometimes good money) on films that I won’t remember in a month. The only reason I can think of is that they are wonderfully escapist and revel in projecting certain ideologies and approaches to life that simply wouldn’t be conducive to reality. But really there is a dark heart underneath all the airbrushed hope and happiness – these films in reality are MEANT to be all the same and to follow their barely-hidden formula. Rom-coms are there to part innocent and unsuspecting women from their money and the sad thing is that some ladies are more than happy to do it. What is worse however, is that these films seem to have an effect on more than just our wallets, as an article in this month’s Marie Claire magazine (“Are romcoms bad for your love life?”, August 2009) explores, there is substantial evidence that suggests that these types of films lead those who watch them to believe in predestined love – which can be damaging to relationship communication. In fact, a BBC News article published in December 2008 stated that psychologists at Heriot Watt University in Edinburgh blame romantic comedy films for promoting unrealistic expectations of love and relationships.

Diane Keaton and Woody Allen in Annie Hall

So not only are these films poor and predictable, they can be damaging to our emotional and psychological well-being too.
The best advice it would seem would be to stay away from the genre, and to explore new avenues of cinematic delight.

Or, if you are glutton for punishment and in the mood for some frothy entertainment with at least a little bit of brain, seek out one of the following (which are actually decent romantic comedy titles):

Definitely, Maybe (2008)
Forgetting Sarah Marshall
(2008)
Knocked Up (2007)
Hitch (2003)
Bridget Jones’s Diary (2001)
Notting Hill (1999)
10 Things I Hate About You
(1999)
Clueless (1995)
Manhattan (1979)
Bringing Up Baby (1938)

If you want a realistic depiction of the highs and lows of relationships, try:

Annie Hall (1977)
Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind (2004)
Sex and the City (TV series)
High Fidelity (2000)

But stay well away from:

Maid in Manhattan
13 Going On 30
The Holiday
Ghosts of Girlfriends Past
27 Dresses
Made of Honour
Failure to Launch
The Lake House
Two Weeks Notice
A Cinderella Story
Simply Irresistible

- the last two are absolutely AWFUL, you have been warned.

Entertainment Weekly has posted a list of “24 Rom-Com Cliches” – check it out to see how many you could live without.

Comments (4)

Missing the point here Maz- Sandra Bullock is strangely attractive- wtf?!? When did that happen?!?!?

I like your observation Pancho, what you say is indeed true. I think like she says, it may be the “good lighting”…

Also I’d quibble about SATC depicting realistic relationships! Carrie’s not a real woman! Most women take their bras off for sex, right?!
http://www2.canada.com/saskatoonstarphoenix/news/story.html?id=b9b79e83-115a-4202-ae4f-5c079df3bd65

Ahhh, high minded debate! Brought to you by the girl who says ‘lol’…

Aha, she does indeed keep her bra on – but surely this is due to no nudity clauses in contracts etc? I do agree with you to an extent – but none of us can say what ‘all women’ do in bed (or life in general), some women may want to remain brassiered in the bedroom.

My inclusion of SATC (TV SERIES) in the ‘realistic depictions of relationships’ list is due to it often criticising and opposing the idea of a Cinderella/fairytale ending which the typical romcom propogates – the characters in SATC demonstrate how relationships are things that require time and thought, with issues never (well almost never) being resolved by partners seeming to know what their other half is thinking.

Write a comment