#52 romcoms

[ayearofromcoms]

#52: It’s Complicated (2009)

IMDB plot summary: When attending their son's college graduation, a couple reignite the spark in their relationship. But the complicated fact is they're divorced and he's remarried.

Is this an accurate plot summary? How nice of it to explain the title. I’m sure you were asking yourself, “But wait, what’s the complicated part?” 

Here we are. 52 movies and way more than 52 weeks after I watched The Wedding Singer, we’ve arrived at the final movie in my year of romcoms. Maybe I should’ve saved one of my all-time favorites for last, but I didn’t. Instead, I watched It’s Complicated, a movie that dares to ask the eternal question: Alec Baldwin or Steve Martin?

They both have their pros and cons. Alec Baldwin has a lovely voice and says things like, “OMG, I thought he’d never leave.” But he also goes on ill-advised rants, and I think he has a podcast? Meanwhile, Steve Martin is possibly the funniest person alive. But I imagine that he’s exactly like his character in Shopgirl in real life. 

But this movie isn’t about choosing between actual Alec Baldwin and Steve Martin; it’s about Meryl Streep choosing between the fictional characters they play. Meryl and Alec have been divorced for ten years and have only recently begun to sort of get along. Alec Baldwin lives with his consistently barely dressed wife, Lake Bell, and Meryl lives in the most beautiful house you’ve ever seen in your life. Alec and Meryl are able to comfortably hang out with their three grown children (one of whom is played by Zoe Kazan, who I love) and things are going as smoothly as Lake Bell’s shiny, beautiful hair. That is, until the two of them get super wasted at a hotel bar and end up sleeping together. 

Naturally, they begin having a secret affair. Alec Baldwin has zero remorse for what he’s doing to his wife, and only one scene where he appears to feel bad for his wife’s kid from another relationship. Basically, Alec Baldwin just struts around in a suit, looking cool and occasionally/often stalking Meryl Streep. 

And as for Meryl...well. She’s living her Oprah-style best life. Honestly, Lady O herself probably wishes she could live this good. Hanging out with Rita Wilson while drinking white wine, owning a bakery, eating unlimited amounts of pie, and undergoing a home renovation even though her house is already perfect. At one point, Meryl’s like “Finally, I’ll get to have a real kitchen,” but I can guarantee that her current kitchen is nicer than any kitchen I’ve ever set foot in. But whatever. It’s Meryl Streep’s world, we’re all just living in it and settling for inferior kitchens. 

Who will she end up with? Alec Baldwin, whom she can’t seem to stop having sex with? Or Steve Martin, her very sweet and divorced architect? I honestly didn’t know where the story was going, and I was pleasantly surprised where it ended up. Nancy Meyers, you got me again. 

Another great thing about this movie: the ages of the protagonists. I’m actually not sure I’ve watched a single movie with “older” lead characters this year. Usually, romcom leads can be up to 30 years old, and if they’re 30 they’re required to be actively trying to find a date for their sister’s wedding/getting married. The characters in It’s Complicated are in their 50s, and they’re not only surviving but thriving. There’s none of the frantic pratfalling, random sex, or anxiety that’s in most romcoms about people in their 20s. Everyone’s secure in their careers. No one’s dealing with an overbearing parent who wants them to get married. Everyone’s fine on their own, even if they end up alone. It’s clear that a romantic relationship is a nice bonus to Meryl Streep’s already-awesome life that involves plenty of gardening, wine-drinking, and inexplicable wealth (seriously, how successful is that bakery? And what does Alec Baldwin do, anyway?). But she certainly doesn’t need a man, and she creating some sort of elaborate, hare-brained scheme to find one. This is a romcom about a secure, successful, all-around awesome woman, and honestly that’s a lot more rare than it should be. 

Stray thoughts:

-Yet ANOTHER movie in which John Krasinski is present but NOT the romantic lead. This is bullshit. Am I saying he should’ve played Meryl Streep’s love interest? Frankly, yes. I would watch that movie. I wish John Krasinski would listen to me and my romcom pleadings instead of lifting weights and going through a Michael Bay phase. You could be the next Tom Hanks, dude. Wouldn’t you rather be hanging out on a houseboat and falling in love with 2016′s equivalent of Meg Ryan instead of blowing stuff up?? Just something to think about. 

-It’s Complicated made me so excited to have children. Yes, okay, so all of Meryl Streep’s children are grown, but they have such a wonderful dynamic and it really makes being part of a big family look wonderful. At one point they refer to themselves as “the original five” and I wrote it down in my notes so I can start calling my own family that (I won’t do that, but I will want to). 

-This is the first line of Roger Ebert’s review: “It's Complicated is perfectly plausible if you are only willing to believe that Meryl Streep sells a whole lot of muffins.”

Romantic comedy cliches: A montage, a rainstorm, a love triangle, getting high, baking/cooking together, a man who’s an architect

Is this a good movie? Yes, thank God. I don’t think I could’ve ended this year on a bad one. 

Did I like this movie? I actually loved this movie. 

Would I watch this movie again? I would! Rita Wilson, take me away!

Did this movie make me believe in love? It made me believe that Meryl Streep does NOT need a man to be happy, but it’s fine if Steve Martin wants to come along for the ride/enjoy some light recreational pot use. 

THAT’S IT, guys! I can’t believe my year of romcoms is over. Thanks a million for taking on this project with me. It was a lot of fun and, honestly, I think I learned a lot about the structure of romantic comedies. I have a better idea of what it takes to make a good romcom (it’s harder than you think!) and what makes some romcoms suck so hard. This project happened during one of the weirdest, best, hardest years of my life...I wrote my first book, I found out I was pregnant, my book came out, two beloved relatives passed away, and I got another book deal. I had to take a lot of time off from writing about romcoms so this project definitely didn’t get finished in a year, but I’m so glad I had these sometimes stupid, sometimes wonderful movies to fall back on. I so appreciate every single email, tweet, or message I got, even if I didn’t have a chance to respond. 

But I’m not totally done with this blog yet...I’ll be posting lists of my favorite and least favorite romcoms sometime soon. As always, you can find me on Twitter @KerryAnn or send me an email at [email protected]. 

[ayearofromcoms]

#35: The Giant Mechanical Man (2012)

IMDB plot summary: An offbeat romantic comedy about a silver-painted street performer and the soft spoken zoo worker who falls for him.

Is this an accurate plot summary? Sort of. They both work at the zoo! And the movie’s much more about Jenna Fischer’s character, in my opinion.

We’re 35 weeks into my year of romantic comedies and I’m actually developing standards. While I want to make sure I’m getting the full spectrum of romantic comedies--the good, the bad, and The Ugly Truth--I just have a lot less patience now for movies that are unpleasant. This week, I started and gave up on two separate romantic comedies: one because it was sexist, sort of homophobic, and promoted rape culture in the first five minutes, and the other just because it was clearly poorly made. I just wanted to watch something nice. Something fun. Something pleasant. 

Well, I’m here to tell you that The Giant Mechanical Man is deeply, deeply pleasant. It’s about nice people doing nice things. Even the people who do bad things come around eventually after a stern talking to. It’s also about Topher Grace with long hair, but we’ll get to that in a minute. Here’s a picture to tide you over:

Hold that thought, Topher. We’ll get back to you. 

The Giant Mechanical Man begins with street performer Tim (Chris Messina) covering himself in silver face paint to perform as a character known as (you guessed it) The Giant Mechanical Man. The Giant Mechanical Man involves stilts, impressively large pants, and some robotic movement. Presumably, this is Tim’s only job, which is a big problem for his girlfriend. She breaks up with him in a scene that, delightfully, involves Bob Odenkirk. All breakups should involve Bob Odenkirk! 

Essentially, Tim is at rock bottom. And guess who else is at rock bottom? Jenna Fischer’s character Janice, who is fired by her boss Kirk from Gilmore Girls, gets evicted from her apartment, and is forced to move in with her sister Malin Ackerman. So far, Malin Ackerman is 2 for 2 in playing annoying, attention-grabbing sisters in romantic comedies. Janice’s sister and her husband keep trying to set Janice up with Long-Haired Topher Grace, a vision who will haunt your nightmares. 

In their times of despair, Janice and Tim both apply for jobs at the zoo, which leads to them hanging out at work and, eventually, going on a date. Surprise, surprise--they’re exactly what the other needs! They encourage each other to work harder and reassure each other that it’s normal to not have your life completely figured out. 

This is a romantic comedy, so of course there are some complications (some TOPHER GRACE-RELATED complications, to be precise), but you know what happens. Janice and Tim end up together! They’re happy! We’re happy! True pleasantness wins out in the end!

From reading the IMDB summary, or even my summary, The Giant Mechanical Man might sound a little bit like it employs a certain Manic Pixie Dream Girl-ness. Tim just needs someone to believe in him and his street performance art! And while I would’ve enjoyed that movie just fine, the truth is that TGMM doesn’t go in that direction. While Tim’s struggle to figure out what he’s doing is certainly a big part of the film, this is Janice’s movie. Her arc, in my opinion, is front and center, and it’s Tim’s boldness that encourages her to do things like demand a better job and finally, cathartically yell at her sister in a scene that’s very Pam-walks-across-hot-coals. If anything, Tim is a Giant Pixie Mechanical Man, and I’m here for it. 

What makes TGMM so special and enjoyable is the persistent beat of melancholy that thumps beneath every scene. From the gray cityscape to the snow-flurry weather to the beigeness of Janice’s sister’s home, this is a bleak-looking film. Tim and Janice are both adrift in a way that feels hopeless--where do you go when you’ve been evicted and fired, or dumped and discouraged? They’re depressed about their career prospects, their relationships, and their lives in general. It’s pretty dark. There isn’t an uptight career woman or an overgrown manchild or a pratfall to lighten the mood. These are sad, lonely people finding each other, and it’s their quiet desperation that gives the movie a real emotional impact. 

Stray thoughts:

-Topher Grace. Topher Grace. Topher Grace. I’ve always thought he was a cute guy, but it turns out all he has to do to become extremely upsetting is have long hair. I can’t think of him without cringing. He was so overbearingly creepy and weird! It also seemed like he was improvising a lot of his material, which was genuinely funny, so why is Topher Grace not in more stuff? Can 2016 be the year of the Topherenaissance? Make it happen, Hollywood! 

-Chris Messina should be in every romantic comedy ever. He’s already perfect in the many romcom moments on The Mindy Project, and he’s great here, too. Also, he’s almost blindingly cute. Don’t stare at him too long because it’s like looking into the sun.

-TGMM does something I normally hate: it continues the story in the credits. I hate this so much because, like, you already finished the movie. I just think that all the loose ends should be tied up in the actual work, and it seems sort of like cheating to be able to continue the story after already having an ending. But this is one of the very few instances in which it worked for me, because all I wanted was to see Tim and Janice continue being happy forever and ever. Also, more Topher Grace. 

-There are a lot of A+ zoo scenes. Every movie should film in a zoo.

Romantic comedy cliches: An overbearing sister, getting fired, a crappy job, going to the movies, a misunderstanding, an unsupportive ex

Is this a good movie? Yes!

Did I like this movie? I liked this movie quite a bit. The presence of long-haired Topher Grace bumped it up to love.

Did this movie make me believe in love? Listen. Chris Messina could make me believe in a lot of things. 

Would I watch this movie again? I’ve watched it twice since last Wednesday. 

Do you have any movies to suggest for my year of romcoms? Just want to talk about Topher Grace’s long hair? Find me on Twitter @KerryAnn or send me an email at [email protected]. 

[ayearofromcoms]

#21: How to Lose a Guy in 10 Days (2003)

IMDB plot summary: Benjamin Barry is an advertising executive and ladies' man who, to win a big campaign, bets that he can make a woman fall in love with him in 10 days. Andie Anderson covers the "How To" beat for "Composure" magazine and is assigned to write an article on "How to Lose a Guy in 10 days." They meet in a bar shortly after the bet is made.

Is this an accurate plot summary? Yes. I appreciate that this plot summary is so coy. “They meet at a bar. What happens after that? Who knows!” 

We’re 21 movies into this thing and I might as well just call it right now because this is it. We’ve reached Peak Romcom. 

No film can possibly be as stuffed with romcom tropes as this one. It crams the classic “Am I a bet??” plot and the classic “it was all for a magazine story” plot into one movie. And that’s certainly not all! There are approximately one million romcom cliches in How to Lose a Guy in 10 Days, but let’s not get ahead of ourselves. Here’s the plot:

Andie (Kate Hudson) wants to write about politics at Composure magazine (the LOL-worthy last line of her latest proposed piece is “And only then will the people of Tajikistan know true and lasting peace”), but she’s stuck writing How To articles. Her boss says she can write whatever she wants if she just writes a “How to Lose a Guy in 10 Days” piece. And Ben (Matthew McConaughey) is an advertising dude who wants to “break into the jewelry market” (okay), and somehow his boss and coworkers decide that if he can make any woman fall in love with him in 10 days, he can get the job. You know, basic advertising stuff. You see where this is going: Andie tries to lose Ben in 10 days by acting increasingly crazy, while Ben tries desperately to get her to fall in love with him. 

Kate Hudson is shockingly beautiful in a specifically early 2000s way. She’s so thin. She’s a vision in neutrals. Her hair has that curly-hair-that’s-been-straightened-into-oblivion look, but it’s still somehow gorgeous. 

And what’s Andie like? Well, you know that oft-quoted “cool girl” passage from Gone Girl? I think Gillian Flynn based that on Andie. She loves the Knicks! She likes to write about politics! She’s so chill! She loves to eat but stays thin! At one point she says, right before her boss reprimands her for eating a burger too sloppily (and I swear to you, this is a direct quote), “Why do they always forget my bacon?” Is Andie cool, you guys? I’m not sure what I’m supposed to think!

And what about Ben Barry (wow, this movie loves alliterative names)? He’s your classic poker-loving, advertising-dude bro as filtered through Matthew McConaughey. Matthew McConaughey imparts a certain je ne sais quoi to every role he’s in, even a generic dude-in-a-romcom role, and damn if he doesn’t work it. You don’t have to feel weird about being attracted to Ben Barry like you might feel weird about being attracted to Rust Cohle (ahem), but that creepy, confusing McConaughey edge is still there. 

For at least its first half, this movie isn’t really funny or pleasant. Yes, it coasts on the beauty and on-screen ease of its stars, but it’s mostly just uncomfortable. Kate Hudson playing the hell out of the annoying girlfriend gave me major The Office vibes, and it was honestly hard to watch. When she sings You’re So Vain, I was overcome with embarrassment tingles. That’s not a criticism, because she’s supposed to be off-putting and she’s good at it (see: the otherwise terrible Something Borrowed, where she made a totally believable drunk narcissist monster). But it’s hard, at first, to get emotionally invested.

Until, that is, Keith Urban shows up.

Okay, so Keith Urban doesn’t make a physical cameo in this movie (but just imagine if he did!). Andie and Ben end up taking a trip to visit his family on Staten Island, where she realizes that he and his family are great over a climactic game of Bullshit. And then he ends up teaching her to ride his motorcycle in a scene that serves no other purpose than to show us that they’re totally falling in love (and that Andie inexplicably chose to wear a white tank top with no bra to learn how to ride a motorcycle?), all to the soundtrack of this sweet Keith Urban jam. 

And then they have sex in the shower at his parents’ house and it becomes a whole thing. 

But, of course, they can’t just be in love after one motorcycle ride. They find out about each other’s deceptions at a big party, because relationship-ending fights are always better when everyone’s in evening wear. Kate Hudson is wearing this iconic gold dress that would look terrible on anyone who isn’t her when she drops this zinger:

Damn, Andie. 

So how are they gonna patch this one up? If you guessed “reasoned phone conversation,” you haven’t been paying attention. It’s time for a...motorcycle race through traffic to catch Andie before she gets on a plane! We saw almost this exact ending just two weeks ago in Imagine Me & You, and I’m not tired of it yet. 

How to Lose a Guy in 10 Days might have the most ridiculous concept of any romcom I’ve seen so far but, as usual, chemistry wins out. Kate Hudson is so glowingly perfect and Matthew McConaughey is just so weird that How to Lose a Guy in 10 Days doesn’t just work; it really, really works. 

Stray Thoughts:

-I watched most of the extras on the DVD (a Keith Urban video, some cast interviews) and there was one feature that was basically just everyone in the cast talking about how much they love Kate Hudson and how she’s destined to be a star. Did you know she was 22 when this movie was filmed? It’s true! Anyway, while talking about how great Kate Hudson is, Matthew McConaughey says, “There’s something I’ve always said: a girl can’t be a woman, but sometimes, a woman can be a little girl.” And he just lets the statement hang there, as if this explanation will illuminate some facet of Kate Hudson’s character. What does it mean? 

-Like a lot of big-budget early 2000s romcoms, How to Lose a Guy has a bananas supporting cast. Thomas Lennon! Kathryn Hahn! Adam Goldberg! Lilith from Fraiser! Thomas Lennon wears a bowtie, thus fulfilling the romcom’s contractual obligation to feature at least one male BFF who wears fanciful neckwear. 

-Marvin Hamlisch is in this movie! After last week’s Hamlisch-full Starting Over, I was shocked to see him pop up again. Either Marvin Hamlisch is a staple of romcoms in every era or the universe is trying to send me a confusing Hamlisch message. Which one is it? Maybe it’s like Matthew McConaughey’s statement about Kate Hudson: I just have to find my own meaning in it.  

-There is, as you might predict, some dumb gender stuff here. At one point, Andie fills Ben’s CD player with albums by Fiona Apple, Tori Amos, and other female artists that he, presumably, won’t like. But who’s to say a guy doesn’t like Tori Amos? And she takes him to a “chick flick” (ugh) marathon that features Sleepless in Seattle, but I know a lot of dudes who like Sleepless in Seattle. So much of the film is like, “Guys don’t like cucumber sandwiches, but they do love cigars!” when it could easily be a little bit more interesting. Gender norms: can’t live with ‘em, can’t watch a year of romcoms without running into them almost literally every week. 

Romantic comedy cliches: Whew, here goes. A bet, getting into a relationship for a magazine/newspaper story, a “cool girl,” a woman who works for a magazine, a pushy boss, a guy who works in advertising, a male best friend who wears bow ties, a crazy best friend who’s terrible with men, a beautiful leading lady who doesn’t realize how beautiful she is, NYC, chasing someone down (through traffic!) to declare love, someone singing poorly, needing to dry off/take a shower together

Is this a good movie? To quote Matthew McConaughey himself, “All right, all right, all right.” Extract your own meaning from that. 

Did I like this movie? Yes. In other words, if this movie taught me to ride a motorcycle to a soundtrack of Keith Urban, I’d be into it. 

Did this movie make me believe in love? This movie made me develop further weird feelings for Matthew McConaughey, which I don’t appreciate. Life is complicated enough as it is. 

Would I watch this movie again? I would watch the last third, but you couldn’t pay me to watch Andie make Ben buy her a soda at the Knicks game again. 

If you have any suggestions for my year of romcoms, find me on Twitter @KerryAnn or email me at [email protected]. 

[ayearofromcoms]

#16: Baggage Claim (2013)

IMDB plot summary: Pledging to keep herself from being the oldest and the only woman in her entire family never to wed, Montana embarks on a thirty-day, thirty-thousand-mile expedition to charm a potential suitor into becoming her fiancé.

Is this an accurate plot summary? Basically, yes. Strangely, though, I don’t remember 30 days or 30,000 miles being stipulations, but “before 30″ definitely was. This plot summary feels like a lost opportunity for synchronicity.

Pleasant, raspy-voiced robot Paula Patton is back again, but time time as the star of her own romcom instead of a mean background character in Queen Latifah’s. And I’m all for it. Paula plays Montana, a flight attendant with a heart of gold and also a crushing, outsized desire to be married by the age of 30. Why? Well, her mom says you aren’t a lady if you aren’t married by 30, and you’re not a woman until you have two kids. Which...raises a lot of questions (what if you get married at 31? Do you retroactively become a lady or did you miss your chance?). But Montana takes what her mom says as gospel, and she deeply wants to find a man before her younger sister’s wedding.

Luckily, Montana has the best thing you can have in a romcom (besides an arbitrary time limit on finding a spouse): two best friends, one of whom is fun and promiscuous and the other of whom is gay and unrealistically interested in Montana’s love life. Together, the three of them form the holy trinity of the modern romcom (Montana, obviously, is the thin, shiny-haired pretty one who is inexplicably single). I wish I could lie to you and say that I find this cliche tiresome, but BIG SURPRISE, I don’t. I think it’s fun, especially when said best friends are played by Jill Scott and Adam Brody.

After Montana spies on her current boyfriend (and hides in a trashcan while doing it, as all people spying in romcoms are contractually obligated to do) and finds out he has a wife, she goes on an Adam-Brody-spearheaded mission to reconnect with men from her past by “coincidentally” ending up on their flights. Don’t worry about the logistics behind this. Jill Scott is worried enough about it for all of us.

Montana ends up reconnecting with a lot of men, including Twitter friend to all Taye Diggs, but it turns out everyone is awful. But would you believe that Montana just so happens to be neighbors with her childhood best friend, who just so happens to be very attractive? Yes, because we’re 16 movies into this project and we all know how this works by now. He’s dating Christina Milian, but MOVE ASIDE CHRISTINA NO ONE HAS TIME FOR YOU because obviously he’s going to end up with Paula Patton so they can get married and have tons of pleasant, raspy-voiced, robot babies.

So even though this movie is full of running-through-the-airport scenes (I’m not kidding, I think there were at least five), there’s one extra-dramatic running-through-the-airport scene at the end. Everyone at the airport has to work together to make sure that Paula Patton doesn’t lose the love of her life! Adam Brody and Jill Scott have to put aside their constant bickering to help her find a cab! This is the stuff I live for. I’m tempted to say “I wish life was like a run through the airport!” but every time I’ve actually run through an airport, it’s only been because I’m, like, running late for my connecting flight and not because I’m trying to find my neighbor/childhood best friend so I can get on a plane to Paris. 

This movie is probably a great example of the genre for romcom haters to mock. It’s full of cliches. You know from the beginning exactly how it’s going to go. It’s almost offensive in its portrayal of Paula Patton’s desire to get married (but she does have a Taye Diggs inspired feminist awakening late in the movie, so I think it’s more a way to show her character growth than it is a way to reinforce stereotypes). But cliches and formulas are part of what makes romantic comedies so wonderful. I mean, no one’s complaining that the leads in superhero movies always defeat the bad guys. Sometimes predictability is good. There’s nothing new about Baggage Claim, but that’s okay. If a movie has a good heart, it can include all the cliches it wants. 

Stray Thoughts:

-Sorry, Adam Brody, apparently no one in marketing cares that you’re in this movie. He’s nowhere on the cover, and the cover includes Tia Mowry, who’s in the movie for all of three minutes. But Adam Brody and Jill Scott are very, very funny. I laughed out loud at them multiple times. Also he looked like this the whole time:

-Just, like, a sidenote, but how terrible is Robin Thicke for ruining his relationship with Paula Patton? Just something to think about.

-Trey Songz in this movie. He’s okay.

-Baggage Claim might win the award for Weirdest, Most Awkward Sex Scene (so far, anyway). It’s slo-mo, for some reason. And also totally unnecessary. And kind of funny. And it takes place on a boat.

Romantic comedy cliches: An arbitrary time limit on finding a spouse/date, best friends who fall in love, gay best friend, promiscuous best friend, running through an airport (like one million times), trying to hail a cab, a wedding, forced snuggling to “keep warm,” a choreographed dance, a dream sequence, montages galore, spying on someone, someone singing/doing karaoke poorly

Is this a good movie? It’s not necessarily well-directed (so much slo-mo) and it’s full of cliches, but it is very funny. So I’d say...maybe.

Did I like this movie? I LOVED THIS MOVIE. Bring on the cliches, I’m here for them all.

Did this movie make me believe in love? It made me believe that I want Adam Brody to be my best friend. It made me believe that Taye Diggs is weird. It made me believe, more than ever before, that Paula Patton is a robot. And there’s nothing I enjoy more than when childhood friends fall in love, so yes, it did make me believe in love. You got me.

Would I watch this movie again? Yes, if only for the Adam Brody line, “We get it, Gail. You like to bone.” 

[welcometoladyville]

Tomorrow on A Year of Romantic Comedies: Baggage Claim. 

[ayearofromcoms]

#12: Something New (2006)

IMDB plot summary: Kenya McQueen, an accountant, finds love in the most unexpected place when she agrees to go on a blind date with Brian Kelly, a sexy and free-spirited landscaper.

Is this an accurate plot summary? For once, yes. This is a clearly worded, not confusing plot summary. Kudos, IMDB.

This is the first “uptight career lady” romantic comedy we’ve seen here on A Year of Romantic Comedies. How can this be? How have I not encountered this classic romcom cliche yet? I don’t know, but Something New is the perfect movie to introduce this one to us (and I’m sure I’ll get to that awful looking Katherine Heigl/Gerard Butler movie eventually). 

I mean, “She had everything under control...except her heart” is the single best/worst movie tagline I’ve ever read. I couldn’t write a parody tagline that good if I tried. 

Kenya McQueen is living the perfectly sterile life of every other uptight, works-too-much romcom leading lady. Of course, because this is a romantic comedy and no one can mind their own business in a romantic comedy, everyone in her life wants to set her up with a guy. Kenya’s looking for her IBM (ideal black male), but she agrees to be set up on a blind date by a coworker.

But her blind date turns out to be Brian Kelly, also known as Simon Baker, also known as The Guy From The Mentalist. He’s very obviously not Kenya’s IBM, since he’s both white and working class. Kenya’s not interested in dating him, but she does decide to hire him to help her do some landscaping. Oh, did I mention that Brian’s a landscaper? Just a blue-jeans-wearing, dog-having, truck-driving manly-man. In other words, he’s a romcom dream guy. He works with his hands! He eats adventurous food! He’s tough!

Also he likes to make out amongst his landscaping projects:

And wear weird shirts:

And NOT wear shirts:

This doesn’t mean that he’s Kenya’s dream guy, though. As I’ve already mentioned, she’s a cool, put-together romcom career woman who has no time for dating, let alone dating a white guy who’s working class. 

The rich-guy-poor-girl thing has been done to death (see: Maid in Manhattan) and so has the uptight-lady-laidback-dude thing (see: like 50% of romantic comedies). But even though Something New is rooted in all of my favorite romcom cliches, it stands out in several important ways. As Roger Ebert noted in his review, “the movie is, astonishingly, told from a point of view hardly ever visible in movies: African-American professionals.” Kenya’s parents are successful, she’s working her way up in her company, and all of her friends are kicking ass at their jobs.

Something New is, so far, the only romantic comedy I’ve seen this year that even addresses race. Maid in Manhattan breezed past it, and the leads of Hitch were carefully chosen so that race wouldn’t be an issue. But Something New is primarily about the race and class differences between Kenya and Brian, and the movie looks at the tension those differences cause. There’s no denying that Brian and Kenya love each other, but that doesn’t mean that they can ignore all of their differences and expect them to go away. And Brian is a nice guy, but just because he’s not a Huge Terrible Racist doesn’t mean he can’t say some dumb, thoughtless things.

At one point, Kenya and Brian get into a relationship-ending fight because he wants “a night off” from talking about race after Kenya vents about the discrimination she faces at work. Kenya, understandably, gets upset. These are two people who have lived very different lives; they don’t know each other’s experiences, and until they decide to make an effort to be patient with one another, it seems plausible that their relationship wouldn’t work out.

Of course, they do work it out. We can assume that every couple in every movie I cover is going to work it out eventually, right? Brian eventually apologizes, but it’s too late. Kenya has moved onto Blair Underwood, who’s very rich and also loves golfing (in other words, total IBM material). But just as Brian has to realize that he’s wrong in demanding that Kenya not share her reasonable frustrations and struggles with him, Kenya realizes that she needs to care less what other people think and follow her heart. Luckily, her heart leads her straight to Brian and away from Blair Underwood. Sorry, Blair Underwood. You never stood a chance.

The lesson in Something New, I think, is that love doesn’t necessarily conquer all. It takes a lot more than love for two people to understand each other and build a relationship. The leads don’t have to become colorblind or ignore each other’s differences to live happily ever after. And, yeah, it ends with a wedding (my fave!), but it feels earned. I just want Sanaa Lathan and Simon Baker to be happy, you guys. 

Also, this may be a PG-13 movie but it’s still hella steamy. Did you see that shirtless picture up there? There’s a lot of that going on. 

Stray thoughts:

-Sanaa Hamri directed Something New, Just Wright, and The Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants 2. A trifecta of my favorite movies! She also directed a TV special about Prince.

-This is the second movie I’ve watched this year with a dramatic, transformative weave removal scene (the other is Beyond the Lights, which I loved but which is too much of a drama to talk about on this blog).

-This is definitely a romantic comedy, but it’s also the least funny, most dramatic romcom I’ve watched so far for this project. However, it does include Donald Faison, which means that it’s a comedy by definition.

-The last line from Roger Ebert’s review is worth noting: “You'll laugh and maybe you'll have a few tears, that kind of stuff.” He’s right! You will!

-I don’t really understand why the marketing for this movie plays up Blair Underwood. I guess he’s one of the most famous people in the cast (more famous than THE GUY FROM THE MENTALIST? I guess!), but he’s on the cover and he introduced the movie on the DVD I have. Obviously Blair Underwood is a comforting presence who should introduce all movies, but still. I don’t get it. 

Romantic comedy cliches: A guy with a dog, an uptight heroine, a laid-back blue collar dude, hair symbolism, opposites attract, a climactic wedding, running to declare your love to someone, a kiss in the rain

Is this a good movie? Yes! This is a legitimately good movie that’s very rom-commy without being dumbed down. Also, it really stands out from other romantic comedies that I’ve seen and, well, I’ve seen a lot of romantic comedies.

Did I like this movie? Does the guy from The Mentalist like bringing his golden retriever everywhere? That’s a yes.

Did this movie make me believe in love? Yes, and not even in a sappy, unrealistic way.

Would I watch this movie again? Yes.

Do you have any suggestions for romantic comedies I should check out? Let me know! Find me on Twitter @KerryAnn or send me an email at [email protected].

[ayearofromcoms]

Help me out!

If it isn’t obvious by now, I love romantic comedies. A lot. But that doesn’t mean I’m blind to their flaws. One big one is that romantic comedies are almost exclusively about straight, white people.

Maybe this isn’t a problem with romcoms themselves so much as it’s a problem with marketing and the film world in general. When these films are made, they’re often made with smaller budgets and very little promotion. Which, of course, means it’s hard for people like me to find them. 

And that’s where I need your help! I’m always open to romantic comedy suggestions in general, but I’m specifically interested in recommendations for romcoms starring minority leads or LGBTQ leads. And just to clarify, my definition of a romantic comedy is simple: a movie that is primarily about romance that is also funny. 

You can tweet me @KerryAnn or email me at [email protected]. And, to end this sucker with a question: Do you have any romcom recommendations? 

[ayearofromcoms]

#4: Something Borrowed (2011)

IMDB plot summary: Friendships are tested and secrets come to the surface when terminally single Rachel falls for Dex, her best friend Darcy's fiancé.

Is this an accurate plot summary: Yes, unfortunately. 

To quote Pavement, wowee zowee. This was a very bad movie. 

I don't take any joy in this. The point of this blog was never to trash romantic comedies. I love them, you know they're my favorite! (Callback to my post on The Wedding Singer). But I cannot with a straight face (or even with a crooked face) sit here and tell you guys that this was a good movie or a movie that made sense or a movie with a male lead that didn't make me want to violently assault him. 

The premise of the film is already going to turn a lot of people off. Rachel and Darcy are BFFs, but Darcy is a self-centered drama queen while Rachel is a quiet lawyer. Darcy is blonde, Rachel is brunette, and that's basically the level of character description we're working with here. Darcy always gets what she wants and doesn't really take Rachel's feelings into consideration, and Rachel just puts up with it because that's what brunettes do. 

One night, Rachel sleeps with Darcy's fiancé, Dex. Dex has a dumb name and has been carrying a torch for Rachel ever since law school. And Rachel's always had a thing for him, too! So why is he marrying Darcy, who is all-around awful to everyone? It will forever remain a mystery. 

The whole movie is about Rachel and Dex trying to figure out a way to be together, but the thing is...they easily could, if Dex would just break off his GD engagement to Darcy. And why doesn't he? 

The film tries to give us some lackluster explanation, like, "Oh, his mom's super depressed and this wedding is the only thing making her happy," but...that's a dumb reason for an adult man to get married. He's spineless and boring and he just reminds me of any number of shitty dudes who are totally going to break it off with their girlfriend because they're in such a loveless relationship, but they're just hanging on because they don't want to hurt her, you know? 

Is he plotting a murder or falling in love? Who can say? 

Dex is the worst. 

You know who's the best, though? John Krasinski. He has more charm and presence than everyone in this entire film put together. Kate Hudson does a good job of playing a narcissist. Ginnifer Goodwin is an impossibly cute Kewpie doll. Dex is human trash. 

But John Krasinski steals every scene just because he actually has a personality. And when he confesses his love to Rachel (even though it's out of the blue and not even hinted at until five seconds before his confession), I thought, "Whoa, maybe this movie is turning around. Maybe it's not just about a woman falling in love with an awful manipulative monster. Maybe it's actually about a woman realizing she should respect herself enough to stop talking to that monster forever and just make out with John Krasinski, who's cute and nice and, most importantly, not engaged." But that doesn't happen. 

I believe that when you're watching a film, especially a romantic comedy, you have to judge it based on what it is, not on what you want it to be. I mean, Andie was never going to end up with Duckie, you know? No matter how sweet Duckie was or how much you loved him, he just wasn't ever going to win. 

And I know that I shouldn't hate this movie just because Rachel doesn't end up with John Krasinski, but guess what? I do. Dex is a huge nightmare who strings two women along while sleeping with both of them (at first, anyway). He is a garbage person. Why do they both even care about him? What did he ever do to deserve love from anyone? John Krasinski, meanwhile, is charming and sweet and much more fun to watch than anyone in this miserable slog of a film.

I DON'T CARE ABOUT EITHER OF YOU! Try not to look so shocked. 

Was there a lesson in Something Borrowed? Maybe that John Krasinski needs a better agent. But maybe it's that we should go for what we want and not allow the Darcys in our lives to steamroll us. We should stand up for ourselves, just like Ginnifer Goodwin does right after she has a flashback and confesses her feelings to Dex in the pouring rain while still looking super cute. 

But what this movie never does is tell us why we should care. Why does it matter if Rachel and Dex end up together? Dex isn't very nice, and Rachel keeps sleeping with her best friend's fiancé. And why do any of them care about hurting Darcy when a) she's a jerk and b) they're already doing something that's going to hurt her anyway? 

I feel like I should like this movie because the quiet, shy, brown-haired girl finally learns how to stand up for herself and get what she wants. I should relate to that, right? But mostly I just think everyone in this movie should never speak to each other again. Especially John Krasinski, who really needs to find better friends. 

I guess the lesson I actually learned from Something Borrowed is this: you have to make people care. You have to give people a reason to root for the heroine and the hero. And, most importantly, if there's a gun in the first act, then someone better make out with John Krasinski in the third act. 

Stray thoughts:

Any stray thoughts I have on this film could only be expressed as a scream of frustration. 

Romcom cliches: Living in the shadow of a gorgeous BFF, a declaration of love in the rain, BFFs in love, NYC

Was this a good movie? Absolutely not.

Did I like this movie? As the credits rolled, I just shook my head at the screen. I am still full of fury.

Did this movie make me believe in love? It made me believe that all relationships are meaningless and if John Krasinski can't even find love, what hope does anyone else have? So, no. 

Would I watch this movie again? Frankly, I wish I'd never watched this movie in the first place. I very much wish I just decided to watch Just Wright again. 

Next week, we're going to talk about a movie I actually like. I promise.