Login

Register

Member List

RSS Feed

Amanda | Contact

Auguste | Contact

Jesse | Contact

Pam | Contact

Next entry: Gov. Bob McDonnell of Virginia and the Confederacy Commemoration Month Previous entry: Interview on the radio box thingie

Ground zero for romantic comedy evil

Movies

Irin at Jezebel has a post up making fun of Hollywood, because there are two movies and one television show in production called “Friends With Benefits”, demonstrating the perennial problem of trend-chasing and lack of imagination in the entertainment industry.  Why oh why is this suddenly the hot topic in Hollywood?  Irin has some ideas:

) Sounds like studios have read too many trend stories about the demise of dating and the rise of hookup culture.

There’s no doubt about it.  But there’s another reason that is much older, but no less troubling for it.  I’d say even more troubling, in fact, in no small part because the source of the problem tends to go without much criticism or push back from grouchy feminist pop culture critics.  The source of this particular evil?

I was shocked and appalled earlier this week when I read Irin’s post about how most romantic comedies are sexist drivel.  No,  it wasn’t because Irin was wrong—-she’s quite right, in fact—-but because rose-tinted glasses exploded all over the comments, as commenters routinely cited “When Harry Met Sally” as an example of a good romantic comedy, the sort of thing Hollywood needs to make again.

Call me daft, but isn’t that exactly what they’re doing?  These fuck buddy movies, for instance, sound like yet another attempt to retread the basic idea of “When Harry Met Sally”, just with more sex.

“When Harry Met Sally” is an inexcusable piece of sexist trash. It fits right into the formula of most sexist romantic comedies, where a woman doesn’t know what she really wants and has to be schooled by a man who knows better than her.  That Harry is a piece of work only makes this premise more insulting.  The movie toys with your affections, too.  Throughout much of it, we’re led to believe that Sally has the upper hand in their disagreement over whether or not men and women can be friends, but in the end, of course, Harry’s viewpoint (that they can’t) prevails.  Along the way, we get some of the most tired stereotypes of men and women ever put on screen—-Harry is a smug asshole, Sally is an uptight princess.  It’s never explained why we should give a shit if these two fall in love or drive off a bridge together.  Feminist beliefs, such as believing that men and women can indeed be friends, are dismissed as childish fantasies.  And you can’t help but think Harry and Sally’s marriage is doomed. 

And yet, it’s held up uncritically as an excellent example of the genre and something all other romantic comedies should aspire to.  But when Hollywood remakes “When Harry Met Sally” over and over again, complete with the stereotypes, the humiliation of the female lead, and the happy ending that doesn’t seem so happy, we’re not happy.  Perhaps it’s time for people who remember “When Harry Met Sally” fondly to sit down and watch it again, without the glint of nostalgia making you more generous than you should be. 

 

------

Registration is now required! We're still in the process of getting it all squared away, so for the moment don't forget to Login or Register using the links in the upper left menu before starting to write your comment.

Posted by Amanda Marcotte on 05:34 PM • (92) Comments

Feminist beliefs, such as believing that men and women can indeed be friends, are dismissed as childish fantasies.

It’s hardly just a feminist belief.  Building a base of opposite-gender friends is part of becoming an adult.  You can’t work in a modern office or have anything resembling a normal social life if you are unable to get past the idea that you need to marry everyone you meet.

Of course, “When Harry Meet Sally” is a twenty year old movie.  I can’t really be shocked that it isn’t up with the times.

Comment #1: Zifnab25  on  04/07  at  06:06 PM

“When Harry Met Sally” is horrible for many reasons. The mosyt obvious, of course, is because Billy Crystal is in it.

Comment #2: Mark  on  04/07  at  06:07 PM

Heh.  When Harry Met Sally was the first romcom I specifically remember making me feel miserable. Not uplifted with a romantic song in my heart and a good-hearted chuckle, but a feeling of ‘gonna die miserable and alone.’ Thereafter, I began choosing my diet of romcoms sparingly and carefully, but if I catch one unawares? Still that chest-pressing feeling of despair… which then morphs into a much healthier ‘fuck you, Hollywood!’

Comment #3: benvolio  on  04/07  at  06:07 PM

WHen Harry Met Sally is only even marginally acceptable if you watch it on the presumption that it’s a movie about two deeply unlikeable people with bizarrely misanthropic views about life who decide they’d rather lie to themselves than be alone.  From that point of view, it’s kind of funny.

But then everybody says “omG SO ACCURATE” and it makes you fear for humanity.

Comment #4: Billingham  on  04/07  at  06:18 PM

Not uplifted with a romantic song in my heart and a good-hearted chuckle, but a feeling of ‘gonna die miserable and alone.’

I think my feeling after that film was, “Jesus fuck, I think I’d rather die alone than be stuck with that guy for the rest of my life.”  Which might be the same thing.

I just got done reading a book about the pre-Production Code movies called Complicated Women and the writer had an extremely righteous rant about how the Code infantilized American films just when they were starting to look at relationships with a more adult viewpoint.  It gave me a new way of looking at those “classic” romantic comedies of the 1940s and 1950s and understanding why so many of them make you want to gouge your eyes out.

(But not Pat and Mike.  That one holds up.)

Comment #5: Mnemosyne  on  04/07  at  06:24 PM

Ehhh… I prefer my rom coms to be ZOMBIE rom coms.  Shaun of the Dead… classic.

Comment #6: Cicero  on  04/07  at  06:25 PM

I think WHMS works as a comedy because of the stuff that’s *not* their relationship. Carrie Fisher is dead funny, and the actor she hooks up with has some good lines, and New York itself looks gorgeous.  The sandwich/orgasm scene, some other funny bits, can keep you going if you ignore the fact that both leads are shallow, unlikeable, and cliched. 

There’s a reason you don’t see them *after* they decide to stay together. Because w/out all the dramatic tension, you would only have two repellent people.

Now, Moonstruck, that’s a rom-com I love, mostly for Nic Cage when he was still a freak instead of a puffy action hero with improbable hair. That whole movie is gorgeous.

Comment #7: emjaybee  on  04/07  at  06:27 PM

That trailer remix is awesome, doubly so because it doesn’t even tamper with the actual footage and dialogue.

I’m not sure which film genre is deader, rom-com or horror.  If pressed, I’d have to go with rom-com.  Modern-day Horror films may be tired retreads and remakes, but at least no one pretends they’re anything else.

Now, who else wants to see “When Freddy met Harry and Sally”?

Comment #8: Sour Kraut  on  04/07  at  06:28 PM

I don’t know when I started to hate Billy Crystal, but I think this movie did it. I always wondered why I squicked at romantic comedies that other (female) people claimed to love; I’ve since concluded that, sadly, we’re starved for even marginally positive images of ourselves.

Comment #9: brettvk  on  04/07  at  06:28 PM

“When Harry Met Sally” is horrible for many reasons. The mosyt obvious, of course, is because Billy Crystal is in it.

whoa, wait

romantic comedies with Billy Crystal in them are awful?

because I will highjack this thread so hard to defend The Princess Bride.

Comment #10: Ferox  on  04/07  at  06:32 PM

Yikes. What in the hell?
I have never met a “romcom” that I didn’t hate - the ones I don’t have don’t really officially fall under that genre I suppose - they have zombies, etc..

Comment #11: Danica Lefse Queen  on  04/07  at  06:37 PM

... I should follow up that _The Princess Bride_ isn’t actually a great feminist film.  Princess Buttercup is a shrew to start with, then has no agency for the rest of the film.  It doesn’t pass the Bechdel Test.  Aside from the romantic lead, the only female characters are Valerie (Miracle Max’s wife) and the queen.  Valerie just likes to annoy Max, and the Queen is the female version of the King: senile for laughs.

Dammit.

Comment #12: Ferox  on  04/07  at  06:45 PM

there are two movies and one television show in production called “Friends With Benefits”

I’m all for the promotion of the FWB option in films targetted at women, that being my preferred type of sexual relationship. Let’s take a look at the synopses…

Natalie Portman FWB project:

So, this movie is Ivan Reitman’s new project the sex driven comedy, based on the Elizabeth Meriwether’s script,  which will star Natalie Portman and Ashton Kutcher as two friends in a solely sexual relationship who develop true romantic feelings for each other.

Or if you prefer, the story is about how men and women who have no problems hopping into bed together can have trouble actually forming a solid relationship.

BZZZZTTTT! Either way, wrong! Let’s try again with the Justin Timberlake FWB project (as described by Jezebel):

A headhunter recruits a magazine editor and since each is too busy to find a mate, they agree to sleep together with no strings attached. Things get complicated when the guy falls for the girl, who’s dating someone else.

BZZZZTTTT! Double wrong answer. This doesn’t even make sense: she’s too busy to find a mate, and yet she’s dating someone. Does the headhunter lose her own job halfway through the movie, freeing her up for her true calling of becoming a Mrs?

The TV show offers more possibilities, perhaps:

Meanwhile, the writers that brought us (500) Days of Summer wrote a pilot about “about five friends who bed-hop while looking for true love” that was greenlit by NBC — also called Friends With Benefits.

If the fact that this is being brought to us by the writers of (500) Days of Summer (previously on Pandagon) isn’t BZZZZT!-worthy enough, the bolded part seals its fate.

Here’s a Bonus FWB Movie from 2009:

One fateful day, a brave Owen proposes the “perfect” solution: Friends (read: no messy relationship stuff)...with benefits (read: insanely messy sex stuff). “Perfect,” that is…if the two hadn’t always been secretly in love with one another

Seeing a trend here? No, no ... these FWB movies do me no good at all.

What these movies are really about is the same bloody thing all rom-coms are about: that the only healthy and acceptable sexual relationship is that between a (conventional, heterosexual) couple that’s in lurrrvvve. Sure, dramatic conventions of conflict require that some protagonists are too kooky/manic/foolish to know better, but everyone “comes to their senses” in the big dramatic finish.

Comment #13: Gracchus.  on  04/07  at  06:46 PM

“because I will highjack this thread so hard to defend The Princess Bride.”

Doesn’t count. Bit part & he was NOT the main character/love interest. I will defend Princess Bride all day long.

Comment #14: Mark  on  04/07  at  06:52 PM

Meh. I love the film. I’m sure there are some aspects of the storytelling that would make me roll my eyes now, but all in all I found the movie incredibly sweet and funny. You can argue that the ending is too pat, too Hollywood, too much of a confirmation that “men and women can’t be friends, ” but the fact that their relationship started as a friends (real friends, who loved and supported each other) made the idea of their subsequent hook-up that much more sweet.

I guess this is why I rarely comment on these sorts of posts here.

Comment #15: Vacuumslayer  on  04/07  at  06:53 PM

Always hated When Harry Met Sally. The funny bits didn’t make up for the awful premise.

I’ll defend Mark’s sentiment, Ferox, because Billy Crystal wasn’t the leading man in Princess Bride. He was hidden under layers of makeup.

Also, is there a good rom com that Meg Ryan has ever been in? I like to call Sleepless in Seattle the stalker movie. The horror remix for that is hilarious.

In fact, I’m trying to think of a rom com that doesn’t come from the 40s I’ve liked. maybe Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind? hmmmm. Could the Princess Bride be considered one? Although I love the movie, the irritating part is Buttercup’s inability to do anything useful.

Comment #16: louC  on  04/07  at  06:54 PM

Meanwhile, the writers that brought us (500) Days of Summer wrote a pilot about “about five friends who bed-hop while looking for true love” that was greenlit by NBC — also called Friends With Benefits.

Uh, wasn’t that pretty much the plot of “Friends”?  Oh, wait, that was six people who bed-hop while looking for true love, not five, so clearly they’re totally different.

See also “Coupling,” which was an American remake of a British rip-off of ... “Friends.”

Comment #17: Mnemosyne  on  04/07  at  06:54 PM

Zif, that something becomes widely accepted doesn’t mean it’s not a feminist belief.  Take, for instance, the idea that women should be paid equally for equal work or that they should be allowed to own property.  There mere presence of women in the work force is not enough for people to be convinced men and women can be friends.  Acquaintances, sure, but friends?  A lot of people in our modern era would balk at what I did last summer—-traveled to Europe with a male friend instead of a female friend as a companion, even though I’m in a relationship.  Hollywood couldn’t conceive of such a trip without it becoming sexual.

Comment #18: Amanda Marcotte  on  04/07  at  06:56 PM

What really pisses me off is when people try to disguise a movie that is an obvious RomCom as something other than a RomCom. I thought Nick & Norah’s Infinite Playlist was going to be a quirky indie comedy about two people who formed a fantastic friendship over their mutual love of music. Nope. Boilerplate RomCom.

Hollywood seems to have taken the When Harry Met Sally truism that a man and a woman can’t be friend because the sex always gets in the way and figured “why bother to even try to prove it wrong?”

Comment #19: Mighty Ponygirl  on  04/07  at  06:58 PM

A Princess Bride isn’t feminist, but unlike most rom coms, it’s actually good and charming.  I’m not hellbent on everything being feminist.  But romantic comedies and sexism are particularly grating, because there’s supposed to be an “amirite?!” factor, and no, they aren’t right.

Comment #20: Amanda Marcotte  on  04/07  at  06:59 PM

_The Princess Bride_ isn’t actually a great feminist film.  Princess Buttercup is a shrew to start with, then has no agency for the rest of the film.

I’ll throw you a bit of a lifeline (in the sporting spirit of Inigo Montoya), because the movie (and the book) poke lots of holes in the standard fairytale narrative. For example, Buttercup isn’t technically a princess because she hasn’t yet married handsome Prince Humperdinck and (as opposed to all good fairy tale heroines) doesn’t want to. And the Humperdinck only wants the marriage as part of a complex pretext for starting an needless war (Count Rugen being the Cheney to Humperdinck’s Prince Bush).

Sure, it all ends with Twue Wuv for Wesley and Buttercup, but I’m willing to cut Princess Bride a break. As you might guess, I’m fond of it. I like Billy Crystal in it, too—it precedes his self-important phase.

Comment #21: Gracchus.  on  04/07  at  07:03 PM

While we’re on the topic, allow me to complain about How to Lose a Guy in 10 Days.

OK, yeah, it’s terrible.  But what pisses me off the most is that although the two main characters have spent the entire movie manipulating each other, it’s the female character who is the one who has to do all the apologizing.  Yeah, they were both “bad”, but she’s the one who has to beg for forgiveness and she’s the one who gets demonized as the biggest bad guy of the movie.

And what was the bad thing she did?  She got in a relationship with this guy in order to prove that she could get him to dump her quickly. 

And what was the bad thing he did?  He got in a relationship with her in order to prove that he can make any woman fall in love with him.

What’s worse?  Going out on a date with someone in order to make them not like you (whether they would have otherwise liked you or not), or going out on a date with someone in order to make them fall in love with you (whether you liked them or not)?  I don’t know about you guys, but what the man did sounds like a horrible thing to do to a person while what the woman did sounds like a silly thing to waste your time on, as it is obviously the easiest thing in the world to make someone NOT want to date you.


And somehow?  This theme of the female half of the romantic comedy having to prostrate themselves for love, regardless of whether they were the “bad guy” persists in many movies.  Another movie that is a guilty pleasure for me is Bring It On.  Boy knows girl has a boyfriend.  Boy flirts with girl anyway.  Boy then gets mad at girl when he sees girl kissing boyfriend.  Girl has to beg forgiveness after finally getting around to dumping said boyfriend.  WTF?

Comment #22: Denise  on  04/07  at  07:10 PM

For some reason a sentence got deleted.  Beginning of final paragraph should read:  “And somehow?  She’s the bad guy.”

Comment #23: Denise  on  04/07  at  07:12 PM

You know, I used to hate the “RomCom” genre too….. Then I got netflix.  Suddenly, there are a whole slew of movies that don’t make me hate the genre- Love and Other Disasters, Carolina, and some old Marilyn Monroe movies (particularly Gentleman Prefer Blondes- Monroe’s rant at the end of “Why shouldn’t I want financial solvency” had me cheering). 

However, I think the difference is the romance is mostly the subplot.  They’re about friends and family mostly, and romance is kind of a tack-on.

Comment #24: Antigone  on  04/07  at  07:17 PM

I liked “You’ve Got Mail”. Any opinions on that one?

Comment #25: Doug S.  on  04/07  at  07:20 PM

Another movie that is a guilty pleasure for me is Bring It On.  Boy knows girl has a boyfriend.  Boy flirts with girl anyway.  Boy then gets mad at girl when he sees girl kissing boyfriend.  Girl has to beg forgiveness after finally getting around to dumping said boyfriend.  WTF?

I didn’t hate Adventureland as much as I thought I would, partly because it seemed to me that they set up very early on that the Kristin Stewart character was already in a relationship (even if it was a secret one) and the hero of the movie was kind of an a-hole for screaming at her for “leading him on” right after she breaks up with the other guy.  IIRC, she didn’t have to apologize, but I can’t remember, so maybe I blocked it out.

Comment #26: Mnemosyne  on  04/07  at  07:24 PM

Also, is there a good rom com that Meg Ryan has ever been in?

I like Joe vs. the Volcano, but I haven’t watched it recently under a feminist lens. Ditto IQ and French Kiss. Sleepless in Seattle did squat for me. I had fondish memories of WHMS BUT can totally see the points above.

Comment #27: PixelFish  on  04/07  at  07:25 PM

I liked “You’ve Got Mail”. Any opinions on that one?

Go watch the original, The Shop Around the Corner.  Margaret Sullavan is kind of grating, but Jimmy Stewart is kind of a jerk, so it all ends up working out.  It’s G’s favorite Christmas movie ever.

For a classic pre-Code comedy from Lubitsch, go find Trouble in Paradise.  Herbert Marshall and Miriam Hopkins are a pair of cohabiting thieves who try to run a con on Kay Francis, but then Marshall starts to fall for Francis, much to Hopkins’ dismay.  It’s especially fun because neither one of the women is “bad” and Marshall is genuinely torn between the two of them, so you don’t know how it’s going to turn out until the very end.

Comment #28: Mnemosyne  on  04/07  at  07:31 PM

You’ve Got Mail was a remake of The Shop Around The Corner (starring Jimmy Stewart). I think that You’ve Got Mail and IQ have problematic bits where the male half of the duo either finds out the score early on and leads the woman on, only to fall in love with them….and that we EXPECT the woman to eventually relent and realise he’s really a good guy. Except we’re viewing this through the omniscient audience viewpoint, when in reality it would really be reasonable for the woman to give him the ol’ heave ho for deceiving her so long. (This is the same problem with The Truth About Cats and Dogs, but I forgive it more in IQ, and less in You’ve Got Mail, and even less in Cats and Dogs.) Lots of movies frame this as expected behaviour though…the woman has to bend and forgive the man because he really has changed, doncha see. In real life….this almost never works out.

Speaking of Jimmy Stewart, I’m reminded that I want to rewatch The Philadelphia Story to see if it holds up.

Comment #29: PixelFish  on  04/07  at  07:33 PM

(This is the same problem with The Truth About Cats and Dogs, but I forgive it more in IQ, and less in You’ve Got Mail, and even less in Cats and Dogs.)

Okay, I’m confused because, as I remember The Truth About Cats and Dogs, the Janeane Garofalo and Uma Thurman characters lie to the Ben Chaplin character until almost the end of the film and he’s rightfully pissed off and kind of freaked out by it.  Yes, he gets a bit of revenge by having the giant dog pull her through Santa Monica but, honestly, I felt like he deserved to after what the two women did.

Comment #30: Mnemosyne  on  04/07  at  07:38 PM

Sorry, I should have said it’s the same problem re: honesty. The genders are switched in that Janeane Garafalo’s char lies to Ben Chaplins char, and I should have clarified that. Generally, it’s the whole Forgive Them Though They Lied The Entire Time thing that bugs me. (Unless the party confesses before being caught, and even then….well….I feel a little itchy.)

Comment #31: PixelFish  on  04/07  at  07:41 PM

Yeah, I can’t think of a romantic comedy that I like that isn’t also another genre.  The Princess Bride, A Fish Called Wanda, Shaun of the Dead - they’re all comedies, and in all of them the primary protagonist ends up with the desired member of the opposite sex - but they’re not really *about* romance.

Well, okay, A Fish Called Wanda is.  The movie revolves around the romance, and Wanda’s kind of a giant Mary Sue (EVERYBODY wants her), but it’s damn good.

I will admit that I’ve enjoyed some of the recent trashy romcoms though.  I liked 40 Year Old Virgin.  I like Coupling, actually (not the remake).  Neither of those admissions makes me feel great about myself.

Comment #32: Ferox  on  04/07  at  07:45 PM

I loved WHMS growing up. I think I’d still like it if I saw it now. I never thought the take away was “men and women can’t be friends,” but rather “if you must date, friends are the best place to look for people to date.” Maybe I was too young when I watched this movie though—I was only 8, so I willfully misunderstood the message? Also, I think they are both meant to be unlikeable in a Seinfeld-y way.

Comment #33: t-ster  on  04/07  at  07:48 PM

Comedy that has romance thrown into it is not a RomCom.  RomComs follow a very boilerplate script. Princess Bride is not a RomCom because Wesley and Buttercup love one another pretty much right away (within the first five minutes) and without that there’s no RomCom conflict. The whole point of the RomCom is the realization at the end of the movie that they *must* be together. Usually the stuck-up one realizes that they need the quirky one or similar nonsense. And in order to be together, one of them needs to make a Big Sacrifice (usually the woman), swallow their pride, and admit that they need the other. For guys it’s usually just admitting that they need the woman. For the woman she has to throw her life away. The point of the RomCom is bringing two people together who desperately don’t want to be together but for whom mutual dysfunction happens to “work out” because that way the audience members can feel validated that their own miserable marriages might just be the same thing: that the schlub you settled for who’s a selfish boor is actually your One True Soulmate and even though your relationship might look like a codependency nightmare to outsiders, no one could ever know the true specialness that is your life together.

Comment #34: Mighty Ponygirl  on  04/07  at  07:56 PM

Generally, it’s the whole Forgive Them Though They Lied The Entire Time thing that bugs me. (Unless the party confesses before being caught, and even then….well….I feel a little itchy.)

Ah, okay, that makes perfect sense.  It’s usually so genderized as “woman has to apologize for existing” that I wasn’t thinking about that being yet another gender reversal in that film, but you’re right, it is.  I admit that the end of Truth About Cats & Dogs bugged me a bit for that reason because I didn’t think her character deserved forgiveness, or at least not as quickly as he did it.

Comment #35: Mnemosyne  on  04/07  at  08:06 PM

I think there’s still some occasional goodness in horror, mostly imports like Let the Right One In and The Descent.

I think my favorite rom-com is the the Hepburn/Tracy jaunt Desk Set. It’s an amazingly progressive movie for the ‘50s, built entirely around the fact that Hepburn was the smartest person in the room So it gave her a character and romance to match, and concludes with a man validating a woman’s professional skills and experiences.

Comment #36: CBrachyrhynchos  on  04/07  at  08:07 PM

I’m reminded that I want to rewatch The Philadelphia Story to see if it holds up.

Holds up?  Are you forgetting the scene where Hepburn’s character’s father blames her for his infidelity because, as his daughter, she didn’t love him enough?  And then there’s the final scene where her ex-husband takes her back because it turns out she isn’t *that* bad.  The movie may not be as sexist as Woman of the Year, but that’s not saying much.

the humiliation of the female lead

You mean the pancake makeup she’s wearing in the NYE scene?

I don’t care what anyone says.  I still love Carrie Fisher in this movie, especially when she and Bruno Kirby make a connection and ditch the losers on a street corner.

Comment #37: keshmeshi  on  04/07  at  08:08 PM

Another message from WHMS: dorky dude so homely he could crack a mirror by looking at it is entitled to Meg Ryan in her prime, groveling and grateful.

Comment #38: Unree  on  04/07  at  08:10 PM

Are you forgetting the scene where Hepburn’s character’s father blames her for his infidelity because, as his daughter, she didn’t love him enough?  And then there’s the final scene where her ex-husband takes her back because it turns out she isn’t *that* bad

Yep and yep.  Cary Grant does manage to play it as Dexter never having stopped loving her and it all being a ploy to get her back now that he’s sober, but you’d never know it by the dialogue the script gives him.

The film also manages to blame Tracy for Dexter’s alcoholism because she didn’t “stand by him” when he was at his worst.  It’s a really, really, really nasty piece of work.

Comment #39: Mnemosyne  on  04/07  at  08:12 PM

My biggest complaint with friends winding up together is when they, or especially the actors, don’t have any chemistry on screen.  Jim and Pam in The Office?  Well, duh, they’d wind up together.  Sam and Tony in Who’s the Boss?  Double duh, it’s only a question how long the writers want to drag the thing out.  But there have been many movies/TV shows, which weren’t even necessarily rom coms, where the two leads get together at the end, and my only response is “What the fuck?”  Strange Days is the worst offender in my opinion.

Comment #40: keshmeshi  on  04/07  at  08:12 PM

MP @34: I actually had a marriage that went exactly like that. Not that I would recommend it…but maybe I should sell it to Hollywood.

Comment #41: Well, what?  on  04/07  at  08:13 PM

I guess, but the main character in WHMS to me was always New York.  The movie has special meaning for my bf and me.  I never bought Billy Crystal as a romantic lead because I find him repulsive.  But I still love the movie.

Comment #42: JennyLI  on  04/07  at  08:18 PM

@#38 - I agree with that.  And don’t forget that same homely dude was beating women off of him everywhere he went. 

That was the suspension of disbelief for me in WHMS.  That Billy Crystal who is not the famous and rich Billy Crystal is not only having no trouble getting laid, but he is leaving distraught, youner, beautiful women in their beds afterwards.  Cause staying over is so icky for him.

No way.  In real life, he’s the nice guy.  A total nightmare, can’t get laid to save his life, hates women. NO idea what possessed them to cast Crystal in that role.

Comment #43: JennyLI  on  04/07  at  08:22 PM

Wait, wait, wait…
There’s an American version of Coupling?  Why?!?!

Comment #44: lonespark  on  04/07  at  08:28 PM

Um.
I think the ending of Strange Days is weird and the hooking up is kind of unnecessary to actually show, but I can’t see watching that movie without seeing the love.

Comment #45: lonespark  on  04/07  at  08:36 PM

I think the main reason WHMS is considered a “realistic” or groundbreaking romantic comedy is that the couple knew each other for years, off and on, before they finally get together. Compared to the “love at first sight” or “fall in love over a weekend” relationships that clog the genre, Harry and Sally are the kids next door (annoying, narcissistic, sexist kids next door, but still).

Comment #46: Dorothy  on  04/07  at  08:38 PM

@lonespark,

Really?  I thought the two actors had exactly zero chemistry.

Comment #47: keshmeshi  on  04/07  at  08:43 PM

OK - Romantic comedies I have enjoyed (although a number of these cross into other genres) :

From an older era :

Arsenic and Old Lace
Pat and Mike
Roman Holiday
It Happened One Night
Sabrina

From (say) 1970 onwards (a number of these have questionable attitudes to the sexes, but arguably overcome them) :

The Princess Bride
Groundhog Day
High Fidelity
The American President
Annie Hall
Chasing Amy
Clueless
Dave
Fever Pitch (Colin Firth version)
A Fish Called Wanda (although more a screwball comedy)
Four Weddings and a Funeral
Getting It Right (obscure British movie with Helena Bonham Carter - fantastic!)
Jack and Sarah
...Say anything.

Comment #48: Aussiesmurf  on  04/07  at  08:52 PM

I do think they are best as friends and Lenny will be years improving himself back to the person she originally fell for, but I don’t know that that argues against thank-god-we’re-alive-and-averted-a-riot NYE snogging.

Comment #49: lonespark  on  04/07  at  08:52 PM

Keshmeshi and Mnemosyne: Well, I’m going to guess from your comments that it evidently does not hold up. I hadn’t recalled those bits….Mostly I remember Katherine Hepburn telling her rich fiance to take a hike and giving the metaphorical finger to society, and I usually dig Kate. But as with many movies in my life, I saw it long before I had a feminist lens to view things with. Hence, me saying that I wanted to check it out again to compare and contrast.

Comment #50: PixelFish  on  04/07  at  08:54 PM

Mostly I remember Katherine Hepburn telling her rich fiance to take a hike and giving the metaphorical finger to society, and I usually dig Kate. But as with many movies in my life, I saw it long before I had a feminist lens to view things with. Hence, me saying that I wanted to check it out again to compare and contrast.

Personally, I’m all in favor of re-watching movies because it’s always fascinating to go back and say, “Oh, geez, I didn’t get that the first time, but how did I miss it?”  So you should re-watch The Philadelphia Story, IMO, if only to see the horror for yourself.  grin  I didn’t even mention the snobbery behind the whole dumping of the rich fiance because he’s not upper class—there’s a whole lot of comedy at the guy’s expense for not fitting in with Tracy’s family because he worked his way up and didn’t inherit his money like they did.

And, actually, the reason you probably remember it the way you do is that Katharine Hepburn is really, really good.  It’s kind of a bizarre experience because all of the other characters are talking about how cold and distant she is and you’re sitting there thinking, “Are we talking about the same person?”

Comment #51: Mnemosyne  on  04/07  at  09:19 PM

I did love Strange Days, and particularly Angela Bassett’s character.  (I was very much in the minority at the time).  I remember walking around for a year or so with a Strange Days shirt and copping endless questions as to whether Strange Days was a new band or something.

“The question isn’t whether you’re too paranoid…its whether you’re paranoid ENOUGH…”

Comment #52: Aussiesmurf  on  04/07  at  09:37 PM

This is what happens in Hollywood: somebody goes into a pitch room and says, “Okay, we remake ‘Annie Hall,’ but with a hotter, blonder actress, a dumpier actor,* jokes that don’t make you think, and the colorful, well-rounded lead characters replaced with cardboard cutouts labeled Man and Woman.”  And someone else says, “Can we make it just a schmear less Jewish so it doesn’t freak out the flyover states?” and we have “When Harry Met Sally.”

In addition to the whole “men and women can’t be friends” thing, WHMS also popularized the phrase “high-maintenance girlfriend,” so thanks a ton for that.

Carrie Fisher and Bruno Kirby are cute as hell, though, and you can believe those characters could form a functioning couple.  The one other clever part is the framing device of the couples on the couch, except that when it ends, inevitably, with Harry and Sally themselves, it’s obvious that they don’t have any of the love and respect you can feel radiating off the other couples.  I give ‘em six months, unless Sally goes for a last-ditch save-the-marriage pregnancy and drags the misery out an extra couple of years.

“Annie Hall” has better footage of New York, too.

*Yes, I know it’s hard to find actors less conventionally attractive than Woody Allen.  Billy Crystal fits the bill.  He’s one of those cow-faced guys it’s hard to imagine having genitals, which makes it all the goofier that his character is supposed to be a super-stud who considers Meg Ryan beneath him as a sex partner.

Comment #53: Shaenon  on  04/07  at  09:44 PM

I have a huge bisexual mancrush on Ryan Reynolds so I’ve seen a bit too many crappy rom-coms recently. I wish he’d go back to making things like Foolproof… *sigh*.

Comment #54: BlackBloc  on  04/07  at  09:44 PM

Mnemosyne: I’ve been having a lot of “OH GOD how did I miss that” as I rewatch movies from my childhood. The latest was Thoroughly Modern Millie….I started explaining the plot to my boyfriend and got about two seconds in before realising, “Holy shit, that movie was really racist.” (Oh, hey, and ANOTHER example of the leading man lying to the leading lady about who he really is. Sigh.)


And, actually, the reason you probably remember it the way you do is that Katharine Hepburn is really, really good.  It’s kind of a bizarre experience because all of the other characters are talking about how cold and distant she is and you’re sitting there thinking, “Are we talking about the same person?”

Yeah. Pretty much.

Comment #55: PixelFish  on  04/07  at  09:54 PM

“Another movie that is a guilty pleasure for me is Bring It On.  Boy knows girl has a boyfriend.  Boy flirts with girl anyway.  Boy then gets mad at girl when he sees girl kissing boyfriend.  Girl has to beg forgiveness after finally getting around to dumping said boyfriend.  WTF? “

See, I always assumed that boy (what’s his name? Faith-as-cheerleader’s brother) DIDN’T know she had a boyfriend. If his sister didn’t tell him, how would he know? I agree its surprising that she wouldn’t tell him, but its a silly movie. His behavior definitely makes me think that he thought the main character was single. Who shows up with flowers and a mix tape if they know someone has a boyfriend? I always figured she was apologizing to him for flirting with him for weeks without ever mentioning that she had a boyfriend, because that’s the only way it makes sense. (Of course, she shouldn’t have to apologize for that if she didn’t mean for it to be flirting, but the implication is that she did).

Comment #56: geogami  on  04/07  at  09:55 PM

And, actually, the reason you probably remember it the way you do is that Katharine Hepburn is really, really good.  It’s kind of a bizarre experience because all of the other characters are talking about how cold and distant she is and you’re sitting there thinking, “Are we talking about the same person?”

So true.  I know there are a lot of smart people with great taste who love “The Philadelphia Story,” but I mostly just find it boring: static and talky in that way that screams, “This was an acclaimed play and we don’t feel like we can fuck with it.”  Add the annoyance of everyone in the movie scolding Hepburn’s character for being too independent and talking about her like she’s a raging bitch when she’s being perfectly pleasant and reasonable, plus one of the least satisfying endings in movie history, and it’s a big pile of meh for me.  It wouldn’t be ranked among the great 1940s comedies if it didn’t have such a fantastic cast.

A lot of the Tracy-Hepburn comedies hold up well, though.  The battle-of-the-sexes stuff is written as two smart, pugilistic people butting heads, rather than a stubborn woman who’d be happier if she’d just let some poor guy dominate her already.

Comment #57: Shaenon  on  04/07  at  10:03 PM

and some old Marilyn Monroe movies (particularly Gentleman Prefer Blondes- Monroe’s rant at the end of “Why shouldn’t I want financial solvency” had me cheering).

I’m a fan of the older set of movies and it honestly amazes me how many times I can watch a movie from the 40’s and the 50’s and wonder how the hell in they end up be more progressive on some levels than movies made today.

Don’t get me wrong most definitely have their problems but the lack of progress (and in some areas back pedalling) is truly mind boggling.

Comment #58: hypatia  on  04/07  at  10:04 PM

What about 10 Things I Hate About You? Does that count as Sexist because Kat is portrayed as an angry feminist, or Feminist because she IS a smart and impressive feminist character, and in the end Heath Ledger apologizes to her for being an ass?

I don’t know if I can defend it against any serious analysis, but I always liked that movie.

Another one that really bothers me in retrospect is Sixteen Candles. I always enjoyed it when I was younger, but now when I watch it I have a hard time getting past the fact that Jake Ryan literally gave his unconscious girlfriend to a horny guy and told him to go ahead and drive her to a parking lot and have fun with her, as long as he got her home in the morning (which he didn’t). And then she LIKES it, so that we won’t be upset! I was always always confused that the nerdy guy acts like he doesn’t remember their night together very well, because he was acting perfectly sober when we saw him last, and we never see him consume drugs or alcohol. True, Jake Ryan’s girlfriend is not a great person, but that in NO WAY justifies raping her or handing her over to someone to be raped. I can’t have any respect for Jake Ryan after that. Even if your relationship is going badly, you should be able to trust your significant other on the most basic level to not go out of their way to hurt you while you’re unconscious in their house.

(How do I do italics and quotes? Is there a page that explains formatting?)

Comment #59: geogami  on  04/07  at  10:04 PM

Let me condense that: In Sixteen Candles, the male romantic lead purposely engineers the rape of his unconscious and drunk girlfriend, and then the movie ends with him and Molly Ringwald happy together.

Presumably he will respect Molly Ringwald and treat her better because she is a Nice Girl, unlike his previous girlfriend, but I’m not so sure I would count on that if I were her. Piss off Jake Ryan and he might think that rape is the proper punishment. But he’ll act like he’s a nice guy while he’s setting it up, and everyone will still like him, respect him, and moon over him.

Comment #60: geogami  on  04/07  at  10:17 PM

What about 10 Things I Hate About You? Does that count as Sexist because Kat is portrayed as an angry feminist, or Feminist because she IS a smart and impressive feminist character, and in the end Heath Ledger apologizes to her for being an ass?

I think it counts as generally Feminist. Kat herself doesn’t change her beliefs, nor does Heath Ledger’s character expect her to change for him, nor would her changing for him be a triumph in the terms the movie lays out. She becomes more flexible as a person, less quick to judge, but she doesn’t abandon her essential beliefs. It’s more like two people dealing with each other on equal terms—Heath Ledger’s char (Patrick) isn’t scared of her, nor is she scared of him, they just figure out how to negotiate with each other as equals. The changes in the characters are more opening them up to being equals.

Comment #61: PixelFish  on  04/07  at  10:31 PM

Also, Joey the sexist pig loses at the end of the movie, and Bianca seems to be getting into a more healthy and happy relationship with the nicer guy. The only downside I see to that is that the “nice guy” totally falls for Bianca at the beginning of the movie as an object—he doesn’t know anything about her, he only falls for her based on her looks, and he commits to a pretty crazy plan to get her before he really has a chance to get to know her. I prefer Kat and Patrick, who are thrown together by the crazy plan but then end up falling for each other slowly as they get to know each other.

Comment #62: geogami  on  04/07  at  10:35 PM

Blasphemer: True, Bianca and Joseph Gordon Levitt (I forget his character’s name) start off based on looks alone.  JGL’s character has this realisation, when he realises Bianca’s a bit shallow, but never makes the connection that he LIKEWISE is shallow in a different way. Bianca at least realises her shallowness and makes an effort to change, but somebody should have smacked JGL’s char upside the head and asked him how he was any different.  (Although I guess a few characters do point out that he doesn’t know anything about her. He just doesn’t listen.)

Still, that’s sort of inline with the source they were referencing and it does actually make a distinct foil for Kat and Patrick’s relationship. (Honestly, I think Ten Things improved on Taming of the Shrew because Kat doesn’t need to be humiliated to attain the movie triumph. Rather she gets support from her sister and Patrick for being who she is.)

Comment #63: PixelFish  on  04/07  at  10:45 PM

I think his name was Cameron?

Well, he is definitely shallow, but he isn’t so ... I don’t know what the word I’m looking for is. What I wanted to say is that Bianca is shallow in liking guys based on looks and social status, but on top of that, she is totally self-centered and expects everyone to do things for her and has no problem taking advantage of them. Now that I say that, I guess Cameron also took advantage of Joey through his whole elaborate plot, but Joey is clearly a jerk to everyone all the time so its hard to care as much. Meanwhile Bianca has no problem taking advantage of everyone around her, being mean to her family and friends, etc. For instance, Bianca finds those pearls from her mother, and just assumes she should get them because they’re pretty on her, when obviously its a very emotional issue between her and Kat. (Did the mother die or walk out on them? Either way it was something very serious.). So I think Cameron has a little less to apologize for, but I would have liked to see him acknowledge that he was not perfect in this scenario. His friend (who I always think of as Bernard the Christmas Elf) does tell him that he is being totally shallow, but he doesn’t seem to really get it. Still, its stated for the audience, so that’s almost as good.

I have never watched or read the original Taming of the Shrew, but I’ve heard that its a lot more sexist than 10 Things.

Comment #64: geogami  on  04/07  at  11:02 PM

What about “America’s Sweethearts” (another Billy Crystal movie!!) I can’t help myself I laugh pretty much throughout the whole thing. Some of it is a bit problematic - Julia Roberts in a fat suit. But it turns out the guy she winds up with was attracted to her regardless of weight.

Comment #65: MissCherryPi  on  04/07  at  11:12 PM

Billy Crystal’s Forget Paris is actually a more realistic depiction of a relationship in the context of a rom-com.

The funny thing about that trailer remix is that I subconsciously began to see Billy Crystal morph into Christopher Walken, who’d be a better choice for the lead of a horror-genre “When Harry Met Sally” movie.

Comment #66: Tyro  on  04/07  at  11:16 PM

I saw America’s Sweethearts in high school and I remember really enjoying it, but I don’t remember it well enough to discuss its true merits.

To get back to the original topic, I always thought When Harry Met Sally was stupid and boring, but then, I didn’t see it until college.

Comment #67: geogami  on  04/07  at  11:22 PM

Aussiesmurf—Getting It Right? In which the HBC character’s bulimia is kinda played for laughs?  It’s romcom as written by a Seinfeld character.  And Sarbina, if I may pronounce it that way, has the distinction of Bogart spending most of the movie looking as if he’s receiving a barium enema.

It takes some hardcore Schadenfreude to like those two movies.

Whether Annie Hall and Princess Bride fit into the genre has already been addressed.

Comment #68: Josh  on  04/07  at  11:24 PM

I have to say, in Philadelphia Story, I always thought Kathryn Hepburn’s character was surrounded by a bunch of judgmental jerks.

Any muscial lovers? Kismet has a hell of a strong woman’s role in Lalume, the Wazir’s wife. She engineers the downfall and death of her corrupt and cruel husband to get her freedom and the clever but cowardly Hajj. (The young couple in virtually any musical/operetta are bland and conventional, but there’s always an older and/or comedic couple who are complex and sometimes the leads, as in Kismet or The Merry Widow)

Comment #69: Samantha Vimes  on  04/08  at  12:06 AM

Josh - Yes, that is the movie.  You have a point about the HBC character, although I barely recall her scenes.  I suppose I was more drawn to the fact that the main character was a quiet, shy hairdresser who ended up with a quiet, shy girl without either of them falling into stereotypes.  And also the fact that he was the only character that insisted upon treating her (and the other assistants in the salon) with some dignity and respect.

I guess you can chalk Sabrina up to my Hepburn and Bogart loves.  I still like the way in which it exposes the shallowness of the men who haven’t given Sabrina a second thought until her surface appearance blossoms.

I didn’t include All About Eve (one of my favourite movies) as a romantic comedy, but I still enjoy the romantic aspect between Bette Davis and her love tremendously, given how wonderfully 3-dimensional Davis’ character it. 

The whole ‘bumpy night’ party sequence is an absolute masterpiece of acting, screenwriting, directing and editing.

Comment #70: Aussiesmurf  on  04/08  at  12:35 AM

Yeah, these movies are clearly sexist against men and women. The men act one way, the women act another, and both sexes are painted badly. Sweet crispy chocolate-covered caramel Christ on a Popsicle stick!!! I don’t know how women see “When Harry Met Sally”, but as a man I would have given a version of the ending speech after the first or second argument, and the movie would have ended about 38 minutes in. As in “I see that we’re supposed to stretch this out for the sake of drama, but I love you, and I think you love me, so let’s cut the crap, I’ll avoid being an a$$hole, and we’ll live more or less happily ever after.”

Of course, from my perspective, every romantic comedy should end in about 40 minutes, either break up or be together, and adjust your life accordingly!

Comment #71: Improbable Joe  on  04/08  at  12:37 AM

Bad misquoting of The Simpsons aside, you simply must be aware that there were significant political and economic differences between the North and the South at the time of the Civil War, besides slavery.  Yes, slavery was a pivotal issue, but it was hardly the only influence in the war.

If you would do us the courtesy of reading the state-by-state declarations of secession, you will note that slavery is generally the first mentioned and primary cause of the treasonous rebellion against the United States by the southern states.

Comment #72: Improbable Joe  on  04/08  at  01:11 AM

Another one that really bothers me in retrospect is Sixteen Candles. I always enjoyed it when I was younger, but now when I watch it I have a hard time getting past the fact that Jake Ryan literally gave his unconscious girlfriend to a horny guy and told him to go ahead and drive her to a parking lot and have fun with her, as long as he got her home in the morning (which he didn’t). And then she LIKES it, so that we won’t be upset!

Not only that, but when Jake mentions that he’s interested in Samantha and Ted says (more or less) that he hopes Jake isn’t just looking to have sex with Samantha, Jake replies that he could have sex at any time and that he could “violate her [Carolyn’s] tender ways if I wanted to”, because she was passed out.  So he’s saying flat out that he could rape Carolyn, but chooses not to.

I confess I still get a lot of nostalgic enjoyment out of Sixteen Candles, but I do view it with a much more critical eye than I did way back when.

Comment #73: Linnaeus  on  04/08  at  01:31 AM

Re: 10 Things I Hate About You:  It’s a film adaptation of Taming of the Shrew.  The sisters get a somewhat better portrayal overall, thanks to four centuries of advances.

Also they’re not played by men.  So that’s a plus for immersion’s sake.

Comment #74: Ferox  on  04/08  at  01:54 AM

because I will highjack this thread so hard to defend The Princess Bride.

Seconded!  If you didn’t like “The Princess Bride” then you have no soul.  Full stop.

Comment #75: Richard Goblin  on  04/08  at  02:11 AM

I think it’s pretty obvious in “10 Things I Hate About You” that the wife/mom left.  Kat at one point tells her dad “Aren’t you punishing me because mom left?” and Kat goes about how she *spoiler alert* had sex with Joey once “right after mom left”.

I like 10 TIHAY because she gets to be pissed that Patrick lied to her.  She is not portrayed at being unreasonable at all AND she gets to keep her feminist beliefs.  The only thing I don’t like about it so much is it shows that semi-stalkery behavior being rewarded (but even that she goes “Are you stalking me” to get him to back off).

Comment #76: Antigone  on  04/08  at  02:21 AM

I should have added 10TIHAY to the list, partly because I found all three male characters to be sweet and endearing, yet also willing to adjust their actions and thoughts once they ‘knew better’ about their approaches.

And yes, Kat’s character was a masterpiece of kiss-assery.  Her scenes with Alison Janney were a thing of beauty.

Comment #77: Aussiesmurf  on  04/08  at  02:31 AM

kick-assery.  *smacks head*

Comment #78: Aussiesmurf  on  04/08  at  04:14 AM

Oddly, I seem to like Hugh Grant romcoms though I don’t care for what I hear about him (despite really avoiding Hollywood infotainment as much as possible).

Comment #79: helen w. h.  on  04/08  at  09:40 AM

The original Coupling was produced by BBC.

Comment #80: helen w. h.  on  04/08  at  09:45 AM

haven’t watched When Harry met Sally in a long time but the points made hit home - Harry’s completely self absorbed and smug prick to boot - “i made a woman meow” - indeed. Sally just screams NEEDY!

but the movie I truly hated was Sleepless in Seattle - from the soul mate gibberish to the lazy writing (using having allergies and Asthsma as short hand for being mr wrong) to the kid - I loathed the whole thing.

And I’m am so glad to hear others trash The Philadelphia Story - damn thing could be used as a text book on how disfunctional familes scapegoat one of their members (“if it wasn’t for you being the way you are, things would be great for all of us!”) And that it’s Ms. Hepburn being scapegoated makes it worse for me. Really she should have ditched the whole lot of these losers - creepy father and passive agressive ex-husband and lived her own life.

Comment #81: professorfate  on  04/08  at  11:42 AM

I also liked “It’s Complicated”. I kept laughing the whole way through.

“Chasing Amy” was good, too, although I’m not entirely sure it’s a comedy.

Comment #82: Doug S.  on  04/08  at  12:36 PM

I don’t agree with most of the analysis of Philadelphia Story, however I enjoy it anyway.  I don’t find it static, though it is certainly talky, and what talk!  They don’t make dialogue that crisp and clever anymore, and Hepburn is BRILLIANT in it.  But, for me, the best of the film is everything involving Virginia Weidler; she steals every scene.

Dinah:  “Nothing ever possibly in the least ever happens here. Mother, how do you get smallpox? “
———-
Margaret Lord: I think that dress hikes up a little behind…
Dinah Lord: No, it’s me that does.
————
Dinah:  “I know something is happening because they’re sending me out of the room.”

And that amazing scene where she plays the crazy idiot child at the beginning of the film, and she sings Lydia the Tattooed Lady.  Wonderful!

Comment #83: DBK  on  04/08  at  12:58 PM

Oh, the dialogue in The Philadelphia Story sounds great.  And then you realize what they’re actually saying, like when Tracy’s father tells her, “You have everything it takes to make a lovely woman except the one essential: an understanding heart. And without that you might just as well be made of bronze.”

Or this:

Tracy Lord: “Only for the moment, I’m not interested in myself.”
C. K. Dexter Haven: “Not interested in yourself, Red, you’re fascinated. You’re far and away your favorite person in the world.”

Or this:

C. K. Dexter Haven: “You’ll never be a first class human being or a first class woman until you’ve learned to have some regard for human frailty.”

Or this:

Seth Lord: “What most wives fail to realize is that their husband’s philandering has nothing whatever to do with them.”
Tracy Lord: “Oh? Then what has it to do with?”
Seth Lord: “A reluctance to go grow old, I think.”

Sounds great, but the message is not so good.  It’s the daughter’s fault if her father cheats on her mother and the wife’s fault if her husband is an alcoholic?  WTF?

Comment #84: Mnemosyne  on  04/08  at  01:28 PM

Ehhh… I prefer my rom coms to be ZOMBIE rom coms.  Shaun of the Dead… classic.

Night of the Comet has got to be the progenitor of that sub-sub-genre.

A film that has informed a lot of subsequent romantic comedies was Romancing The Stone. I need to re-watch that and see how it’s stood up. I seem to remember it being somewhat subversive in regards to the standard romantic plot, but honestly I can’t remember much more than the pot bonfire.

Comment #85: Sarcastro  on  04/08  at  01:31 PM

As I said, I agree with the criticisms, but there is wonderful comic dialogue.  The stuff you quoted is bad.  No argument.  I just happen to enjoy the funny stuff.  And Virginia Weidler.

Comment #86: DBK  on  04/08  at  01:36 PM

Tracy Lord: I’m going crazy. I’m standing here solidly on my own two hands and going crazy.

Macaulay Connor: This is the Bridal Suite. Would you send up a couple of caviar sandwiches and a bottle of beer?
Margaret Lord: What? Who is this?
Macaulay Connor: This is the Voice of Doom calling. Your days are numbered, to the seventh son of the seventh son.
Margaret Lord: Hello? Hello?
Tracy Lord: What’s the matter?
Margaret Lord: One of the servants has been at the sherry again.

Elizabeth (Liz) Imbrie: Where’s my wandering parakeet?

Sidney Kidd: You really hate me, don’t you Connor?
Macaulay Connor: Oh no!
[pause]
Macaulay Connor: I don’t like you very much though.

Comment #87: DBK  on  04/08  at  01:41 PM

“Jake replies that he could have sex at any time and that he could “violate her [Carolyn’s] tender ways if I wanted to”, because she was passed out.  So he’s saying flat out that he could rape Carolyn, but chooses not to. “

I think the line is actually “I could violate her ten different ways if I wanted to” which is possibly worse—he’s not just saying he could rape her, he’s saying he could get creative about it. But he chooses not to, because she isn’t good enough for him? But he’s fine with having her raped by a freshman guy that neither of them have ever spoken to before. I googled it and a lot of people refer to it as date-rape, but its not even the guy she went on a date with so I’m not sure that phrase fits.

Comment #88: Terra  on  04/08  at  03:27 PM

If you like Virginia Weidler, then you would love Diana Lynn, too.  Try either The Major and the Minor or, if you really want to have your mind blown, The Miracle of Morgan’s Creek.

And, of course, there’s Eve Arden, the grown-up version.  “Personally, Veda’s convinced me that alligators have the right idea. They eat their young.”

Comment #89: Mnemosyne  on  04/08  at  04:09 PM

Hated Major and Minor, but I liked Miracle of Morgan’s Creek.  I’ll take a Preston Sturgess comedy any day.

Comment #90: DBK  on  04/08  at  05:42 PM

If Coupling was a swipe of Friends, then it was a case of the swipe being a huge improvement over the original.

And as for The Princess Bride, I always felt that the real love story in that movie was of the grandfather and grandson.

Comment #91: Prodigal  on  04/09  at  01:51 AM

His Girl Friday! It has the storyline of the Philadelphia Story, but without the “punish the uppity heiress” dynamic. Plus, the heroine refers to herself throughout as a “newspaperman”.

Comment #92: hexia  on  04/09  at  06:22 PM

I can’t get over Meg Ryan’s big hair in that film.

“When Harry Met Sally”...Nora Ephron wrote it.  No more needs to be said other than that fact.

Comment #93: Melponeme_k  on  04/10  at  06:07 PM
Page 1 of 1 pages
Commenting is not available in this channel entry.