Opinion: Modern rom-coms cannot compare to the classics

Work, eat, sleep, repeat. Every day the same predictable, monotonous schedule. In an attempt to change it up a bit, you put on “Love Actually” and hear Hugh Grant remind you to look around yourself and see that love actually is all around. Suddenly, the world doesn’t seem so bleak all huddled on the couch under a fluffy blanket.

There’s an addicting magic to older rom–coms like “Love Actually;” they make the weight of the world seem a little lighter and the dull hum of mundanity gain a heartfelt rhythm. In comparison, the leading rom–com of the last couple of years, “Anyone But You,” has been reviewed as “too generic to stand out” by top critic Udita Jhunjhunwala.

Simply stated, rom-coms before the mid–2000s are inferior to those following because of nostalgia, greater character depth and higher budgets. 

For most, rom-coms feel simple and therefore comfortable, like “Love Actually.” This really comes from the psychological “familiarity principle,” which outlines how repeated exposure creates a sense of ease. In other words, humans appreciate the predictable. It is expected that the ending to every rom-com is a happy one with the two lead characters confessing and falling in love: a very safe and fulfilling outcome. Some critique the formulaic approach to creating rom–coms where the intrigue of guessing the ending is removed. However, there is enjoyment to be found in a predictable end as outlined in the psychological concept of “experiential control.” 

Further, ritually watching the same movie every Christmas allows for some of that bliss to rub off on the piece of media itself. Altogether, it’s the recipe for a comfort watch. 

For all of this to happen, the movies have to be released for a substantial amount of time to cultivate nostalgia. This time is something that modern romances do not withstand and frankly do not have the capability to do due to their superficial nature. In comparison, older rom–coms include character nuances which mimic the complexity of people in the real world. 

When watching rom–coms, most people do not look for a perfect person meeting another perfect person to form a perfect couple. Instead, they want to see an imperfect person be loved along with their calamitous mistakes, egregious actions and fatal flaws. To this end, older rom–coms give the viewer that assurance they crave so much.

One example is the rom–com that was said to have begun the golden age of the genre: “When Harry Met Sally.” This movie has a crude man, Harry Burns, as the main love interest. Burns and female lead Sally Albright start out as enemies with polarizing perspectives on life and slowly morph into adults who “age into each other.” The two perspectives they bring to the table meld together, leading to the movie having a different “molecular composition” when Burns and Albright are together rather than when they’re apart. 

The complexity of each character allows them to have flaws that morph and change through the progression of time, ultimately enhancing the final product. It sets the precedent that one does not have to be perfect to fall in love and that love itself can be messy. 

The heart of rom–coms is to indulge in human connection, however imperfect it may seem, so it appears odd that only older rom–coms do so. In fact, it was pointed out by Carrie Smith, an associate professor of psychology at the University of Mississippi, that Hallmark movies, popularized in the late 2000s, “have the same formula” that is not representative of real people. “None of them have flaws,” said Smith. 

In honesty, the declining quality of rom–coms comes at no surprise when considering their perception. Dr. Faye Woods, an expert in film, theatre and television at the University of Reading, explains how rom–coms are culturally looked down upon due to their association with female pleasure and emotions. Historically speaking, rom–coms have to fight against the stereotype that they are less than other genres. 

Keeping this in mind, it makes sense why when entering the 2010s, studios started prioritizing projects with more intricate visuals and higher budgets. Basically, Hollywood stopped investing in rom–coms, making their downfall inevitable. It makes sense why modern rom–coms are not as well written, directed and produced. There is no effort being put into them. As evidence of this fall off, out of the over 2,000 American–made rom–coms released from 2010 to 2023, “Crazy Rich Asians” was the only one to land a spot in the list of “the 20 top–grossing movies” from 2010 to 2023. 

Somewhere over the years, we forgot the value in rom–coms. We chose to stop putting money in the genre, rather depicting unrelatable characters with plots incredibly far from realistic. The same films that were supposed to represent a part of life so utterly human instead displayed a world considered entirely alien to most. There needs to be a push to return back to solid ground, so when movies try to say that maybe love actually is all around, one may actually believe it.