By Patricia Fontejon

Ever since the release of recent movies like “Anyone but You” and “The Idea of You,” news outlets have been whispering the idea of a rom-com renaissance in the works. Yet, in spite of these new and fresh rom-coms that are fit for a 21st century audience, these movies are not the same. In comparison to classics such as “When Harry Met Sally,” “Notting Hill,” and “How to Lose a Guy in 10 Days,” rom-coms from the ‘90s and 2000s are more authentic in how simple and nuanced characters are portrayed than what is being offered today. 

In the midst of plague and food scarcity, Shakespeare was writing comedies such as “As You Like It,” “Twelfth Night,” and “Much Ado About Nothing” which were full of complex plots and characters in disguise. These comedies had happy endings, which in Shakespeare’s mind meant marriage. 

In the early 1930s screwball comedies were characterized by their fast-paced, witty dialogue. Their romantic storylines often involved a battle of the sexes. These movies involved two opposing individuals who meet and fall in love and featured social class commentaries. 

The reason why Hollywood stopped making screwballs can be attributed to a number of factors, one being World War II. After the U.S. entered World War II, Hollywood’s attention shifted to raising funds for the war effort.  Once the war ended, Americans returning to their shattered image of suburban peace found comfort in romantic movie musicals. Due to these shifting times, the traditional sense of a rom-com fizzled out until “When Harry Met Sally” in 1989. 

Skeptics argue that rom coms are overly materialistic, post-feminist, reinforcing a patriarchal status quo, lacking the satire of a screwball and cynicism of “Annie Hall,” overwhelmingly white and insufferably heterosexual.

Despite all of those things being true, the rom-com formula was constantly deconstructed by the irony-poisoned culture of the 2010’s with standout movies, such as “500 Days of Summer.” 

When “Anyone but You” was released, it went back to the standby formula of “When Harry Met Sally.” Deriving inspiration from this classic rom-com, the media thought the two movies would be synonymously linked in likeability. Yet, in spite of talking like Shakespeare and looking like “When Harry Met Sally,” recent movies like “Anyone But You” don’t really feel like the former, or any of the rom-coms that people have come to love.

Romantic comedies may be formulaic but they are capable of being greater than the sum of their parts when used correctly. But other than blind nostalgia, what makes rom-coms of the early 2000s and late ‘90s work is their worldbuilding and atmosphere, which are underutilized in today’s rom-coms.  

These films let us peer inside the worlds of the leads when they’re not pursuing romance. 

Harry and Sally both have established friend groups and distinct lifestyles that you really get a feel for throughout the film. Whereas in “The Kissing Booth,” we have a hard time rooting for Lee because he isn’t fully fleshed-out as a character. All he does is whine and complain. So, we have no reason to resonate with character, or even like him. 

Not only is world-building important but I think just as important, if not more so, is the atmosphere. The goal here is to curate wonderful cinematography so that your brain is given permission to go on autopilot without being pulled out of the world of the film. These movies tend to feature really cozy blues and motown soundtracks that give them a sense of sensuality and timelessness. In “When Harry Met Sally,” the iconic fall leaves in Central Park and the recurring motif of Washington Square Park are aspirational. 

Another very important facet of a rom-com is chemistry between the two lovers. I think the appeal of that final romantic gesture that this formula has beaten to death is the idea of inconveniencing yourself for love and taking a risk. To get behind this risk as a viewer, you have to understand the chemistry developing in front of you. In “Ten Things I Hate About You,” it’s the snappy quips between Kat and Patrick that make it so entertainable. They are able to play off one another, whilst still admiring that they’ve grown to love from observation. Yet, Sydney Sweeney and Glen Powell’s characters feel too generic and their star personas are too underdeveloped to really come through. Ultimately, their characters feel unrealistically charismatic. Unlike a lot of other rom-com protagonists who work in creative fields of owning a business (“You’ve Got Mail”) and aspiring to more than a greeting-card company (“500 Days of Summer”), in “Anyone But You” it just feels like watching two people from high school get together because they’re both attractive. 

And today’s modern technology removes the possibility of certain beloved tropes, ruining the serendipitous magic of older movies. 

As opposed to now, in the ‘90s not everyone had a cellphone or even a car. So, it was easier to miscommunicate on a global scale and with this lack of technology is what we miss from early 2000’s rom-coms. The simplistic nature of these movies allowed us to be caught up in a whirlwind of romantic, simpler, emotions