Dancing in the rain, a rescue from a potential car accident, colliding books that fall on the floor, grazing fingertips, public serenades… these moments and more are extremely familiar scenes: the meet-cutes and grand gestures that capture the essence of a rom-com. As early as the 1930s, the cinematic genre of romantic comedy has taken the world by storm. However, you may be asking yourself… what defines a rom-com?
A romantic comedy is, in my opinion, defined as the genre that merges romance with comedy to demonstrate a lighthearted (and, in some cases, heartfelt) approach to the complexities of love in all its facets — whether that means marriage, dating, or even situationships. While it may seem trite to some, this genre reflects many snippets of societal behaviors, such as coping with the pain of losing someone or yearning for a person from a distance. Film and television impact audiences as much as any other art form, even motivating them towards positive or negative goals and mindsets — this especially applies in the woes and joys of romance.
What I propose to you, dearest reader, is to retrace your steps and come along on this fleeting journey of how romantic comedies have influenced the modern dating scene, and still do.
In a recent interview on Dax Shepard’s Armchair Expert podcast, Hollywood darling Reese Witherspoon spoke about how, along with the rapid evolution of social media, the decline in productions of romantic comedies over the last 15 years has contributed to insufficient or convoluted dating skills. Her comment may seem trivial or perhaps even conceited (a haughty defense to her earlier filmography); however, Witherspoon’s hypothesis opens up space for a bigger, looming conversation, one that inevitably touches upon a reality that deeply afflicts our generation.
A WALK THROUGH HISTORY
Before arriving at the current climate of the dating atmosphere and the films that align with it, a historic review always comes in handy to analyze and evaluate what each era represented to the demographic of its time. While many experts may point to the 1930s as the earliest era of romantic-comedy production, most audiences like us are probably more familiar with the genre’s skyrocketing rise following the release of When Harry Met Sally (1989), directed by the late Rob Reiner and penned by the late Nora Ephron.
While rom-coms typically rely on absurdly grand gestures or complex love triangles as normalized scenarios to indicate romantic “progress” in the relationship, When Harry Met Sally challenges the cliché of instant, fervent connection or love at first sight. Over a decade passes in the film’s timeline, during which the protagonists evolve through their stages of mutual disdain to long-term friendship until eventually arriving at a romantic relationship. Sally and Harry’s authentic portrayal of what we now call a “slow-burn” is a healthy example of allowing time for the connection to progress at a steady pace. Is it also a largely heteronormative narrative? Absolutely. The film leads with the premise that men and women cannot be friends without any sexual attraction. What cannot be denied is the unforgettable lessons it taught the young generation, particularly that the best foundation for a relationship is built through years of trust and friendship. Despite the fairy tale-esque ending, When Harry Met Sally offers a realistic stance that meets these expectations in the middle.
Meg Ryan, the lead actress of When Harry Met Sally, later became a household name in the genre, making continuous appearances in other Nora Ephron films such as Sleepless in Seattle (1993) and You’ve Got Mail (1998), both opposite the iconic Tom Hanks. The latter film’s plot, however, eerily kicks off the world of online dating. Where When Harry Met Sally displayed the positives of a friendship-fueled romance, You’ve Got Mail places the narrative in a non-physical realm, where a digital veil obscures both parties from vital factors such as in-person social dynamics.
The characters indulge in the shroud of mystery and zero information provided to them through the early internet messaging platform of AOL (that some of you may not even have been familiar with prior to this article); despite, unbeknownst to them, knowing each other in real life as professional rivals. Ephron’s mesmerizing delicacy woven into her writing manages to portray the duality of this dynamic as mostly harmless. For the film to function under the guise it promises, it delivers an idealized ending. The message it conveys to viewers forgoes all consideration of the potential dangers that existed for either party, particularly Ryan.
Despite the soft launch of online dating through the 1998 film, other films of the genre stuck to the neotraditionalist structure laid out by Ephron and her colleagues still dominated the decade. Julia Roberts’ Pretty Woman (1990), Runaway Bride (1999), and Notting Hill (1999) all come to mind as examples of the meteoric rise that kept propelling rom-coms to new heights. Though they’re rewatchable, Roberts’ films are written and directed entirely by male auteurs, which creates a stark contrast between the perspectives in which these films are developed and the goals they strive for. Tropes involving love triangles, or simply the omitted third party that somehow disrupts the main couple’s chances of getting together, may align with relatable situations and are an example of this contrast in perspectives. However, the act of romanticizing these tropes without weighing the consequences, despite villainizing certain characters who perhaps don’t pose a threat to the protagonists, puts forth the baffling idea that constant obstacles in the way of a doomed romance are simply a challenge to blindly accept and overcome.
TURN OF THE 21ST CENTURY
Arriving in the 2000s, rom-coms leaned into the naïve tone with larger doses of comedy imbued into the story, as if to distract the viewers from all the toxic dynamics that were being laid before them. Fantastic films that portray this odd balance can be found in The Proposal (2009), The Wedding Planner (2001), and How To Lose A Guy In 10 Days (2003). To their credit, these movies accomplish a degree of comfort due to the immense nostalgia the setting emits and the witty banter that matches the kooky comedy at play. Perhaps it’s the gullible attitude with which the characters face the events of the film that contributes to the charm. The bigger picture, however, relies on the fact that the first batch of 21st century rom-coms normalizes unhealthy practices and dynamics in romantic relationships that bounce back to the viewer. By normalizing factors such as third parties or infidelity, these rom-coms perpetuate the idea that these patterns should be enacted in real life.
THE ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM
Another important pattern worth recognizing in the intricate history of this genre: Where are the queer stories? Are they buried under piles of discrimination and invisibility? While the previously mentioned rom-coms uphold heteronormative and white identities (since Black produced rom-coms were released but weren’t as distributed or well-known as the previous mentions), that overwhelming presence sent a clear message to queer communities: their dating experiences were too foreign to portray for mass audiences.
This mere act alienated these communities and excluded them from learning experiences that could have enhanced their social skills in the long run. Tropes that were used to represent them include tragic deaths (fueled by the harmful narrative surrounding the AIDS epidemic), exaggerated emasculation of gay men, and vice versa when portraying queer women, among many others. Though most stories that reached decent exposure to audiences emphasized tragedy, some films managed to showcase nuanced storytelling, especially in the world of independent filmmaking.
Edge of Seventeen (1998) directed by David Moreton, is the first that comes to mind — though I consider it more a dramatic film than a rom-com from a technical perspective. Aside from the ambiguous genre classification, Edge of Seventeen employed a bold tactic by portraying the protagonist’s experience as a gay high schooler through a raw, vulnerable lens where idealistic notions and reality checks constantly collide. The story is void of tragedy and simply executes a natural environment. This film led by example by offering queer audiences a seat at the table, one where their experiences are validated and matter.
Shortly after, But I’m A Cheerleader (1999) crosses the threshold for centering a sapphic story. With its zany dialogue and colorful world (all inside a conversion camp), But I’m A Cheerleader challenges countless stereotypes by following the protagonist through her entire journey as a lesbian, from stages of denial until self-acceptance. It exited the limiting frame of the butch stereotype and showcased a lesbian character who embraces femininity, all while navigating a romance with another woman. The film enforced positive representation that could provide these communities with a positive mindset despite the tense environment post-AIDS epidemic.
SHAKE-UP IN THE NEW DECADE
Even with all this progress, heteronormative rom-coms continued to dominate the narrative and, frankly, had a deeper impact on audiences. Though queer films of the genre slowly continued to progress, the presence of rom-coms around the 2010s was already dwindling due to a lack of interest from audiences, the rapid rise of the superhero genre, and social media beginning to cement its place in society. Reese Witherspoon indicates this era as the starting point of her hypothesis — when the decline in rom-coms releases and the rise of social media converge as humongous influences in the modern dating world.
As the turnout decreases, the rom-coms released demonstrate a tendency towards a return to form. La La Land (2016) upholds itself as the prime example. Honing the spirit of 50s and 60s musicals and the whimsical energy of later rom-coms, La La Land delivered a nuanced relationship and a bittersweet ending all while maintaining the beats of the delectable fantasy laid out before our eyes. Despite the film’s intended intricacy, its effect on audiences over time has inadvertently festered a mentality gravitating towards the comfort of illusions. In a reality where the overwhelming fact is that people are allowed to be complicated, and loved with flaws and all, rom-coms like La La Land may have unintentionally become part of the reason that certain audiences simply create unrealistic standards.
The same can be said about Jon M. Chu’s Crazy Rich Asians (2018), a film that celebrates Asian representation yet its critique of social classes and cultural norms quivers under the luxurious lifestyles unraveling before viewers. Once again, while both films do not intend to champion these harmful messages, the audience’s interpretations might make them slightly complicit in the damage regardless.
CONCLUSION
Currently, the 2020s era of rom-coms is less defined. Rich, diverse storytelling is paving the path, with films such as Red, White and Royal Blue (2023), The Half of It (2020), The Wedding Banquet (2025), and the list goes on. But somehow, I continue to return to Witherspoon’s take, which began all these questions in the first place. Acquiring basic social skills is becoming difficult for our generation and people are more reluctant than ever to enter the dating sphere. People are so tired that even the attempt seems like arduous labor with no rewards to reap.
With all the choices in the world, audiences prioritize nostalgia and comfort over refreshing, or even innovative, content. The effects these elements have inflicted upon our generation strengthen the algorithmic system that the online dating world has created, where people quantify potential partners’ values through their green or red flags (a dynamic that was highlighted in Celine Song’s Materialists [2025], famously not a rom-com). Approaching uncharted territory in order to properly get to know another human being has nearly become obsolete in response to post-pandemic traumas.
By sheltering within the familiar and comfortable digital walls, people have either delighted in the delusions of what never was with a real person or indulged in parasocial relationships with fictional characters because “real people will never amount to their expectations.” These circumstances have caused a pessimistic, or even nihilistic, outlook on dating life for many — a turmoil many of you may relate to. These frustrations are absolutely valid. However, just as cinema has the power to influence society, you have the power as an individual to grasp whatever lessons may shift your own perspective for the better.
Perhaps the best lessons this cinematic genre teaches us is that surpassing the outside noise simply enables you to do the bold act of inviting love in. Be your own romantic lead, seize the moment, and tell that person you love them in real time, where life goes by so fleetingly.