And why shouldn’t Rebel Wilson get a romantic comedy? No, she doesn’t look like Julia Roberts. Does that matter? Is romcom participation only for a certain type of woman? That doesn’t seem right, huh? Why should romcom affairs only happen to JLo and Meg Ryan and Kate Hudson? Does Rebel Wilson have any less of a heart? Why shouldn’t she attract men-who-should-already-be-taken, collect a dragon’s horde of Valentine presents, and get random strangers to line dance at her Whitney Houston karaoke? Isn’t It Romantic makes this exact argument.
Ah, but there’s a catch, a caveat if you will – as Rebel Wilson isn’t the usual romcomdame, she is stuck in a world where she recognizes both the Pretty Woman fantasy and PG-13 torture. Life is a #$^%& bitch when you cannot $%#@ or $&^%$@!
Natalie (Wilson) grew up a cynic. As a child, she enjoyed romantic comedy until mom schooled her to know better. Twenty-five years later, Natalie is an unattached architect. She dreams of making a big splash with a design on a new hotel that uses the parking lot as a focal point. Wait. That isn’t a joke. Really? As an office afterthought, the underutilized and underappreciated professional Natalie berates her own assistant (Betty Gilpin) for constantly watching movies instead of working. Failing to curb her assistant’s indulgence, Natalie’s anti-romcom rant instead accomplishes the same thing as the exposition in Scream: it lays out the rules for the film we’re going to see, one in which the romcom world comes to life in all of its wonderful, pathetic, and miscellaneous glory.
And wouldn’t you know it? While escaping a mugger, Natalie bangs her head and wakes up in her own romcom prison where she is annoyingly clumsy (so men can always “save” her), exquisitely wardrobed, constantly accompanied by a backstory-challenged gay best friend, and suddenly pursued by hunky Liam Hemsworth. The joke is that Natalie knows full well she’s in a fantasy world; she questions whether to roll with it or … rebel. As somebody who has seen one-too-many JLo films, I loved this part. I loved how Natalie couldn’t swear without life bleeping it; I loved how spontaneous flash mobs randomly formed around her; I loved how romance happened whether she was into it or not; I really loved how Blake (Hemsworth) gives her his digits by writing them separately on rose petals and dropping the individually clipped petals in Natalie’s hands – don’t worry, it’s a romcom; if she needs his number, the petals will arrange themselves properly at the appropriate time.
In fact, the only thing I didn’t like about the fantasy portion of our film was the time when it was subjugated to real life considerations – like when Rebel Wilson discovers that for the seventeenth film in a row, she is in love with Adam Devine. Screw Adam. You can … screw Adam later; tell me more about how all romcoms are a adorable pilesof crap.
Rebel Wilson and Amy Schumer are two of my favorite people these days and I’m quite pleased that these women are currently in control of what a modern romcom is all about. No, theirs are not perfect films, but since when is the genre loaded with perfection? 13 Going on 30, Sleepless in Seattle, While You Were Sleeping … these are top 10% examples. If Rebel and Amy are the new “it girls” for the expression of unrealistic love, I say, “Awesome. Go for it. At least Sleepless in Seattle II will be funnier than the original.”
A romcom! Gosh, isn’t that swell?
Check Hollywood’s newest bombshell
May not be your tea
But if you’re askin’ me
That woman puts the belle in “Rebel”
Rated PG-13, 88 Minutes
Director: Todd Strauss-Schulson
Writer: Erin Cardillo and Dana Fox & Katie Silberman
Genre: Belittling a genre
Type of being most likely to enjoy this film: Equal opportunists
Type of being least likely to enjoy this film: People that don’t find the humor in pointing out romcom idiocy
