[ SECRET POST #6045 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #6045 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.


01.



__________________________________________________



02.



__________________________________________________



03.



__________________________________________________



04.



__________________________________________________



05.
[Xanth]



__________________________________________________



06.



__________________________________________________



07.

























Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 21 secrets from Secret Submission Post #864.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

There are some hidden gems in the genre, but yeah, overall it's never been good. I've always preferred action-oriented romance, or romance as a subplot rather than the central focus.

What bums me out is that the romantic subplot may be in danger, as well. Modern audiences seem to be asking for it to go away. My hopelessly romantic heart will be broken if that comes to pass.

[(Anonymous)]

Um, what? That's like saying the action genre has never been good. The romantic comedy genre has had the same level of quality as any other genre: some outright excellent cinema, some good, some mediocre, some bad, some atrocious.

I know nothing about the article OP's taking about, but I also think these things come in cycles and the romcom genre will be back over more mid level movies return to cinema, and/or will live on as straight to streaming movies (Netflix alone has done quite a few recent beloved movies like 'To All The Boys I've Loved Before').

[(Anonymous)]

AYRT

I'm sure to someone who doesn't like the action genre, it's never been good.

I'm speaking for my own self, and no one else.

[(Anonymous)]

I want crappy romance subplots to go away and, since about 98% of them seem to be "man and only woman in the movie are in the same shots for ten minutes total so now they're in love" and that's it, I'm glad to see the back of them.

[(Anonymous)]

AYRT

People always say this, and it confuses me. I think I've only seen one or two romantic subplots that fit that description. Usually the romance is between the male and female leads, who are interacting throughout most of the film.

[(Anonymous)]

AYRT

I guess it depends on your definition of interaction. I will upfront give the caveat that I left behind western media years ago BUT what I remember from the aughts basically had the female lead kinda... there. She didn't do anything other than get rescued, or act as an object for the male lead to win. Maybe there was some banter, if she was the "fiesty" version, but they were all basically interchangeable and I could never understand why either of them would give a shit other than lust. Definitely not love.

[(Anonymous)]

I mean, *rom-coms* tend to follow the female lead, though how much she *does* depends on the film. She might not need to be rescued. BUT, the problem still stands that like... 'chemistry' often just means 'these two people are attractive and of the opposite sex', and in terms of reasons the CHARACTERS should be together... it can be flimsy. Sometimes the relationship is terrible/doomed to fail and they never at any point seem like they even LIKE each other.

[(Anonymous)]

AYRT

At least with rom-coms the romance IS the point. They can be bad at it - 90% of any genre is garbage. With other genres, where they tack it in because they think they have to, it's obvious they phoned it in.

[(Anonymous)]

Big same. I want writers to stop feeling like they HAVE to write romance into a film if it doesn't exist there organically.

[(Anonymous)]

+100000