As I have mentioned before in previous posts (well post), I love romantic movies. Especially romantic comedies. But like everything else I love, (i.e. greasy food,) they are not without their faults. Faults that are usually manifested in the form of tired and somewhat problematic tropes. Not all tropes are necessarily bad. It’s 2019, so you can’t expect every idea to be 100% original. In fact, I have quite a few favorites myself. I’m a sucker for “best friends falling in love”, and “rivals realizing that their hatred for each other is really sexual tension”. Add the oldie but goody, “gives a giant romantic speech to win back love interest” and you’ll get me every time.

But, for every good trope, there are 5 that are not so good. I could list multiple right now, but let’s focus on the one that really burns my biscuits. If you’ve ever watched a movie at any point in your life, you’ve definitely seen it. The granddaddy of bad tropes: “average joe gets a ridiculously beautiful woman completely out of his league.” If you don’t know what I’m talking about, let me direct you to basically every Adam Sandler movie ever made.

I specify “average joe” because movies that have a man who is with a women who is seemingly “out of his league” tend to have a different dynamic. The latter usually occurs when the man is rich and the women is poor, as is the case with both “Pretty Woman” and “Sabrina”. Or when, like in “Working Girl”, the woman is considered less than because her full potential isn’t being acknowledged by those around her, making the true issue between the couple more societal than personal.

I don’t want my issue with this trope to be misunderstood. It’s not the fact that the male character is almost always less attractive than his female counterpart. It’s because usually, he’s not even a good partner. He forgets anniversaries, is an absent parent, or fails to realize that his gorgeous wife is feeling unappreciated. Of course, there are exceptions to my hatred for this trope. I love “The Nutty Professor” and I’ll watch “Hitch” any time it’s on TV. But these exceptions are few. I also want to make something else clear. Being a bad boyfriend/husband is never acceptable, no matter how good you look. But come on! Adam Sandler neglecting Kate Beckinsale? I refuse to accept it.

In case the preceding rant was not clear enough, I have a very strong bias against the way this trope is typically executed; making me wary of movies with that dynamic. Which is why I fully expected to hate “Long Shot”, the 2019 romantic comedy, directed by Jonathan Levine. The film, starring Seth Rogen and Charlize Theron, pairs Charlotte Field, the Secretary of State and hopeful for 1st female President, with Fred Flarsky, a liberal, vocal, and extremely talented journalist played by Rogen. The two have a history, (she was his babysitter/crush) and through a chance encounter years later, he gets hired as her speechwriter. They travel to Europe, along with two of Charlotte’s chief staffers, for an international speech tour and along the way, they grow extremely close. He brings out a side of her that she forgot was there and through being with her, he learns that he can’t always be so staunch in his opinions and at the very least, he should listen to others. They fall in love (duh) and in the end, despite their differences, they make it work.

About halfway through watching, I realized that despite my best effort to resist I was really liking “Long Shot”. Rogen and Theron have great chemistry, and unlike many of its counterparts, the movie is very self-aware. It acknowledges that in any normal situation, Fred and Charlotte don’t work. All the characters know it too and are quick to make that point whenever they get a chance. Even though he is universally considered “out of her league,” Fred actually brings something to the table. He writes so that Charlotte shines through as the relatable and passionate person she is. He’s also her subordinate, which is a great deviation from the norm when those roles are switched. Fred’s part in helping Charlotte reach her goal is crucial to the plot because it’s one of the reasons the audience could buy her falling in love with him.

Still, Charlotte is a gorgeous, successful, and extremely powerful woman, so why Fred? It’s a valid question and the answer is simple. Charlotte is a full-fledged, well developed character. She isn’t totally defined by her success or her good looks; she’s a normal person who also happens to be beautiful and successful. She likes Game of Thrones, Boyz II Men, and the MCU. She takes molly and has a bad (and hilarious) trip. Plus, she takes naps standing up, with her eyes open so she’s definitely weird and quirky in her own right.

Since it’s pretty easy to understand Fred falling in love with Charlotte, the film’s real task is getting the audience to like him as much as she does. Which they do quite well. His character works because instead of ignoring his obvious quirks, the film embraces them. Seth Rogen’s most memorable characters are the ones that acknowledge that his charm is in his crassness, self-depreciative humor, and the dorky awkward vibe he exudes; Fred Flarksy being a prime example of that.

“Long Shot” definitely exceeded my expectations. Although to be fair, they were pretty low to begin with. I do think that the “average joe” trope can work, but only if the “joe” in question doesn’t completely suck. There is no rule that people who fall in love have to have the same level of success, power, or even have to be equally attractive, but I personally am tired of watching films that reiterate the idea that men don’t have to try as hard as women, especially when it comes to relationships. If Hollywood is moving in a new direction with this trope, I’d definitely be interested in seeing what they come up with. I know it’s a long shot, but I’d love to see what they could do if they tried switched “Average Joe” for “Average Jane” more often. But I won’t hold my breath.