I don't know that many, but there's The Incredibly True Adventure of Two Girls in Love and I've Heard the Mermaids Singing.
I've Heard the Mermaids Singing is more of a quirky indie film. Imagine Le Fabuleux Destin d'Amélie Poulain set in Canada: except very deadpan, and the romance is merely a subplot. Yes there are lesbians, though their relationship (presented with no fanfare) affects the protagonist only in an indirect way. Really it's about how most artists work in obscurity, while others—more concerned with being perceived as "creative"—are corrupted by dreams of recognition and fame. This description (despite its awful length) only scratches the surface.
What elements of romantic comedy behaviour are we talking about?
For example- the slideshow in 27 Dresses, illustrating how the heroine's sister lied to wrangle her way into her fiance's affections. There is absolutely no way anyone could get away with humiliating a relative in front of family and friends like that in real life. They make up in a matter of seconds in the film, but if anyone really did that, they'd be in for a lifetime of disownment and hatred. However wrong the sister's actions were, there's no excuse for doing that to her.
I had that same thought for 27 Dresses. The father's insistence that "you have to make up because you're sisters" rings a bit hollow if you (like me) have blood relatives that've gone without speaking to each other for decades over much less than what Jane does. Not to say that it wasn't satisfying as all get-out to watch, but still.
Also, Rachel's parents in Imagine Me and You accepting that she's in love with Luce in ten seconds flat. I'm not suggesting that they should be antagonistic or homophobic but think about it- she's been with Heck for years, recently had a big white wedding, seems prepared to jack all that in for a girl she barely knows ... Instead they're perfectly fine with it and drive her to catch up with her girl!
Or- take Mamma Mia!, which is more of a generic musical chick flick than a full on Rom Com. Inviting your three possible fathers to your wedding, without telling your single mom or THEM. Thinking you'll just KNOW on sight which one's yours, because the other two will be repulsive freaks of nature. First of all, is there ANY way to handle that situation without announcing once the jig is up 'Hey! My mom slept around a whole ton! With those two other guys you were having guy bonding with!' There is NO WAY, not with the three most kindly, good natured, understanding middle-aged men in the world, that that would work out without at least one serious, hard-core screaming match and somebody storming off the island in a huff.
Or their decision not to find out who the real dad is, as it "doesn't matter". WTF? In real life they'd be demanding blood tests all around!
The play originally came out in and was set in the 1970s, when paternity tests were not available.
Hey, if South Park has taught us anything, the mom is probably a hermaphrodite, and the kid's dad.
Or maybe the true father is a ginger Denver Bronco...
How about the whole "Rush to the Airport" that happens in every single film? Has anybody done that, ever? If you haven't realized that you want to be with somebody until he/she is about to leave your life, then you probably weren't that interested in the first place.
Not to mention that a desperate run, without stopping, all the way from the airport entrance to the gate, is not exactly the kind of thing you'd be able to do in any airport these days without being dragged off by security.
Not to mention that many romantic comedies believe the old idea of 'If you argue and bicker incessantly, that means you really like each other!' In real life, the fact that you argue all the time is usually a pretty bad sign. No amount of mutual attraction can overcome things that drive you insane about your partner.
I dunno, my mother has relationships that seem to consist entirely of arguing (albeit she's on her second husband). When I visit her I feel like I'm guest starring in a sitcom.
I argue with my boyfriend all the time, and they're not pleasant arguments either, but we've never been happier with anyone else.
Know It Or Not shows that Bollywood even thinks the trope is corny, because that manages to discuss and parody the trope.
After the characters in a Romantic Comedy go to Hell and back finding their one true love, why are they always back to square one in the sequels? And why in the sequel are they all too happy to go through all that crap again knowing that it didn't last the first time around?
Comedies, by their usually happy ending nature, are hard to make sequels to, period. With romantic plots/subplots, the writers apparently have a hard time coming up with plots about an ongoing relationship - married life has a stereotype of being dull and passionless; falling in love and/or making up is supposedly more exciting.
Well, after the end the characters are supposed to be living in bliss. Bliss is boring and conflict is drama (or comedy), so there has to be more conflict in the sequel.
I'm very sorry for even asking but... examples, please? I don't even remember any romantic comedy getting sequels... except for Meet the Parents, and they worked that one pretty well...
Bridget Jones Diary: Edge of Reason?
I've heard The Break-Up described as 'what happens after a romantic comedy when the pair drive each other crazy'.
Are there ANY rom coms out there where the two people don't get together in the end?
My Best Friend's Wedding. Of course, Julia Robert's really didn't deserve the guy because she acted like a psycho, but so do most Rom Com protagonists. This is just a rare case where it didn't pay off.
Kissing Jessica Stein — sort of. The main pair of Jessica and Helen didn't work out, but they remained best friends and persued relationships with other people. Only half Bait-and-Switch Lesbians as Helen really is bi and ends up with a girl.
Annie Hall. It's actually funny because this is usually considered the Ur Example of the Romantic Comedy genre.
I've been doin' some thinking. Now, I don't really get romcoms, but I got no beef with them - they play in a multiplex while I stay home and watch movies I like. And... well, I just had a slight discussion a few days ago with a classmate where I told her I'm skeptical that romcoms can work storytelling-wise in my POV. As an example, I compared Aliens to Titanic - in Aliens the whole UST/romantic subplot thing is just a subplot among others (there's the whole adopted-motherhood thing, squad cracking under pressure and some other subplots I'm probably missing) that helps, y'know, develop the characters and make the audience care, thus accentuating the impact of the main plot (evil alien go boom). Whereas in Titanic, the romantic subplot is thrust to the forefront and everything else is either absent or marginalised (feel free to yell at me but I saw that film once when I was a kid. I'm going by recollections.). And, uh, my conclusion was that when you're working with a romcom subplot as a writer you're kinda straightjacketing yourself and giving yourself less freedom to maneuver because this whole genre has some rigid conventions, and that therefore I'm really skeptical a generic film based on romantic-relationship-development-thingies can work alone for 90 minutes without some padding or Idiot Plot (again, generic. There are probably movies that work. Haven't seen 'em). So, the question is, am I stupid for thinking romantic stuff works better/more effectively as a subplot to enhance the main plot as opposed to being the main plot? (Sorry for the wall'o'text)
Stupid? No. Wrong? Probably. First, you don't have to follow every convention. Second, I wouldn't agree that this particular genre has more conventions then any other one. And third, even if first and second weren't true, you'd just need more imagination. It just seems to me that your problem is more about what you derive entertainment from then the actual possibilities of writing (that probably can't be "measured" anyway). I don't particularly like Rom Coms (well, maybe the ones that are more Com and less Rom...) and find most romantic main plots pretty annoying, but I really see it as a matter of taste more then anything.
I don't think your points are stupid, but I do think that very fact that romantic stories have been told for centuries and continue to be told (and frequently bring in a lot of money when they are) suggests that romantic and romantic comedy stories can indeed work story-telling wise. It seems to me that it's a matter of taste, quality and judgement; if a particular storytelling technique or convention is not to your taste, then it's natural that you'll prefer stories which marginalise it rather than ones which place it front and centre. And genre's such a slippery, flexible thing that it's possible to argue that no genre has strict generic conventions — otherwise, all romance movies would be exactly like Titanic in every detail when that's clearly not the case (and it's fair to say that Titanic isn't even universally heralded as a classic of the genre anyway). Ultimately, it's all a matter of what your personal taste is and how effectively the story uses the generic conventions it's adopted to tell it. (And, have to say, I'm no fan of Titanic but it's a little unfair to make sweeping judgements about the validity and effectiveness of an entire genre based on one specific example you admittedly haven't seen in years and can't remember fully. Particularly since Titanic isn't even a romantic comedy.)