The performances transcend the film's tropes, grounding it in characters that feel more complete than this subgenre often produces.

I am only giving this movie a 1 for the great cast, though I can't imagine what any of them were thinking. This movie was horrible

The first must-see film of the year.

There are moments in this movie where the great movie it could've been peek out... They're fleeting, here, but they're worth savoring, and they happen often enough to make it worth your while.

The film consists of more than two hours of a couple of writers, somehow in love with each other but unable or unwilling to marry, fussing, fighting, and shouting. And in the end, even though their sexual escapade proved less than thrilling, they end in a clinch on a couch. Happing ending. The film is not very romantic and certainly isn't funny. The moral dimensions of the script are wholly secular and consistently depressing. Marriage and children are nothing when compared to sexual urges, booze, and fame.But there are some good lines in places. And the acting is superb. Dudley Moore and Mary Steenburgen are something to behold. The music is above average, and Arthur Hiller displays his usual excellence as a director. But even the stars of the film were unable to put life into a lame script that is at least 30 minutes too long.Overall rating: 7 out of 10.

I saw this the same week that I saw Dudley Moore's other 1983 romantic comedy, "Love Sick". While I have to give the edge to Marshall Brickman's "Love Sick," this is also a sophisticated and easy-going comedy that delivers lots of smiles and a few good chuckles. Dudley Moore was only a leading man for 13 years (1979-1992) and starred in only 13 films. While I didn't care for his boozy millionaire in "Arthur" and "Arthur 2," I think his work in Blake Edwards "10" and "Micky and Maude" was excellent. He plays an average guy with a little bit of charm and intelligence very well. Here, he plays a playwright without a great deal of talent. He has to get by on the talent of his collaborators. Mary Steenburgen is the real standout in the movie. It may be her best performance. She works very well with Moore. Steenburgen is really more of a character actress and that is where she does her best work, see "Marilyn Hotchkiss' Ballroom Dancing and Charm School." She really can't carry a movie as a lead, but here she plays straight man to Moore and the chemistry works. The story is about a man and a woman who should fall in love and get married, but their careers and lives force them out-of-sync, so they become friends instead. The movie isn't a laugh riot and it won't knock your socks off, but it is a sad/sweet two hours of mature and sophisticated banter.

I first ran across "Romantic Comedy" when it was on cable while I was in High School. (In 1984!!!) I found myself watching it over and over, loving the clever plotting and dialogue. I was just getting involved in acting and stage design then, and knew it was based on a play, having seen the superb "Same Time, Next Year" which is very similar.I love, love , love this movie. More so since I've now played "Jason Carmicheal" on stage. The 2 things that spoil this movie for me are big factors in what made "Same time...." so effective. First, they "open up" the movie to show New York. All well and good, but as with the previous film, the whole idea is that these characters are sealed in a world of their own making. The play takes place entirely in Jason's study. Second, and worse, the costume design, hair and makeup. The story begins in the 50's, and here's Phoebe in the opening credits, with long hair, no hat, no gloves, knee socks!! The only nod to the 50's is she's wearing saddle oxfords. She's a school teacher, not a school student.If they'd done the periods correctly, the changes in her character would have been even more evident. Think of the cast meandering through the 60's. Big hair, loud makeup, short dresses, then the 70's, the environment, falls, polyester, then into the preppy 80's which is pretty much where the entire film looks like it's set. A shame really, this film is so good, and would have been EVEN better if they'd stayed true. But, put that aside. There are great actors, terrific dialogue and wonderful music to be had here. Enjoy!!!!!

I found this movie light and entertaining. I really don't understand why it was abused by the critics. The perfect Dudley Moore vehicle, consisting of comedy in an all too real and serious romantic life situation. NO... it's not an Oscar winner, but it certainly doesn't deserve the bad rating originally heap on it. If you are looking for a true Romantic Comedy... this is the movie you are looking for. It doesn't require that you think and worry about every twist and turn, but does bring true laughter and entertainment into your home.