Bought the DVD of and enjoyed the Capra film recently–hadn’t seen it in 20 or so years. Was struck by how much it set the gold standard for the Romantic Comedy genre, and little has changed since 1934–most modern RomComs simply ring up a few changes on this and “Bringing Up Baby” and “The Philadelhia Story”.
But got to thinking… really, even in 1934 was it truly all that original (I’m aware it was based on a prose short story), or did it just ring up changes on and outdo previous films? If so, give me examples of such films. Silent and talkies.
Hell, lovers who are too dumb to know they’re perfect for each other/lovers thrown together under awkward circumstances go back to Shakespeare and beyond, right. For all I know there’s probably an example of the basic RomCom story in the Bible!
“Screwball” comedies are often seen as distinctly different from “Romantic” comedies, in that they stressed differences in class more (thanks to the Great Depression) and gender roles as well. Though the melding of low- and high-brow humor (slapstick & verbal wit) was not unheard of in theater (Shakespeare, et al.), the lack of audible dialogue in the silent era (and technological difficulties in the early talkies) made this a relatively new phenomenon in the cinema.
I think a lot of people mention 1934 as the starting point because it was openly recognized as a genre by then, with IH1N, Twentieth Century, and The Thin Man all making a huge splash. One could argue that Lubitsch did something similar earlier (like in the brilliant Trouble in Paradise–1932), but he more had the reputation for sophistication rather than “zaniness” that characterized screwballs. Love Me Tonight (1932) is a good example of having many of the screwball characteristics, but it was a musical first and comedy second. Chaplin’s City Lights (1931) has many of the same themes as screwballs superficially, but his film is tinged with pathos and sentimentality that screwballs tried very hard to avoid (plus there’s no dialogue). Clara Bow films have strong central females (like It–1927), but are more high- and free-spirited than “wacky”, and there’s no verbal fireworks (obviously).
The list goes on. I think there are plenty of examples one could come up with, and as many exceptions why they don’t fit into the screwball mold (and I’d certainly argue that almost all modern rom-coms don’t remotely resemble screwballs, except perhaps in their most benign, watered-down form).
Though I didn’t go into it in my OP, one of the things that was on my mind was the fact that IHON is called a “screwball” comedy… compared to the classic Hepburn/Grant films, it just doesn’t seem too “screwball” to me. But my definitions may be off.
Screwball to me is extreme physicality, wild zany females screaming through a scene at lightspeed, falling on thir asses, sliding through the frame, delivering a verbal barrage as they go. Screwball is hapless male leads epitomized by dorky Cary Grant, screwball is Grant lockstepping with Hepburn to cover her… assets.
Unlike my definition of screwball, IHON has a strong male lead, and seems extremely sedate in physicality, but strong in verbal wit.