I'm actually taking a psych course that recently touched upon attachment styles and like vs like as opposed to opposite attraction and I think it works in film for the very reason you said. I think it's this challenge or HOPE that we can change, or not even; that things would just work out. Also, it is quite nice to be with someone who isn't yourself.

I would also mention another movie: Eternal Sunshine Of The Spotless Mind, because here we have two opposite personalities and neither of them change that personality at the end, they are still themselves but they still hope it can work. Maybe we just want to be understood, rather than changed, and that reason is the biggest of all when it comes from someone who isn't like you at all. But get's you, and loves you for it.

Conflict

Harold and Maude

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1pJLZ6mhKp4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8mM8iNarcRc

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sm9qaEJ3MBc

Great question! (And one I ponder in my real and writing life. Did I ever think I'd marry a guy who hated to read? Not so much.)

I like to think the opposites attract thing has more to do with love tempering two extremes than with believing we can change--but I guess it's in there.

But then there's the question of who changes more? And is it better to be flexible or a sign that your side of the personality equation wasn't strong enough in the first place?

I'll leave a roundabout answer to your question:

When I was in grad school and going through a divorce, I made friends with two women who came from India. As they were finishing their graduate work, their families began introducing them to suitable men. they remarked that in modern times, educated families would not force their kids into marriage--each person had the right of refusal.

One of my friends experienced a strong love-at-first-sight attraction to a man to whom she'd been introduced and the feeling was mutual.

From watching this, I realized that many families involved in the age-old custom of arranging marriages actually do a pretty good job. The tradition in some Indian cultures (there's a lot of cultural diversity in the country), is to look for a combination of similarities and differences. In short, they think that people tend to do well when they hold similar values, and when they have enough in common that they can enjoy sharing experiences, with enough difference to make things interesting.

Please realize that I can't do justice to the whole system and the cultures.

I believe that good stories are always instructive in some way. We don't want to have to be lectured, but I think that there's a natural drive that comes from deep within our psyches that causes us to want to continue learning and growing in some way. We like challenges as long as we have enough time to understand and adapt to new and different things.

So, one take on the RomCom is that it demonstrates how people who look really different, can actually learn enough about each other to find similarities that exist beneath the superficial. It's actually instructive in some way while being entertaining, even if it's admittedly fictional.

BTW, I loved "You Don't Mess With the Zohan." :-)

@Josh: Great point: "Maybe we just want to be understood, rather than changed, and that reason is the biggest of all when it comes from someone who isn't like you at all."

@Phil: When in doubt, go with conflict.

@Jodi: Good question: "And is it better to be flexible or a sign that your side of the personality equation wasn't strong enough in the first place?"

@Ascribe: Thoughtful comments. I especially like this: "So, one take on the RomCom is that it demonstrates how people who look really different, can actually learn enough about each other to find similarities that exist beneath the superficial. It's actually instructive in some way while being entertaining, even if it's admittedly fictional."

That whole idea of 'two become one' seems a bit off to me. I think when you're in a relationship, it's more like 'two become three': Him, Her, and the Couple.

Conflict, that age-old device stories have effectively employed since beginning of time.

Opposites in love more likely myth than reality: http://youarenotsosmart.com/2010/06/17/opposites/

And true love exists: http://edge.org/q2005/q05_5.html#buss

Tom Waits was so fortunate, as was Rachel Maddow, and also myself, omg so lucky. Never expected it, never thought was real, then it happened, stunned. (on Tom Waits experience: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kathleen_Brennan )

So if in true love you know right away, where's the conflict? My thought, still lots of potential conflict, two people with different histories, expectations, ways of communicating, families, etc.

Scott:

Obviously, I've given this some thought, but I'll try to be brief.

I agree with Josh that the Op/At idea taps into our (very American) hope-based belief in the Myth of Change. And I agree with your other comments folk on the idea that obviously, having characters be polarized in their extreme differences seeds instant conflict; that's a rom-com screenwriter's given.

But I've come to think that the phrase "opposites attract" is actually about what psychology might refer to as "integration." Meaning: We're strongly attracted to someone who is strong in a quality we lack (and to a lesser degree, vice versa).

Thus optimistic, cheery Sally gives dark, pessimistic Harry a good bolt of positive energy, just as Harry helps Sally to be more grounded in pragmatic realities. Think: Jack Sprat and his wife. It's not so much "opposites attract" as "unfulfilled needs engage."

Good rom-com protagonists start out to some degree emotionally incomplete, because love is about to enter their lives and (after some romantic comedy craziness) fulfill them, and hopefully transform them for the better. The mate-to-be represents "what the other one needs," i.e. Yin gets yanged, and yang yinned.

This is why Cameron Crowe hit it out of the park with "You complete me." He could have had Tom say to Renee, "Y'know, you're the opposite of me in so many ways, but you've got the very qualities that I don't have and that I need, so being with you makes me a better person, and together, we make, like, one really WHOLE unit that like, rocks, so... I want you."

But that doesn't roll quite so trippingly off the tongue, do it?

@mernitman: Well, there you go. Sense of completion, the one partner bringing something the other partner needs and vice versa.

But then in pushing out the differences between the two, it's critical to convey a legitimate sense that both parties actually connect with each other. This goes beyond the issue of actors not having 'chemistry' to the idea that some rom-coms fail because viewers just don't believe they would fall in love with each other - no actual emotional resonance.

That drives me nuts in scripts...

Opposites can be refreshing because:

a.) Someone who is different fulfills our curiosity of the unknown. They help us grow.

b.) It's easier to open up your heart to someone who presents their differences up front, instead of failing to live up to their phony first impression. It also shows confidence - which is sexy.

Yuh-huh, Scott - I'm always going on about this: it's much harder to write the connection - to show why people really do make sense as a couple - than to rely on superficial "they're so different, so sparks fly, and that's hot" constructs...

Wrote a post about this recently: http://livingromcom.typepad.com/my_weblog/2011/02/rom-com-truisms-1.html

Also love Jason's "a," that's so well put! Agree, too, that any character who's not fronting, who's just putting themselves out there (not caring whether you like them or not) is genuinely sexy.

I think part of is sexual attraction/repression. The rules of a traditional society, class and cultural mores have always dictated who we should or should not copulate with. Sexual cliches like the working class stud, or the rich bitch are in part of product of such rules. I think the attraction for the forbidden is a major part of it.

Another part of it might be that on a deeper level we know that all human being are the same. Remove class, cultural, racial and national boundaries and the human experience is the same for everyone. Cinema, literature or art then simply narrows the gaps and gives us a peek into lives not unlike ours.

The third may be how love stories themselves have conditioned us. Epic tales of romance with star crossed lovers, the knight in shining armour, the damsel in distress, the search for that one true love, etc, etc. The sheer loftiness of what has been defined as romance is major money spinning industry. Surely then, the more difficult the path of the lovers, the more magical the romance looks and feels, and the more distinct the lovers are as people, the more difficult thier path becomes in getting to that cherished ideal. The attraction for such a romance could also be because in real life most people choose conservatively when it comes to lovers and marriage partners. We have too many rules, opinions and judgments when it comes to people, and a romance between opposites seems
to be selling you and ideal in spite of the rules, which i think makes it a tempting buy.

Aside from attraction being a law of physics, in a universe of polarities - yin yang, light dark, grow die, (ahem) in out – repel and attract is probably coded into our DNA.

Perhaps the journey is getting conscious of this process so we can make better choices.

Só no LoirasNuas.com encontram as melhores gatas peladas... [...]What is the deal with rom-coms and opposites attract? « Go Into The Story[...]...