Why Can't More Rom Coms Be Like When Harry Met Sally?

I'm not a romantic comedy kind of girl. Frankly, I don't understand the point of them. Any film genre that is defined by a specific, formulaic process doesn't make sense to me. It's the same reason why I can't stand sports movies (the underdog will win in some way, shape, or form and there will be a rousing speech). I don't want to know what's going to happen next when I'm watching the movie.

However, like with all rules, there are exceptions. If you show me something new or do something creative or just make it plain good, I'll like it. There are very few romantic comedies that manage to do this, but by far my favorite is When Harry Met Sally...

This isn't because the film manages to create some incredibly odd plotline or something. There can be (and has been) many movies about friends that fall in love. What's beautiful is how it's done. It doesn't purely focus on Harry and Sally, you also get the differences between men and women and the conversations they share. Also, there's comedy. Actual, REAL comedy. Even lines that are hilarious even though they can just float by you ("I have a theory that hieroglyphics are actually an ancient comic strip about a character named Sphinxy").

So, when I heard that No Strings Attached compared to When Harry Met Sally... I decided to check it out. However, as I expected, it was nowhere near it. First of all, the flashbacks to the different points in which Adam and Emma meet take up around ten minutes, which means it shows you nothing of their actual personality, just enough to show you that they've known each other for a while, but barely. The flashbacks of Harry and Sally (which have one less than Adam and Emma) are just over twenty minutes of the movie. They establish where they're both at in life, and it's wonderful because as you see them in real time, you get to see the changes (an example being a post-college Sally insisting that Ingrid Bergman actually doesn't want to be with Humphrey Bogart at the end of the movie because it is impractical, and a thirty-one year old Sally states that she would have never said that).

Secondly, the relationships between men and women are barely even highlighted in the film. I love the discussions between Harry and Jess or Sally and Marie. It shows the differences in gender, but then it also highlights the different relationships you have between members of your own gender and that of the opposite.

Finally, there is no real friendship between Alex and Emma. The two of them barely know each other and then decide to start having sex, but without the relationship. Maybe it's just me, but I don't find this half as beautiful as being friends without the sex. The thing here is which intimacy takes precedent. In No Strings Attached, Alex and Emma share physical intimacy and attempt to avoid emotional intimacy. In When Harry Met Sally, Harry and Sally share emotional intimacy and attempt to avoid physical intimacy. With another film of the former being released soon (Friends with Benefits), I have to wonder why it is our generation is more fascinated by the idea of casual sex over the idea of real communication. Are we all so terrified of emotional vulnerability? Or is it just that no one can create a friends to lovers film the way Rob Reiner and Nora Ephron did over twenty years ago? Until I can get more great rom coms like When Harry Met Sally, I think I'll stick to romantic tragedies...