“Harry, you might not believe this, but I never considered not sleeping with you a sacrifice.”

I’ve never understood the stigma that a romantic comedy is inherently slight. I’ll openly admit that studios more interested in making money than telling great stories have hijacked the genre slightly, but in many ways I believe that some of the best expressions of how men and women interact have come from those select romantic comedies that dare to hold a mirror up to how we act around the opposite sex.

Up towards the top of the stack for me is Rob Reiner’s 1989 pop culture classic, WHEN HARRY MET SALLY…

Steve Honeywell from 1001 Plus had never seen the film before, so he volunteered to watch it with fresh (and very knowledgeable eyes) and talk to me about how well it holds up 23 years later.

Ryan McNeil: So how was it that you never caught up with this film before now?

Steve Honeywell: I’m not sure why I hadn’t watched it. I think initially, before I really opened myself up to watching a variety of genres, it was more or less that the genre of romantic comedies didn’t appeal to me. In fact, they still don’t, in general. When I started on the 1001 list, I knew I’d have to watch it eventually, and I bought a copy (on VHS, no less) from a sale at my local library knowing I’d have to watch it. And there it sat for a good two years. I don’t really have a reason other than other films always seemed more pressing. I knew I’d get to it eventually.

RM: Well there we go – my tapping you to take part in this series just gave you the excuse to finally dust it off and pull it down off the shelf. Did you have any preconceptions or expectations when you sat down to watch it?

SH: When I pressed play, a part of me thought, “Well, let’s get this over.” Another part of me thought, “I hope it lives up to its reputation.”

RM: Geez man, you make it sound like I was making you watch Andy Warhol’s SLEEP. How did you make out?

SH: It’s really good! I admit that I’m kicking myself for not watching it earlier. In my defense, though, the rom-com genre does tend to be feeble. There are plenty more bad ones than there are good ones, so I’m always wary.

We’re given real characters here instead of caricatures. They have real hopes, real motivations. They’re realistic. Sally’s inability to order off the menu in a restaurant reminds me very much of my wife, who hasn’t ever seen an entree she can’t mutate. Harry’s observations are perhaps a little too clever, but are the sort of observations I see people make. My friends say stuff like that. So do I now and then. The fact that these are real people going through real issues in what look like real lives is a big plus, because I don’t ever care about caricatures. I do care about characters I can understand.

It’s also Meg Ryan before she was typecast as the cute girl aching for a guy, and it’s Billy Crystal at his most likable and fun, and those things don’t hurt.

RM: That’s the thing, right? Sometimes we like to paint a character as being too smart for their own good, but when we step back and realize that we’ve met such people it becomes more tangible.

Perhaps the film’s quality speaks volumes about its writing, and that where rom-coms are concerned, the writers should be looked at as the real stars? More than the actors or perhaps even the directors!

SH: Yes–Nora Ephron should get a lot of the credit here. Ryan and Crystal (and to a lesser extent Carrie Fisher and Bruno Kirby) are given fantastic material. Few actors can make wretched material work, so having that as a base really helps. The problem with rom-coms is that they so often fall back on formula. In it’s own way, When Harry Met Sally is formulaic. We’re pretty sure that at the end they’ll be together. But in most rom-coms, we know this. When Sandra Bullock bumps into a guy and hates him at first sight, is there any mystery about the third act? Or how we’ll get there? That’s the issue for me–but the same can be said of a lot of genres. Generally, you know in the first 15 minutes how most sports movies will end, too. Think there’ll be a big game at the end? Think the underdogs will win?

RM: Did you know coming in that this was where the term “High maintenance/low maintenance” came from?

SH: No. My wife is remarkably low maintenance, aside from her penchant for twisting orders at restaurants (you should hear the woman order pancakes. It’s epic). She’s often ready to go before I am, and I am so appreciative of that. Everyone knows that person who always has to have his or her own way in everything or everything is ruined! RUINED! So, even though I didn’t know the specifics of this film, those terms have been a part of my vocabulary pretty much forever.


RM: I think we all know people who fit into one category or the other. But that’s crazy isn’t it? A writer comes up with one little idea – that’s only ever mentioned once in the film – and it becomes part of the wider vocabulary, and not even in a wry “You complete me” sort of way.

Crystal and Ryan have an amazing chemistry, don’t they? It’s almost strange to see, because on a casting sheet, you might not think of them as clicking as well as they do.

SH: The chemistry works, and part of that is attributable to the script. We wouldn’t buy them as a couple right away. We need to see them as friends who genuinely enjoy each other’s company before we accept them as a romantic pairing. Again, a smart move by Nora Ephron. The chemistry between them works, but with this set-up, the chemistry between any two likable people would work. We’re not told that they like each other, we’re shown it over and over, and so we believe it.

RM: Part of me wonders if a modern studio would be able to resist casting prettier people in the roles and not considering their chemistry for even a moment.

Well it certainly sounds like you enjoyed this a great deal – which I’m always happy to hear. Despite my “watch it again” mantra, I don’t want things to become a chore. It couldn’t have been totally perfect – was there anything in particular that you didn’t like about it?

SH: This will sound crazy, but the biggest problem I had is that “the scene” isn’t as funny as I thought it would be. It might well be that I’ve seen that moment before because it’s considered so classic, or that it’s been built up so much for me that I expected the world of it, but I got a much bigger laugh from “Waiter, there is too much pepper on my paprikash, but I would be proud to partake of your pecan pie.”

Other than that, I could have wished for another 15 minutes or so. Or more of the old couples. I loved them.

RM: It’s strange, because usually I preach the gospel of ‘context’, but the deli scene has always spoken for itself. So I can see what you’re saying; this moment that’s been built up as one of the funniest in film history plays like any other card in the deck.

If anything, Harry gets an even better moment before Meg gets into the theatrics (“What. are. you. saying? Women. fake. orgasms?). I was of the same opinion when I saw it, and like you I was more amused by a lot of the throw-a-way lines (“…but Baby Fish Mouth is sweeping the nation”)

And in the year or two that I’ve been doing this discussion series, I don’t think anyone has logged the “I wish there was more of it” complaint. Anything else rub you the wrong way?
 

SH: The blind date scene is far too pat. The moment that Marie quotes an article Jess wrote, we know where this is going, and the film thankfully doesn’t draw it out too much, but the end of that scene is straight out of a sit-com. Both agree with their friends that they’ll take it slow, and then they leave together and suddenly they’re moving in together. All it’s missing is the “doodle-y doodle-y doo!” music and a “boing-g-g-g!” sound effect.

 
Similarly, it does perpetuate the attitude that a woman without a man is incomplete. Marie, before she meets Jess, is with a married man, and knowing that he’ll never leave his wife doesn’t dissuade her from leaving him because she needs to have a man in her life at all times. It doesn’t matter how successful she is or what she does–she’s incomplete until she claims a man. Sally is much the same way.
 
To the film’s credit, Harry is similar, but this is a stereotype that bothers me. I monitor how much of this sort of idea gets put in my girls’ heads because I don’t want them growing up thinking that they need to have a man in their lives to be complete, and that any man will do as long as he’s a man. My older one, in particular, is setting herself on a career path in which marriage is possible, but pregnancy is a potential career-ender (ballet). She should feel that this is a viable option for herself and she shouldn’t be made to feel like her life is missing something if she chooses a different path. I’ll say that this film puts up a front of at least suggesting other possibilities–Sally doesn’t lose it until her ex gets engaged–but it’s still an element of the film.
 
 
RM: Thing is though, I’d wager we both know men and women who act that way. Who swing from branch to branch and can’t find happiness in who they are themselves? I mean, I understand that there are certain pressures in certain social circles, but doesn’t it seem a little bit backwards that no personal success is enough without having a steady date? Also, I think we’ve both met people who get far too hung up with what their exes are doing. Both details are like a yardstick that people can’t stop measuring themselves against.
 
That’s great to know that you’re instilling more of a sense of self and independence in your children. I’d like to hope that the next generation can turn a corner where self-image is concerned, but I’d wager that such thinking depends on a lot of factors…and that not everyone is as level-headed as The Great Honeywell!
 
Since we’re on the philosophical path here, is Harry right – is it impossible for men and women to be “just friends”?
 

SH: That is the central question, isn’t it? It’s a good question, too. In some respects, Harry is right–there frequently is a sexual tension between men and women.

 
On the other hand, I have female friends with whom I have no such sexual tension. Then again, I’ve been married for ages, and so I’ve been “off the market” since the late 1980s. Sue and I started dating in February of 1988, and we’re married 21 years next month. I don’t experience a lot of sexual tension in that regard because it’s something that no longer really crosses my mind. I may be unusual in that.
 
He does actually bring that up at one point and tries to come up with an exception to his rule, even though he can’t make it work.
 
I think it comes down to strength of relationship. I can have female friends and my wife can have male friends because after 24 years, we’ve worked up a huge amount of trust on that front. I trust her, and perhaps more importantly, I trust myself.
 
So, while Harry is often right, there aren’t a lot of absolutes in this world, so his calling it an impossibility is overreaching. After all, all we really need is a single exception.
 
For you, what makes this film work? This is regarded as at or near the gold standard for the genre, so why does (or doesn’t) it work for you?
 
 

RM: What makes it work for me is the ever-changing relationship between Harry and Sally. Something we seldom see in movie and television shows is the way that we can know of somebody but not feel all that close to them…however, if we run into them later when we’re both at a different place in our lives, we can find ourselves becoming friends with someone who was once just an acquaintance.

 
As I mentioned earlier, it’s a comedy that worries about writing first and lets everything else fall into place – more mainstream Hollywood comedies could learn from that.
 
SH: Is this film a romance with comedic elements or a comedy centered on a romance?
 
RM: I thought I was supposed to be asking the questions.
 
WHEN HARRY MET SALLY is neither – this is a film about two people and how they come together and fall apart through the years. There are lots of funny moments and lots of romantic moments, but they both happen naturally and in proper balance. The script isn’t worried about being funny first or romantic first, and that is what makes it work!
 
So on a scale of 1 to 10, what would you rank WHEN HARRY MET SALLY?
 
SH: I’ll call it a 9. Most of my 10s are films I know and love and have seen over and over again. In five years, this might hit that mark. Right now, though, for me, it’s one of the best in its genre. The characters are great, the writing is light years beyond 90% of the genre, and the actors are superb. It also has the old couples, which are really the butter cream rose on this wedding cake. They’re perhaps my favorite touch in this film, both because of how sweet those little scenes are and because of how unexpected it is
RM: The highest score so far! Thanks Steve.

 

5 Replies to “Talkin’ WHEN HARRY MET SALLY with Steve Honeywell”

    1. Yeah, you guys really covered all the bases. Great discussion on a worthy entry. Most rom-coms make me wanna vom-vom, but WHEN HARRY MET SALLY rises above the rest for precisely the reasons you both point out – writing, characters, acting – it all sits very well.

      1. I think Sean what you’re hitting on here is what makes all of the truly great films succeed and endure, regardless of genre. When they can break out of the boundaries of their particular genre – be it rom-com, action, horror – and exude great storytelling, they take on an identity all their own.

        Too often the structure of these genres is mailed in, but when they aren’t, we get something that feels special – like this!

  2. I love this movie! I’m a pretty staunch advocator of romcoms, because they can be smart and funny and awesome. And When Harry Met Sally is all of that.

    I love Crystal and Ryan. My friend and I have like routine bouts of love for Harry Burns. He’s like her perfect man, which is insane because Crystal isn’t really much of a looker, but he makes this character so endearing and lovely. And I just adore “that scene”. It’s probably one of my most favourite scenes ever. Ryan is priceless, and Reiner’s mum is even moreso.

    I just love this movie. Now I’m all smile-y 🙂

    1. I like to talk up the best rom-com’s, but they feel a bit fewer and further between. But since they talk so honestly about who we are and how we relate to the opposite sex, I believe they are invaluable snapshots in the collage that is film history.

      Movies like this, (500) DAYS OF SUMMER, THE APARTMENT, and SLEEPLESS IN SEATTLE will always have a special place in my heart.

Comments are closed.