Full disclosure: Crazy Rich Asians made me believe in romcoms again. Not that I ever lost hope, but one woman can only take so many 2000s trope-filled nightmares. Crazy Rich Asians has everything I love about a romcom: beautiful people, lavish settings, shenanigans, an emotional climax that is actually meaningful. First, though, a few things: this film is an incredible achievement in representation of Asian people in Hollywood, and many writers have written about its cultural impact in a way I never could. If you’re interested in reading about that, you could start with this article from Suyin Haynes at Time Magazine or this piece from Audrey Cleo Yap at Variety or this one from Marina Fang at HuffPo. For the purposes of this project, I’m looking at Crazy Rich Asians and speaking only for what I can speak to, which is how it plays as a romcom.

 

If you live under a rock and haven’t seen this movie yet or read the book on which it is based, a quick summary: Constance Wu plays Rachel Chu, a Chinese-American Economics professor at NYU, and Henry Golding plays her incredibly wonderful boyfriend, Nick Young, who we later learn is the heir to a huge real estate fortune in Singapore. He’s not just rich, he’s crazy rich. We’ll dive into this more later, but Rachel doesn’t learn of her boyfriend’s huge cash flow until the couple flies to Singapore for Nick’s friend’s wedding, when she is thrown into his family and their prejudices about a woman like her.

 

At face value, this situation is a pretty classic romcom trope. Poor(ish) girl, rich boy, even richer family, disapproving female relative — conflict ensues. This is the plot of Pride and Prejudice, after all. But what I love about Crazy Rich Asians is how romcom tropes are given cultural relevance, and how the film never insinuates that Rachel worth is anything less than her rich boyfriend. The conflict between the couple isn’t so much about the differences in what they do for a living, but more about how upbringing/economic status puts strain on a relationship, even when the two love each other. This film doesn’t imply that Rachel needs to give up her job to be happy with Nick, and I love it for that reason. Also, they’re just so nice to look at.

 

Rachel might be the only econ professor who gets to be the female lead in a romcom. If you know of another one, I stand corrected. There is something wonderfully subversive about Rachel as an academic and in a seemingly male discipline. Also, she’s like a cool professor! When we’re first introduced to Rachel, it’s a shot of her at a poker table, and then the camera pans to show us she’s a professor of game theory (which I still don’t understand even though I googled it) who is destroying her male TA in poker as part of a class lecture.

 

Now, I have not taken a college econ class so maybe they’re all like this, but I think it’s safe to say that the film wants us to believe that this is definite cool professor behavior. The satisfaction I get in watching this woman just be good at her job makes me sad this this is really the only scene we get of Rachel in her actual workplace. I know the story necessitates leaving New York behind, and the film does find ways to incorporate Rachel’s career into later scenes, but I do wish we got to see more of her in action. This film shows Rachel having a career, not just a job. It’s a lot of school and time to become a member of academia, something Rachel should be proud of. I wish a little we got to see more of it.

Nick comes to visit Rachel at work, but it’s definitely in an “I admire how smart you are” kind of way, not in a “I don’t understand personal and professional boundaries” kind of way. I love a man that recognizes his partner is infinitely smarter than him. Although, I will admit, Henry Golding can do absolutely nothing wrong in my eyes. Nor, for that matter, can Constance Wu. They’re too pretty.

 

We get a sense early on that one of the things that Nick admires about Rachel is her career. When they’re in the restaurant and he suggests they take a trip to Singapore for his friend’s wedding, he tells her he wants everyone at home to meet “the brilliant Rachel Chu.” I swoon. But seriously, even though we don’t get to see much of Rachel in action at work, the film lets us know that this career and her intellect as essential parts of who she is. This is particularly notable since not many other women in this film seem to have jobs outside of the demanding Singapore social circle.

 

The women we meet in Singapore, for the most part, have a different kind of relationship with work and employment than Rachel, which adds to the level of complexity that this romcom has with regards to women’s work. It’s worth mentioning that not all women are in a position where they want to or have to work, and Crazy Rich Asians has a fair share of women who don’t seem to have a job, at least in a 9-to-5 kind of way. There are a few exceptions, however. Take Nick’s cousin Alistar’s girlfriend, Kitty Pong. She’s an actress, but evidently a terrible one, as Alistar is the one producing the films in which she stars. Her work is treated like a throwaway, a means to a kind of gold-digging end. There’s also Amanda, who we meet later in the film, the Young Family Corporation’s lawyer and, Nick’s ex-girlfriend. Her career and her close relationship with the Youngs is treated as a threat, not in that she could potentially steal Nick from Rachel, but in that she has the approval influence over the family that Rachel won’t have.

 

For Rachel, whose identity is inherently tied with her job as a success story, the prospect of meeting Nick’s family as career woman doesn’t initially phase her. In fact, she tells her mother that she’s sure to impress the Chinese Youngs, as she’s “so Chinese [she’s] an economics professor with lactose intolerance.” Before meeting the family, she assumes her version of success — great job, come from nothing, independent life — will be what impresses the Youngs. Sidenote, I think the film implies that this trip happens over Rachel’s spring break from NYU, but I’m just impressed and maybe concerned that she can leave grading and other work behind her in New York. It makes me wonder if any of my professors have jetted off to Singapore with a hot rich love interest for spring break. Maybe that’s why papers take so long to grade.

 

If we thought about this movie in its basic parts, it could be seen a conflict between money and lack of it, between career and family priorities, or between love and obligation. Yet, there’s a different way to think about the issues that threaten to pull Rachel and Nick apart, and it’s not one of simple binary. It starts with recasting the opposing forces, particularly the women of Nick’s family, not as antagonists. Eleanor, Nick’s mom, can easily get the villain treatment. Played by Michelle Yeoh, Eleanor initially seems to be set in opposition to Rachel, valuing family and the sacrifice of one’s career over an American ideal of “following your passions.” When watching this movie again, I wondered if it were possible to think of Eleanor as having a career as well, albeit a nontraditional one. Eleanor performs immense emotional labor for her family, sacrificing her chance to raise Nick in her house so that he would be raised by his grandmother and become the favorite, securing his place as the heir to the Young fortune.

 

The conflict that threatens to tear Nick and Rachel apart does come from their difference in economic status, sure, but I would also argue that it comes a little bit from Rachel’s initial inability to recognize what Eleanor does as work. Eleanor says as much to Rachel, asking her to think about the fancy house and their close-knit family as the result of Eleanor’s labor, not just some fairytale. Yes, Eleanor does her fair share of shaming Rachel for pursuing the “American Dream,” telling her that she’ll never be enough for Nick, but I think Rachel reaches a broader understanding of the definition of work by the end of the film. 

 

Although I love Henry Golding, Nick makes a mess of his relationship with Rachel by not telling her about his family’s money earlier and assuming it wouldn’t be a big deal to throw her into this situation with very little to go on. At one point he actually tells Astrid that Rachel “lectures millenials for a living, she’ll manage our family.” Yet, without Peik Lin’s wardrobe or Astrid’s kindness or Nick’s cousin Oliver’s help, Rachel wouldn’t been able to manage. Interestingly, Nick’s job has the most real-world hinderance on their romance, as he is supposed to take over the family business, moving back to Singapore and leaving his life in New York behind. There’s a problem: he loves Rachel and wants to marry her. And while Nick is lovely, the conversation that he has with his friend Colin at the failed bachelor party reveals he has like little to no plan for the two of them after engagement.

 

Colin is right, Rachel loves her job in New York. Would he ask her to leave it? Would he give up on his family and stay with her? The film clearly wants us to see he is torn, but I just wonder how he literally seems not to have thought past ring-on-finger. Also these stakes (if he walks out he leaves the fortune to Alistar and Eddie) are ridiculous and I will not stand for this Astrid erasure. She’s RIGHT THERE and capable of running a company.

 

There are lots of twists and turns and reveals that lead to this film’s conclusion, and if you haven’t seen it you should, but the final moments of the film don’t really resolve as much of the class/work issues as it seems like they do. After initially disapproving of Nick and Rachel and attempting to break them up, Eleanor changes her mind and gives her own engagement ring to Nick in order for him to propose (again) to Rachel. They get engaged on airplane and I’m crying but there are no practical solutions to their problems.

 

Rachel’s reservations about his family and his familial obligations still exist. Her job at NYU is still something she values, and I would think less of Nick if he asked her to give it up. Yes, I know there are two more books and, I hope, two more films in the series coming, but I don’t see a clear way through that lets everyone be happy. My fear is that the woman who has been asked to sacrifice the most, Eleanor, will be called on to do it again, letting Nick’s life bend to fit Rachel’s. Rachel and Nick will go back to New York, Rachel will teach her classes and Nick will do whatever it is he does, and Eleanor’s emotional labor might be for nothing.