The New York Times reviewed Reminders of Him as “A Second Chance at Love,” praised Maika Monroe for selling a “shameless tear-jerker” and Tyriq Withers for bringing “real layering” to a stock character. The review is positive. The buried story is that prestige critics still approach romance adaptations with a single default lens: character drama, performance, emotional authenticity. What the audience is there for often gets less attention than whether the film passes as respectable drama.
Prestige Outlets Default to the Same Lens on Romance
On March 12, 2026, the Times ran a review of the Colleen Hoover adaptation that framed the film as an effective weeper anchored by strong performances. The reviewer noted that Monroe “can sell a 110 percent shameless tear-jerker like nobody’s business” and that the film serves its emotional material “unabashedly and without a single wink.” The headline was “A Second Chance at Love.” That framing is not wrong, but it is the same frame prestige outlets use for almost every romance adaptation: treat it as a character piece, praise the leads, note the emotional beats. The Ringer has described how romance films succeed by following familiar tropes and emotional conflict; The Conversation has argued that the best book-to-screen romance respects the genre. Prestige criticism often does not start from what romance audiences are there for. It starts from whether the film is “good” by the standards of serious drama.
Variety called Reminders of Him “a restrained Colleen Hoover soap opera” and credited it with avoiding melodramatic overwrought moments while maintaining emotional depth. The Los Angeles Times and the San Francisco Chronicle similarly emphasized performance and restraint. The AP noted the film’s “sad-happy” balance and its focus on the maternal bond alongside the romance. In each case, the default is to evaluate the adaptation as drama first and romance second. That tone is what the genre always gets from prestige outlets: respectful, performance-focused, and often missing the language of why romance readers and viewers show up.
The New Yorker, in a piece on Emerald Fennell’s Wuthering Heights, suggested that critics debate fidelity and style while audiences embrace unabashed romanticism, and that Hollywood has largely abandoned the genre for theatrical releases. The implication is that prestige discourse and romance audiences are not fully aligned. The NYT Reminders of Him review is not hostile; it is the tone the genre always gets. The real story is that having to be “respectable” and “restrained” to earn that tone is the default ask, and what the audience is there for can get lost in the middle.
What This Actually Means
The NYT review is a good review. It is also proof that prestige critics still approach romance with one default lens. Until outlets engage with what romance audiences want, not just whether the film works as drama, the genre will keep getting the same tone.
What Is Reminders of Him?
Reminders of Him is a 2026 American romantic drama directed by Vanessa Caswill, from a screenplay by Colleen Hoover and Lauren Levine, based on Hoover’s 2022 novel. It stars Maika Monroe as Kenna, who returns to her Wyoming hometown after prison and seeks to reconnect with her daughter while forming a relationship with Ledger (Tyriq Withers). The film opened in U.S. theaters on March 13, 2026, and was reviewed by The New York Times and other major outlets as a second-chance romance and tear-jerker.
Why the Default Lens Matters
The Ringer has documented how romance films succeed by leaning into familiar tropes and emotional conflict; audiences show up for the promise of a satisfying arc and chemistry. The Conversation has argued that the best book-to-screen romance respects the genre’s conventions instead of condescending to them. When prestige outlets focus almost entirely on whether the adaptation works as drama—performances, restraint, emotional authenticity—they rarely engage with what makes romance readers and viewers loyal. That gap is what the NYT Reminders of Him review exemplifies: a good review that still frames the film as a character piece first and a romance second.
Hollywood has largely abandoned romance for wide theatrical release, as The New Yorker has noted; the few adaptations that get a theatrical push, like Reminders of Him, are judged by the same drama-first lens. The result is that the tone the genre always gets—respectful, performance-focused, often missing the language of why romance audiences show up—remains the default. Until outlets routinely ask whether the film delivers what the audience is there for, the genre will keep getting the same tone from prestige critics. The NYT review is not an outlier; it is the norm.
That pattern is consistent across prestige coverage and reflects how the genre is evaluated: as drama first, with audience expectations often secondary.
The consistency of that message across outlets is the story.
Sources
The New York Times, Variety, Los Angeles Times, The New Yorker, The Conversation