Crazy Rich Asians (2018) - 8/10
I remember at its release, Crazy Rich Asians was heralded by some as the reemergence of the rom-com. A genre that was thought to have been slowly dying was back—and with a vengeance. Now, seven years later, it feels like it was just a momentary blip of pre-COVID optimism. As studios continue to favor big-budget features, rom-coms continue to slowly bleed out of the cultural consciousness, and I now wonder if Crazy Rich Asians was less a resurgence and more a “one last time, for old times’ sake” type of event.
Ramblings aside, this film is a great addition to the pantheon of rom-coms. It benefits from a more female-centric point of view and represents a meaningful growth spurt for on-screen representation. It unfortunately—and sometimes justifiably—carries the burden of some more nuanced controversies. Overall, though, this was a fun rewatch that demonstrates the cinematic power rom-coms can possess when done well.
1. Acting
In a classic rom-com, the most important thing to get right is the chemistry between the two leads. Sometimes this comes from great acting; sometimes it’s great writing. In this film, it almost feels like a subplot to me. Most rom-coms follow a standard meet-cute followed by a will-they-won’t-they dance. Here, Rachel and Nick are already in an established, loving relationship, so the real challenge is creating chemistry that feels lived-in.
Luckily, Constance Wu and Henry Golding are up to the task, and their relationship feels very natural. That said, Wu really carries the weight of it for the audience. Golding is serviceable, but Wu is far more dynamic and shows a great deftness with both dramatic and comedic moments. Put another way: Nick feels like a character; Rachel feels like a person.
Outside of her central relationship, Wu may shine brightest when paired with other members of the ensemble. Her scenes with Awkwafina’s Peik Lin always feel like a breath of fresh air and bring much-needed levity. Wu makes Rachel seem more relaxed and unburdened around Peik Lin, while Awkwafina injects her energetic, sharp deadpan humor into every scene.
With Astrid, we see Rachel’s compassionate side and a different kind of kindred-spirit relationship than what she has with Peik Lin. Gemma Chan brings a great sense of vulnerability to Astrid, making her instantly likable and allowing the audience to understand why Rachel feels safe with her.
By far, though, Wu’s best sparring partner is Michelle Yeoh as the iconic Eleanor. More on Yeoh in a moment, but part of what makes her performance so effective is the tense repartee she shares with Wu. The two go toe-to-toe in every scene.
More specifically, Yeoh’s Eleanor may be one of the greatest performances in an already tremendous career. What makes it so compelling is (1) its depth and (2) how much is conveyed nonverbally. Every look, every line delivery, every nod is loaded with subtext, and Yeoh’s ability to communicate that is a testament to both her talent and her understanding of the character.
As a final note, this is a very large cast. In the interest of moving on, I’ll simply say that there are great performances—both big and small, dramatic and comedic—throughout the supporting ensemble. Lisa Lu, Ken Jeong, Sonoya Mizuno, Chris Pang, Jimmy O. Yang, Ronny Chieng, Nico Santos, and Koh Chieng Mun all leave indelible marks on the film and help make it work as well as it does.
2. Cinematography
The film’s look undoubtedly benefits greatly from its opulent production design and locations. That said, the shooting itself also helps sell the experience. Energetic lighting and camera movement keep the tone light and playful while still grounding the more intimate character moments. There isn’t much photography that stands entirely on its own, but it contributes to a cohesive and consistently good-looking whole.
3. Production and Costume Design
One of the most impressive elements of this film is how luxurious it looks on a reported $30 million budget. Given the decadent locales, large ensemble cast, and lavish costumes, I would have assumed a much higher production cost and had no trouble believing in the wealth portrayed on screen.
The costume department did a fantastic job curating fashion that not only looks great but also feels perfectly tailored to each character. The set design is equally strong and includes several standout sequences, most notably the gorgeous wedding ceremony. The locations not only photograph beautifully but also serve the story well—so much so that the film reportedly caused a spike in tourism to Singapore after its release.
This is a great example of a movie whose aesthetics, tone, and feel are driven primarily by production design, with cinematography playing a strong but secondary role.
4. Writing
One of the challenges of writing a rom-com is that the audience knows where the story is headed. Sometimes the expected happy ending is subverted, but the structure usually remains the same: boy meets girl, conflict arises, and resolution follows.
Here, the familiar elements are present, but the film is closer to Meet the Parents than When Harry Met Sally. The central conflict isn’t whether Rachel and Nick will end up together, but how their lives can realistically merge now that love is already established. It’s not a wholly original concept, but it’s far less common—and one the writers use to explore dynamics often ignored in the genre.
While the film is ostensibly about Rachel and Nick navigating the next stage of their relationship, the more dominant story is between Rachel and Eleanor.
Rachel begins in a relatively stable place: she has a job she loves, a strong relationship with her mother, and a healthy, loving partnership with Nick. That stability is disrupted when she travels to Singapore to meet Nick’s family. Nick’s lie of omission regarding his wealth and family prevents Rachel from making a fully informed choice about her future, forcing her to reassess not only who Nick is but whether she can truly support the life expected of him.
Crucially, the film doesn’t villainize Nick. His omission catalyzes Rachel’s journey, but he remains someone she loves and wants to be with. This allows the story to explore less well-trodden territory—namely, the idea that love doesn’t always conquer all, and that family obligations and cultural expectations can strain even healthy relationships.
Rachel must also contend with something deeply relatable: the need for acceptance. Early on, she seems confident and self-assured, but her desire to be accepted by Nick’s family slowly erodes her self-worth. Repeatedly told she doesn’t belong, she begins to internalize that message. By the film’s conclusion—helped by her friends—she reclaims her self-respect and reaches a place of acceptance that is rooted in understanding herself, not appeasing others. Notably, this arc exists almost entirely independent of Nick, firmly centering Rachel’s perspective. 
Eleanor’s journey is equally important. She resonates because she isn’t a one-dimensional villain. Everything she does comes from a place the audience can understand. She deeply values family and has sacrificed her own ambitions to support her husband and children. Money is not the issue—it’s culture. Eleanor believes her path is the only proper one: self-sacrifice, rigid purpose, and an intense, sometimes toxic, expression of love.
She isn’t entirely wrong—sacrifice for loved ones is admirable—but her inability to accept other expressions of love is her flaw. Eleanor wants Nick to return home, take his place as heir, and marry someone who aligns with her worldview. What she needs is to recognize that her son and Rachel must define their own path together. She is driven by fear and love, not malice.
This emphasis on character over plot is precisely why the film works. It uses the familiar framework of a rom-com but prioritizes interiority and emotional specificity, particularly from a female-centric perspective.
5. Sound Design
Much like the cinematography, the sound design keeps things light and playful. The soundtrack blends older Chinese songs with contemporary tracks rerecorded in Mandarin. Many of the songs focus on wealth, reinforcing both the tone and the film’s thematic motifs.
6. Editing
At over two hours, the film is longer than most rom-coms, but it remains entertaining enough that it rarely feels bloated. That said, there is some fat in the script, and certain beats feel repetitive (we understand fairly quickly that Rachel is seen as an outsider).
Still, there are some clever editing choices. Early in the film, a sequence dubbed “Radio One Asia” illustrates how quickly gossip spreads within Nick’s social circle. Through quick cuts, superimposed text messages, and animated visual links, the film delivers efficient exposition and world-building. It borders on silly, but it’s effective and avoids clunky dialogue dumps.
7. Visual Effects
There are a few stylized flourishes, but very little CGI is needed for the film to succeed.
8. Originality and Strength of Adaptation
The film brings a lot to the rom-com genre, both structurally and thematically. As an adaptation of Kevin Kwan’s novel, it inevitably trims some of the more nuanced cultural commentary. As a result, the film feels efficient—perhaps overly so—and this streamlining likely contributes to some of the controversies surrounding it.
9. Stunt Coordination
Nothing particularly notable here.
10. Direction
Jon M. Chu’s filmography—ranging from Step Up films to music-driven projects like In the Heights—makes him an interesting choice. His musical sensibilities are evident here, even though this film is something of an outlier. Still, he proves to be a strong fit, and his advocacy for Asian representation at every level of production is significant, despite later controversies.
Legacy / Final Thoughts
Rewatching Crazy Rich Asians reminded me of the rise and fall of mid-budget comedies during the Apatow era. Studios today seem increasingly focused on big-budget spectacles, often at the expense of quality. Like those mid-budget comedies, rom-coms appear to have faded from theatrical relevance.
While genres naturally ebb and flow, Hollywood’s current fixation on ROI feels different. Rom-coms have rarely been massive profit engines, and despite Crazy Rich Asians achieving nearly an 8x return on investment, it wasn’t the savior some hoped for. That said, the genre may be finding a second life on streaming platforms—though the lack of theatrical runs can make these projects less appealing to top-tier talent.
As for the controversies surrounding the film, it’s difficult to land on a definitive stance. American critics largely praised its representation, while many viewers in Asian markets found it reductive or took issue with casting choices. There’s also an undercurrent of East-versus-West tension embedded in the Rachel/Eleanor dynamic.
These conversations seem inevitable around films positioned as milestones for representation. While I’m not a fan of incrementalism, I also don’t believe it’s possible to satisfy everyone. The critiques are valid—but I do wonder whether we can allow two things to be true at the same time.
Comments
Post a Comment