Among cineastes, there is a longstanding debate about the fundamental purpose of film. Most ultimately agree that cinema exists to tell stories—stories rendered through a visual medium. While storytelling may be the essence of filmmaking, not all films succeed at it. When evaluating a film’s effectiveness, the primary metric is always the quality of its story. For me, as a reviewer, that metric is foundational, and it proved especially instructive when assessing the 2026 romantic dramedy Couple Goals.
The Mantle: Inner Core of Story
As the Motion Picture Institute notes,
“From cave paintings to digital billboards, we are all visual consumers. We love to watch a story unfold. It is the art of showing a feeling that emotionally connects us to a product, a character, and the issues that shape us.”
At its core, the cinematic experience is about connection. Connection fosters engagement, and when a film fails to engage its audience, it has failed in the most basic sense of the word.
Locking in on Template
Stories can range from the simple to the profound, but all follow a basic structure: a beginning, a middle, and an end. By definition, any narrative that fulfills this structure is a story—but not all stories are good ones. Artists typically bring projects forward because they have a vision or something meaningful to communicate. Characters serve as the vessels for that vision: they pursue goals, encounter opposition, and engage in conflict. These are the fundamentals of effective storytelling. Yet what happens when a film meets all of these criteria and still fails? Couple Goals is a case study in exactly that dilemma.
Following Formula
On a technical level, Couple Goals is undeniably a story. It has a clear beginning, middle, and end. The protagonist has a goal—to become a showrunner—and she faces resistance from the network, which introduces an external challenger brought in to test her capabilities. There is conflict, as well as secondary and tertiary storylines. By all structural measures, the film qualifies as a narrative.
Where it falters is in execution. First and foremost, the film is aggressively formulaic. It relies on a one-size-fits-all romantic blueprint: the source of conflict inevitably becomes the object of desire; contrived circumstances force two emotionally guarded individuals together; a moment of sabotage or misunderstanding occurs, followed by a grand epiphany and a climactic “chase”—yes, all the way to the airport. While predictable storytelling is not inherently fatal, it becomes problematic when it lacks depth or originality.
Promotion Over Purpose

However, predictability is not the film’s most significant flaw. The more damaging issue is its reliance on a runaway plot device that overwhelms the narrative. Rather than serving the story, this device becomes the story. The film plays as though an object was selected first and a narrative constructed around it, instead of the object organically supporting a meaningful story. As a result, Couple Goals ceases to be about relationships or emotional connection and instead functions as a feature-length promotional vehicle.
By the film’s conclusion, viewers are not left contemplating love, partnership, or personal growth. Instead, they are inundated with messaging that promotes the author and his book, Couple Goals. The intentionality of the film’s theme is lost. The narrative shifts from exploring relationships to justifying why the audience should buy the book and support its creator. This makes the film emotionally hollow and difficult to engage with.
Going Down with the Titanic

Character development is virtually nonexistent, leaving viewers without anyone to truly root for. Every frame feels less like a step forward in storytelling and more like a marketing push. The result is a film that is disconnected, shallow, and ultimately ineffective.
The Final Rites
Couple Goals stands as one of the year’s most disappointing releases. While the actors bear no responsibility—and, in truth, do what they can—their performances are unable to salvage a fundamentally flawed narrative. If nothing else, the film serves as an instructional example of what not to do in storytelling, a cautionary tale about prioritizing promotion over purpose.
