It is a truth universally acknowledged that a single woman in search of marriage must be in want of love. And yet, it’s not that simple, is it? Some marry for status. Some marry to make their inner circle green with envy. Some women marry a fantasy until it’s too late. Subsequently, they’re stuck with a person instead of the false perception they bought into. Celine Song sees all of this, understands it, and portrays it in Materialists.
Since the dawn of time, love has existed. It makes the world go round and fuels countless stories. From the first people who ever got married to those who will continue to merge their lives in holy matrimony. Materialists follows Lucy (Dakota Johnson), a successful matchmaker working for a high-end company named Adore. She makes eighty grand a year before taxes, and, so far, she’s been responsible for nine happy marriages in her line of work. She knows what she’s doing, but her love life is a different matter altogether. Without any remorse, she declares she’s going to die alone.
Enter stage right, Harry (Pedro Pascal), the successful and wealthy yet kindhearted brother and best man of one of Lucy’s clients. He’s suave, humorous, and, for emphasis, extremely wealthy. What’s not to love? Then there’s Lucy’s ex, John (Chris Evans). He’s an aspiring actor living in New York City with less than $2,000 to his name. They dated once when they were in their twenties. Their relationship only lasted five years because they were broke and miserable, from Lucy’s perspective. So… Who will she choose?
They say write what you know, and Song has a distinguishable talent for this. She takes parts of her life and embeds them into her work in a way that feels genuine and natural. It breathes life into a story. The characters come off as real as the people you cross paths with on the street. This is due in part to the fact that the Korean-Canadian writer/director admitted to working as a matchmaker when she was struggling as a playwright. What she then noticed was how dating becomes a business. Quickly, it turned into a numbers game for her. People would ask for height, weight, age, and income. This unfolds effortlessly in the movie.
It’s all about math and checking off boxes, where people become merchandise. Lucy’s journey may be one of the best parts because of this. Audiences will see her spiral and unravel as she falls out of love with her job. The reality of how coldly she’s approached it all settles in. It’s almost like she lost sight of her empathy for her clients along the way. She began to see them almost as a retail employee views shirts or jeans for a customer. This bleeds into the strongest aspect of Materialists: its B plot.
Lucy’s favorite client Sophie L. (Zoë Winters) is a nice girl. That being said, not a single man Lucy has set her up with wants a second date. This dynamic unfolds as a challenging foil to Lucy’s journey as her client faces sexual assault. It shakes Lucy up and completely shatters her worldview. It is brave to seek love, but there are real stakes when swimming through the dating pool. Lucy seems to drown in survivor’s guilt as she was supposed to protect her client. Sophie is hurt, but Lucy’s biggest problem is deciding between two men who care about her. The film then shifts from being a romantic comedy to a romance drama. While it still glides with the lightness of a rom-com, the tonal shift is significant. As someone who has faced a similar situation when dipping their toes in the dating world, it’s a chilling plot point to take in. However, the positive spin on it may be that it stands as a testament to the fact that every single person deserves to love, to be loved, and to be reminded that they are worthy of love.
Many upheld the arrival of Materialists like a prophet destined to save the romance genre. But, one thing is for certain from all of this reflection: the genre doesn’t need saving. To say it does is counterproductive. It simply needs more, well, love. To establish that it’s broken only leads to creatives who wish to fix it. This then produces work that oftentimes belittles the genre. It’s disappointing to say that while the film overflows with enchantment that will warm you up like a comfortable blanket, the relationships in Materialists stand as unremarkable. There is a lack of chemistry between the three stars that hinders the romance from being something we can genuinely believe in, as it’s presented more as something we must accept because the characters tell us so, rather than something palpable. We barely crack the surface of the three main players beyond who they are and what they do. As well, the movie’s R rating is unnecessary because nothing that occurs throughout the film’s runtime warrants it.
The longer the film sits with you, the more apparent its flaws become. Materialists is essentially less of a love triangle and more of a second-chance romance. If the triangle exists, it lies between Johnson’s Lucy and the uncertainty versus certainty among her prospects. The script itself feels overwritten at times, polished to the point of lacking human affection or emotion. Despite Pedro Pascal’s natural charisma, for example, the film failed to utilize his charm as Harry fully. It also proposes the tried and failed notion that the noblest declaration of love is to transform one’s life to prove that one can change as a person, even if that means giving up everything one has built.
The thesis stands strong: to want love is not just girl shit. Dating is a noble pursuit. To want love doesn’t make you weak. Nevertheless, realism must be present at times. It mustn’t be at the wheel of your life, but it should be a compass when you need it most. Love can be a guide, but, in the film’s case, financial uncertainty can destroy even the most perfect relationships. Money tears apart the foundation of any “perfect, happy couple,” if they even exist. Nevertheless, Song does a good job of glossing over this to reach a desirable conclusion.
With its quirky beats declaring that marrying a rich man is the same as dying alone and surgeries that can give men six extra inches of height, Materialists remains occasionally humorous and dazzling. The score is pure perfection, capturing the sound of falling in love. That being said, Song’s second film doesn’t reach the near-perfection Past Lives (2023) carries. It’s missing the effortless raw emotion that Song’s début feature held. Materialists’ predecessor introduced a storyteller who applies heart to every word and every scene. Despite this, it is fair to say that it remains a strong and valiant addition to the 2025 film slate.
Rating: 7/10
You must be logged in to post a comment.