Celine Song’s Materialists is not what you think it is. From the marketing you would expect this to be a throwback to the early 2000s. A glossy and sexy romantic comedy about a woman torn between her imperfect ex-boyfriend and the man of her dreams. However, in reality this film is a commentary about the world of modern dating. How unrealistic expectations, entitlement and a twisted view of love, can lead to someone being single forever. I found this commentary to be refreshing but sadly it stumbles in its execution.
We follow Lucy, a highly sought-after matchmaker in New York City. She has led to nine marriages, however her own romantic life has remained aloof as she is perpetually single. However, during a wedding with one of her clients, she meets Harry (Pedro Pascal), a rich, handsome, man looking to settle down who becomes infatuated with her. Lucy immediately dubs him a “unicorn”, the perfect match. But on that same night, she reunites with her imperfect, broke ex-boyfriend, John (Chris Evans), who is still in love with her. Thus she begins to spiral in emotions as she is torn between the perfect match and the imperfect boyfriend.
On paper, there’s a lot I respect about Materialists. I appreciated its commentary on modern dating, how the whole process has basically turned into an interview, where numbers and superficial traits run the show instead of actual human connection. Lucy, as she proudly states, approaches matchmaking like a mortician or an insurance broker. She pairs people based on surface-level stats like height, weight, build, hobbies, and finances, but never who they are underneath it all. That same strategy ends up shaping how she sees love and relationships. She genuinely believes she can only be with someone who checks all her boxes, which leads her to adopt the same entitled and unrealistic expectations as her clients. And through her relationships with Harry and John, and an incident with one of her clients (which, to be honest, I thought was unnecessary) she slowly comes to realize how flawed and damaging that outlook is. I really connected with that idea, because I’ve definitely found myself in Lucy’s position. But despite how interesting that commentary is, I think the film fumbles it by making it feel underwritten and underexplored.
The main reason I think the film falls flat is, ironically, because it lacks romance. Materialists never takes the time to actually build Lucy’s relationships with Harry or John. It left me wondering: why are these characters even attracted to each other? There’s no chemistry, no meaningful bonding, no romantic gestures that would make me believe they’d be together, outside of it feeling like some kind of arranged marriage. Sure, there are a handful of one-shot, intimate moments between them, but having characters explain the dating world to each other on a “nice” date or in a dim alley doesn’t explain their actual connection. I get what Song was trying to explore here, and I respect the ambition, but she didn’t put in the work to make these relationships feel real. It’s a major writing flaw, one that nearly causes the entire film to fall apart. And unfortunately, that’s not the only major issue this film has.
I’ve never considered Dakota Johnson to be a good actress. I’ve always seen her as a pretty nepo-baby with no real acting chops. And unfortunately, her lack of talent drags this film down even further. Her line delivery is awkward, stiff, and uninspired, and it’s a big reason why I never bought the supposed attraction between any of the characters. I get that her chemistry with Pedro Pascal is meant to feel off, since their relationship is about the boxes matchmakers force people into. But even then, he’s at least trying to bring some nuance to an otherwise one-note role. She, on the other hand, brings nothing. And her complete lack of chemistry with Chris Evans is even more frustrating, especially since he’s giving what might be the performance of his career. I fully believed that his character was still head over heels for her, even after being broken up for over five years, just from the way he looked at her with those puppy-dog eyes. But I never once believed that Johnson’s character still had feelings for him. Her performance is just so flat, so emotionless. Which is a real problem, considering their entire dynamic is supposed to be about the messy, unpredictable nature of human connection.
In the end, I genuinely appreciate what Song was aiming for with Materialists. There’s no denying that the film is well-crafted as her directorial eye feels sharper and more assured. It has all the makings of a much-needed dramedy about the toxic mess that is modern dating. But with an undercooked script, a miscast lead, and an ending that ties things up a little too neatly, Materialists ultimately collapses under the weight of its own ambition. I respect the effort, but I can’t help but mourn the film it almost was.
My Rating: C+
Leave a Reply