Materialists

**Let's do the math.** Absolutely gorgeous. The writing, acting, cinematography, all so good. Everyone disappeared in their roles with an A+ story. Celine Song is 2/2, but this didn't reach Past Lives level. _Worth watching in cinemas._

After Past Lives, the bar for Celine Song was incredibly high, and perhaps for that reason Materialists doesn’t quite reach the same level of mastery. Even so, it’s a remarkable film that confirms the director as one of the most compelling voices in contemporary cinema.

The story treads familiar ground: a romantic triangle, doubts about true love, and the human need not to be alone. But Song reshapes the genre with a sentimental, reflective tone that goes beyond conventional romantic comedy. It’s not just about who ends up with whom, but about what it means to seek affection in a world where everything seems measured by perceived value.

The script is full of sharp dialogue, the kind that leaves you with more questions than answers. The characters, convincingly portrayed, feel real in their vulnerability and contradictions, making it easy for the audience to see themselves in them.

The central trio—Chris Evans, Pedro Pascal, and Dakota Johnson—works beautifully, giving the story balance. Johnson in particular stands out, once again proving her growing strength as an actress, bringing both sensitivity and power to her role.

Visually, the film maintains the elegance shown in Song’s debut, with a restrained but carefully crafted style. The inclusion of Cat Power songs adds to the melancholic atmosphere.

In the end, Materialists may not be as flawless as Past Lives, but it has heart, ideas, and moments of genuine beauty. A film worth seeing, about love, desire, and the eternal need not to be alone.

Cynical, sad, increasingly fucked up, and
often gloriously mean.It was visually stunning.Dakota: phenomenal,Pedro: magnetic, Chris: Fantastic.

Loved it. Convinced my friend who never goes to the cinema to go with me, and she also loved it, so that is the biggest compliment coming from her lol.

Such a unique take on love.

I especially love the short story of the two cavepeople that was intertwined into the main story; it comes full circle so wonderfully.

“Materialists” is the kind of film that, at first glance, might seem like just another obvious satire on modern relationships. But under Celine Song’s sensitive direction, the narrative turns into a surprisingly empathetic study of how love, today, is constantly tangled up in market values, class dynamics, and financial anxieties that end up contaminating even our most intimate decisions. Far from being cynical, the film is fully aware of the coldness that lingers over a lot of contemporary relationships, but rather than condemning it, it’s more interested in listening to it. Through the protagonist Lucy – played by a perfectly in-sync Dakota Johnson – Song doesn’t just question the math behind elite matchmaking; she humanizes the desperation and the warped logic that often fuel it.

By setting the story in the exclusive world of a high-end dating agency for New York’s elite, “Materialists” throws the audience into a social slice where love is packaged like a luxury product, negotiated with the same precision and chilliness as financial contracts. And that’s where the film finds its heartbeat: not in moralistic critique, but in the naturalistic portrayal of a reality that, for a lot of people, feels absurdly familiar. The idea that “love doesn’t pay the bills” isn’t tossed out like some punchline or shallow provocation, it lands as a melancholic truth from someone who’s already had to weigh affection in spreadsheet terms. That’s also why the appearance of Harry (Pedro Pascal) and the reappearance of John (Chris Evans) in Lucy’s life don’t function like a classic love triangle, but more like escape routes that challenge how willing she really is to maintain emotional commitments inside a market-driven logic.

Song’s direction avoids easy answers and never falls into the trap of treating romance as some redemptive antidote for modern-day pragmatism. Quite the opposite: “Materialists” leans into ambiguity. The choice to shoot on 35mm gives the film a warm, organic texture that contrasts with the artificiality of the spaces the characters move through – fancy salons, sterile offices, upscale restaurants – and makes the real feelings, when they do show up, feel even more precious. Shabier Kirchner’s cinematography is subtle but essential in building this atmosphere, and Keith Fraase’s editing helps too, prioritizing pauses, glances, and silences over verbal exposition. There’s also special attention paid to costume design, where tiny details, like Lucy’s changing necklaces that reflect her emotional openness, say a lot about her internal state without ever resorting to being too on-the-nose.

Even though its structure openly flirts with urban romance clichés, “Materialists” draws strength from how it updates these familiar formulas with disarming honesty. The script knows it’s in familiar territory, but instead of trying to reinvent the wheel, it chooses to polish classic elements with a clear, personal voice that feels warm and lived-in. The cast helps a lot in making that work: Johnson never forces a vulnerability that doesn’t belong to her, Pascal brings a low-key charm that hides deeper layers, and Evans plays off his heartthrob image only to slowly unravel it, revealing a man quietly haunted by past choices. There’s also a touching supporting role from Zoe Winters as Sophie, a client stuck in an emotional loop of never feeling like she’s enough – a character who, in a smaller scale, captures the collective ache of an entire generation trying to stay desirable under increasingly dehumanizing rules.

That said, it’s hard not to feel like “Materialists” could’ve trimmed a little off its runtime. There’s a point where it really feels like the film is wrapping up, but instead, it keeps adding new layers, new scenes, new resolutions. And while none of those additions feel pointless, the sensation of stretching things out is definitely there. It’s like the film is testing out several different endings before finally settling on the idea that not every story needs a neatly tied conclusion. This sense of prolonging doesn’t ruin the experience, but it does make you feel the time passing in a few sections.

At the end of the day, “Materialists” doesn’t offer closure or promises of happily-ever-after, and that’s exactly where its biggest strength lies. Instead of doubling down on the escapism that’s so typical in romantic comedies, the film goes for a much more uncomfortable and honest path: it acknowledges that to love someone today means navigating a minefield of social expectations, financial insecurities, and emotional exhaustion. And still, there’s beauty in the effort. There’s tenderness in the discomfort. And there’s a quiet kind of hope in the fact that, despite everything, people still keep trying. Even if loving today means spreadsheets, clauses, and unspoken contracts, “Materialists” understands that affection, no matter how suffocated, still desperately wants to breathe.

“Relationships”…..Easy to get into… Hard to maintain. Everybody deserves respect & Love, Not just Any kind of Love, only the best… Unconditional Love! Do yourself a favor and watch this movie.

I had an ex who gave me a hard time for making the comment that love is fake. While there was more nuance to my comment, that overall idea seems consistent with this movie's theme, with Dakota Johnson's entire profession built on the idea that relationships aren't built on love, they are built on math. Whether you want to call it cynical or practical, this less common perspective made for a unique spin on the romance genre. Of course, the real revelation is that even relationships allegedly built on love are actually built on math, it's just subconscious math. Dakota Johnson's character is just bringing that math to the surface and leveraging it. In any case, the theme and set-up to the story are strong, hitting some interesting and unexpected beats along the way. There's a couple turns that don't quite feel earned, but strong dialogue and performances and interesting characters kept me invested throughout.

"You're not ugly, just poor"

Celine Song returns with a different vision of love. In Past Lives, she showed us that the love of our life won’t always be our partner; that even if two people are made for each other, they won’t necessarily end up together. Now, in Materialists, she confronts us with another dilemma: love… and materialistic love.

Beneath the façade of a romantic cliché, the film dissects an uncomfortable, corrosive view of affection. Song takes elements of the genre and uses them as both ornament and vehicle to explore a world where people are products—marketable flesh meant to fulfill the buyer’s wish list. Relationships are transactions: we give what we offer as goods, and in return we receive the company of someone who is looking for exactly that. “Marriage is a business and always has been,” the film declares.

In this landscape, loving becomes about satisfying a personal whim—an egotistical desire to possess something… or someone. Love becomes a checklist, like going to the supermarket, where the only thing that matters is the ego. The partner becomes an object to flaunt, like a watch, a car, or a necklace. Loneliness is monetized. We are like a house: it doesn’t matter if the pipes are broken or the structure is crumbling, as long as the façade looks flawless to show off. And when there’s abuse, the pain isn’t framed as human suffering, but as “damaging a product.”

This is where we meet Lucy (Dakota Johnson), the daughter of a poor, dysfunctional family, marked by failed relationships and a shattered romantic ideal. Her work has convinced her that love is nothing more than a business. Throughout the film, we watch her question these certainties and discover the difference between “to love” and to truly love.

And here come the suitors: Harry (Pedro Pascal) and John (Chris Evans). Harry, described by Lucy as a unicorn, is the fantasy of the ideal man—romantic, thoughtful, stubborn, hopeless, a good listener, and, very importantly, rich. He reminded me of a modern, toned-down version of Rhett Butler from Gone With the Wind—only without the questionable traits of a man from the 1930s. John, on the other hand, is a frustrated actor, ordinary, poor, and capable of offering everything a real human being can give—the good and the bad. Romance, arguments, thoughtful gestures, doubts, attention, highs and lows. At first glance, an unfair rival against Harry.

Through them, the story proposes a way of understanding love where it is not a transaction, but an inevitable act that sweeps through us without asking for permission. Marriage, then, is not a contract, but the choice to walk alongside someone until the end. In this approach, what matters is not what the other person possesses, but who they are: the way they care for us, accompany us, and share their days with us. Material possessions fade into the background; what’s essential lies in what makes us human and unique—our values, our scars, our way of loving.

Visually, the film is as dynamic as it is meticulous. It combines camera movement and static shots with precise actor blocking and rhythmic editing. The warm yet muted brown palette echoes the aesthetic of Past Lives. The sound shifts between the breadth of music and bustling environments, and the intimacy of silences that wrap around key dialogues.

I walked in expecting a predictable love triangle and walked out with a disturbing portrait of how blinded our society is by appearances. We are not products—we are human, we love, and we deserve love, even if we’re not “the best item in the catalog.” I hold on to one line from Sofi that I think says it all: “I’m not looking for a miracle, just someone who can’t help but love me.” Now, all that’s left is to see what Celine Song has in store for us next.

This is easily one of the best movies that I've seen this year. I love that this writer/director has brought new life into old themes. This movie transcends the "love or money" theme by getting into the question of self worth. The three leads are perfectly cast and they knock this out of the park. I wish that I had taken notes during the movie as I had a million thoughts running through my mind that escape me at this moment.

follow me at https://IHATEBadMovies.com or facebook IHATEBadMovies

The Materialists feels like a much more conceptual movie than Celine Song's debut, Past Lives. I think it was marketed like a romcom, but I would not classify it as such. There are some moments of humor, but they almost feel out of place when they occur (thinking of a recurring gag about legs). Instead, I think Celine Song wants to dissect what makes love ticks and uses Dakota Johnson's matchmaker Lucy as a way to reflect both the cynical and the idealistic visions about what it can be. The movie has elicited a ton of Discourse, but make no mistake, Song remains a phenomenal talent. The shots are gorgeous, perfectly lit, and captured in elegant beauty. It's been a while since I've seen a movie where the blocking feels so intentional and thought out. Even the characters walking styles feel deliberate and purposeful. I think a lot of people wanted this movie to feel more character-driven, and I agree that the relationship between Chris Evans' and Pedro Pascal's characters is not exactly that organic. However, I think Song is really focused on Lucy and her worldview, and in that regard, those two characters play the exact role she needed. This movie is not about a sweeping romance that will leave people in tears or even a slow-burn yearning like her prior movie. Instead, Song wants to see if love can be mathematically determined and the role material wealth (hence the name) plays a role in it. It's honestly a very fascinating examination, and even though the movie felt very different than what I was initially expecting, I was enthralled with it. I do wish we got a bit more with Pedro Pascal, which could have made things feel a bit more sincere and maybe curbed some of the dumb controversies surrounding it. Regardless, I think this movie feels authentic in a different way, in a way that feels less about the characters themselves but the very nature of dating and love. It's an earnest and lovely second feature from a director who is proving to be a talented tour de force and someone who is unafraid to challenge genre norms.