Materialists
Materialists is playing in theaters at the time of writing. Rated R. Common Sense says 15+.
A young, ambitious New York City matchmaker (Dakota Johnson) finds herself torn between the perfect match (Pedro Pascal) and her imperfect ex (Chris Evans).
STORY: D
Who are these people?
This film poses a fascinating central question: How on earth do we figure out who we’re going to spend the rest of our lives with?
The film’s interest in its own theme greatly exceeds mine in it. Why? Because the old screenwriting saw is true: an audience will follow fascinating characters through a ridiculous plot, but not (like here) vice versa.
These characters are avatars, points of view personified. They don’t feel like complex humans struggling for understanding, and as a result we lose interest in their pursuit of an answer.
PEOPLE: C
Thin characters make it hard for the actors.
Perhaps the film felt it could lean into its themes more than its characters because Pascal, Evans, and Johnson (a great law firm name, by the way) all possess an unfair abundance of charm.
If the talented trio’s assignment was to lift up a thin script, then they did not pass. But if so, it was an unfair thing to ask of them.
FILM NERD STUFF: C+
The bookend is the key to the film.
The first scene is not the one I expected. I almost ran out to check if I was in the right theater.
Some may not think the scene works, but it completely invigorated me. It feels like a big swing, a promise that the film’s scope will spread light years wider than anyone would have guessed.
The movie doesn’t come through on that promise, but the closing scene does circle back to the opening one in a very satisfying way.
ONE BIG LESSON: B-
Love ain’t no algorithm.
For decades, science has followed the dogma of “materialism” - the idea that science is valid only if findings can be supported through physical, quantifiable measurement.
Materialism has led to invaluable discoveries. But to believe that it alone is capable of completely explaining the mysteries of the universe is misguided. Matters of the spirit are just as real as their physical brethren, even if they can’t be measured in pounds, miles, or magnitudes.
The film’s characters obsess over the measurable, material issues of marriage: age, income, height, hair lines, BMI. These traits have their place, but they’re not the only things that matter. I’d argue they’re less important than the intangible aspects of love.
FINAL COMMENTS:
It’s impossible to watch this film and not play matchmaker. We don’t want to sit by idly and find out which guy Lucy chooses. We want to decide which one she should pick ourselves.
Materialists flies through character development so quickly, and spends such little time with them as their relationships grow, we never get a full grasp on why Lucy wants to be with either guy. As a result, our decision is reduced to statistical comparison (he’s rich, he’s not; he’s tall, he’s short, etc.). Not only is that an unsatisfying way to decide who Lucy should be with, it contradicts the film’s theme.
Fair or not, I can’t help but compare Materialists to writer-director Celine Song’s previous film, Past Lives, a movie that spends most of its time moving through the messy, beautiful, complex weeds of its relationships. We’re forced to ask our hearts, not our brains, who Nora should be with.
Past Lives shows how much more powerful a film can be when it focuses on the people living within its world rather than the big ideas it wants to explore.