Spoilers for the end of Materialists are ahead.
Among the upcoming films in 2025, few have ignited as much controversy as Celine Song’s newest romantic drama, titled Materialists. The story revolves around Dakota Johnson’s character, Lucy, a matchmaker who begins her own romantic journey with Harry, played by Pedro Pascal, who seems ideal on paper. However, complications arise when she chooses to rekindle a friendship with her former boyfriend John, an aspiring actor portrayed by Chris Evans. Despite his financial hardships, Lucy ultimately decides to be with John instead of Harry. This choice has caused quite the stir among fans. Yet, the filmmaker has a unique take on the ending of Materialists, and it carries a surprising depth.
During a conversation with Refinery29, Celine Song was invited to address various critiques, including some witty ones on Letterboxd, regarding her film titled Materialists. The movie has been subject to criticism by several viewers who label it as “financially irresponsible advice for the struggling economy,” as it seemingly endorses romantic relationships with individuals from lower socio-economic backgrounds at a time when economic conditions are reportedly challenging.
Despite the humorous tone, Song stated that she found the comments unfunny as they distorted feminist beliefs. In her own words, she clarified:
The humor doesn’t tickle me, as it falls short of my expectations and leaves me feeling dismayed. There seems to be a genuine misunderstanding regarding feminism and its origins. Given the importance of intersectionality, much of modern feminism has evolved into anti-establishment and anti-capitalist movements. Additionally, it has always been a strong advocate against class discrimination, which raises concerns about how we address people from lower socioeconomic backgrounds.
Fundamentally, Song contends that defining John solely by his socioeconomic standing reduces him to less than a whole individual. John, in fact, is a multi-layered character who deeply cares for and shares a bond with Lucy – a trait that Harry, despite his wealth and status, apparently lacks.
As a passionate admirer, I’d rephrase the statement as follows:
From a feminist standpoint, I find the song particularly resonant, as it underscores the inherent worth of individuals and their struggles against oppressive systems, such as classism. When we simplify the John character to just a “broke man,” we’re inadvertently undermining his complexity and richness. This is what I took away from her insightful remarks.
I strongly believe in emphasizing that it’s unfair to blame the less fortunate for their financial struggles. I find it incredibly harsh and unfair to refer to John, who genuinely cares for Lucy, and is portrayed so lovingly by Chris, as a ‘broke boy’ or ‘broke man.’ This seems to reflect a certain classism, a contempt towards poverty and those living in it. Let me reiterate that the unfortunate situation of being poor is not an individual’s fault.
In simpler terms, Song’s words hold a lot of validity, particularly when you take into account John’s financial struggles in the movie. He works hard, yet his career in the arts-a field that has been progressively less profitable in today’s society due to societal devaluation of the arts and culture-is a significant contributing factor. The film emphasizes that Lucy chooses to marry John at City Hall because she values him as a person and their emotional bond, rather than his financial prospects. This doesn’t glorify poverty but instead highlights relationships built on love, not just wealth or opportunities.
It’s impressive and genuinely considerate of Song to defend her movie by discussing its cultural background. Yet, an opposing viewpoint on the film’s message in “Materialists” remains persuasive. Although some criticisms might be tongue-in-cheek, there is merit in acknowledging John’s flaws. He isn’t merely financially struggling; he also exhibits a lack of maturity that often leads him into specific predicaments.
It’s been noticed that taking a car to dinner when one can’t afford the parking costs is a sign of bad foresight, perhaps not because he’s a cater-waiter living with roommates, but rather because his current living situation with those roommates has become unbearable and he hasn’t considered any other options for years.
Some people may find it difficult not to idolize Harry when John fails to meet expectations, considering several aspects. This could explain why certain critics label Materialists as skeptical or jaded.
However, I also completely see the point the director was making.
Regardless of which viewpoint you align with, the fact that Celine Song’s movie has sparked conversation among viewers signifies an accomplishment in itself, proving it transcends the norms of a typical romantic comedy. Now, you can form your own opinion about Lucy’s appealing suitors, as the film, titled Materialists, is now available for rental or purchase on Amazon.
Read More
- Gold Rate Forecast
- Wrestler Marcus “Buff” Bagwell Undergoes Leg Amputation
- ENA PREDICTION. ENA cryptocurrency
- PS5’s ChinaJoy Booth Needs to Be Seen to Be Believed
- Microsoft is on track to become the second $4 trillion company by market cap, following NVIDIA — and mass layoffs
- AI-powered malware eludes Microsoft Defender’s security checks 8% of the time — with just 3 months of training and “reinforcement learning” for around $1,600
- xAI’s $300/month Grok 4, billed as a “maximally truth-seeking AI” — seemingly solicits Elon Musk’s opinion on controversial topics
- Anime’s Greatest Summer 2024 Shonen Hit Drops New Look Ahead of Season 2
- Lewis Capaldi Details “Mental Episode” That Led to Him “Convulsing”
- Minecraft lets you get the Lava Chicken song in-game — but it’s absurdly rare
2025-08-14 22:41