
‘Materialists' Director Celine Song Wants Justice for the Romantic Comedy
The new movie Materialists poses an age-old but always interesting question: Can love exist separate from money? In Celine Song's highly anticipated follow-up to Past Lives, Dakota Johnson plays Lucy, an ambitious New York matchmaker helping her clients realize their dreams of finding true love with someone who conveniently makes more than $500,000 a year. In her pursuit of eligible bachelors, she meets 'unicorn' Harry (Pedro Pascal), who provides a perfect contrast to her barely-employed ex John (Chris Evans). She spends the movie being pulled between a love that is convenient and a love that is decidedly less so.
The movie is what many people have been desperate to see back in theaters: a genuine romance. While the film's marketing makes it seem a bit more 'com' than 'rom,' in actuality, Song gives a cynical but honest take on what love looks like in 2025, with surprising and heartfelt performances from her three leads. I alternated between giggling/kicking my feet while watching Johnson and Pescal flirt to crying at the hard-earned growth the characters achieve by the final credits. Song hopped on Zoom with Cosmopolitan to talk about getting the casting of Lucy, Harry, and John just right, why money has always been a part of dating, and how her two films are in conversation with each other.
I don't write for actors, so I just wrote a script and I create characters and then I worry about it after. I was casting this movie when I was on the Oscars campaign trail. I was in a good spot to just go and meet actors because they had seen Past Lives.
And in the case of all three of these actors, it really was a journey of meeting them during one of these lunches or coffee or dinner and then just falling in love with them as the characters. I wish that I could tell you exactly what it was, but it's just like falling in love. You meet them and then you just fall in love with the idea of that person being Lucy, you know?
Dakota and I were having lunch, and at some point in this conversation, I was like, Oh, I think she's Lucy. And it's not really about the literal way that she is Lucy; it's about something in her spirit, in her talent, in her being. And that was true about Chris as well. I expected Chris to be like what I've seen in a magazine. And then I was talking to him, and I just loved him.
When it comes to Pedro, it was surprising how the inspiration hit, because I've known Pedro before. We were getting very close, and I wasn't really thinking about it. And then one day, he and I were having this conversation about what love is like and the difficulty of love. Just a personal conversation. And in the middle of it, I remember feeling like, Oh my god, I think my friend is Harry.
It has to surprise me a little bit. As in, there is a kind of unexpected quality to it. That's what I really feel is where love is, right?
Well, I think that there are things that are easier because it's the second film. My second film gets to be made by somebody who knows how to make a film. The truth is that the way I see my actors is exactly as that—as working actors. And that's how they showed up to set every day. And they just worked their ass off. It was amazing to get to work with such colleagues.
I think it's actually the way that he was so completely worthy of love. He's very passionate about it. You know what it is? He was not afraid to be humiliated for love. I think that is a very important quality. Because love humiliates us. It is a humbling experience to be loved and to love. And I think that there is an amazing humbleness that Chris has. He's not afraid to be embarrassing for love.
Every actor has an amazing history of work that they're bringing with them. So I wouldn't say that I didn't think about those things. Of course, I did. The surprise of Chris as a person was what really what made me feel like he was John. I found meeting him very moving. And I think that's what really drove me to cast him as John. There's something very heartbreaking about his goodness.
I don't ever want to walk into a conversation with an actor about doing a movie and not be able to say, 'You're going to do something you haven't done before.' Because I want not only to be inspired by the work that I'm doing with the actors, but I want the actor to feel inspired, too.
The sensitivity that Pedro has, there's a softness that is sometimes being disguised by this hard shell of being a man who is surviving a zombie apocalypse or whatever. Because of what this character is going to eventually go through, it had to be somebody who is completely, entirely lovable. We get to sort of undress him in this movie and see the part of them that is so raw and open.
This is the thing about all three actors. The first truth is that they're actors, right? This movie is about self-objectification and self-commodification. It's about turning people into numbers. It's about the way that we are thinking about a love in a material way. Who do you think completely understands that? Actors. That's their work. They have to be judged, and they have to be given value.
In the very first line! Did you know?
Yes! Yo, that's very Materialists.
I worked as a matchmaker for six months back in the 2010s, and something that I noticed is that this completely objectified, completely commodified way of talking about our future partner is the norm. Just because it's not being depicted in cinema as much or in stories as much, it doesn't mean that it's not in our everyday life.
I think about this so much. So many love stories, you're like, what does the person who's in love do for a living? Well, they're accidentally very rich. Isn't it amazing that Darcy is, like, accidentally so rich and it's a solution to all of Liz's practical problems and he is also the love of her life? But when he points that out, she goes, 'Fuck off.' People don't remember that conversation. They always only remember the 'ardently.' This has always been something that is part of love, dating, marriage, and, in 2025, still is.
In this economy? Abso-fucking-lutely. To not contend with it and to not talk about it directly feels like we're missing a really amazing opportunity.
The romantic comedy as a genre or romance is often relegated to something that is for chicks, so therefore not of substance. Romance is something that affects us all. I'm so interested in this amazing opportunity that the romantic comedy presents, which is that everybody gets to show up for two hours to talk about love, dating, relationships, marriage.
And then within this fun thing, let's actually talk about something. I do think that it is completely worth talking about. It affects all of us. It's the one thing that makes us all feel like idiots. Love makes fools of all of us.
[There are spoilers below for the ending of Materialists. If you haven't seen the movie yet, this is your official warning!]
Both movies have at the center of it this woman who is facing the question of, what life does she want to live? It's beyond men. Materialists is pretty openly a love triangle, but at the end of the day, it's about this woman who goes through a transformation that they then at the end of it get to make a choice. And that choice is going to affect her life. And the person who is in the beginning of the film has transformed so much by the end of the film, she's unrecognizable. The Lucy who's at the first wedding could never end up with the cater waiter ex boyfriend. It's very connected in that way.
I think about this ancient Greek thing that's like, character is destiny. Who you are is going to determine what kind of choice you're going to make. It's not that you make choices and then that becomes who you are. It's actually like who you are is going to mean that the choice you make is inevitable. Given what Lucy has gone through and given who John is and given what John is saying to her, what could she say except "deal"? That's the most romantic line in the whole film.
The film is so interested in the practical. The Pride and Prejudice. The debt. The finance. And then, of course, the way that it is going to be ripped apart, but also put together by this very, very ancient notion that love is all shocking. Love is really what is going to keep us going. That's the only deal you can make.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Geek Girl Authority
4 hours ago
- Geek Girl Authority
Materialists Archives
Categories Select Category Games GGA Columns Movies Stuff We Like The Daily Bugle TV & Streaming Is Materialists the bundle of joyous "movie love" we're all looking for right now? Or should this one just give back the ring? Read on for our review.
Yahoo
6 hours ago
- Yahoo
Byron Allen Reaches Settlement With McDonald's In Lawsuit Claiming Racial Bias In Advertising
Byron Allen's Entertainment Studios and The Weather Group have reached a settlement with McDonald's in a lawsuit over the fast food giant's alleged lack of support for Black-owned media companies. McDonald's defeated the complaint in 2024 in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, but Allen appealed. The parties announced the settlement Friday, though no financial details were disclosed. More from Deadline Paramount Says Abrupt Dismissal Of Longtime Media Agencies WPP Media And Horizon Was Driven In Part By Push For "Greater Efficiency" - Update AMC Says New NCM Preshow Ads Don't "Negatively Influence Moviegoing Habits" Tastes Great, Less Filling? Report On Meta Plan For Cheaper, Fully AI-Made Ads Boosts Tech Giant's Stock As Media Agency Shares Slump Under the settlement, McDonald's will still buy ads from ESN, which controls a range of broadcast and streaming properties, 'in a manner that aligns with its advertising strategy and commercial objectives,' a press release said. and ESN will dismiss its lawsuit against McDonald's The fast food company is not admitting any wrongdoing and the press release affirmed that the ads sold will be priced at market value. 'We are pleased that Mr. Allen has come to appreciate McDonald's unwavering commitment to inclusion, and has agreed to refocus his energies on a mutually beneficial commercial arrangement that is consistent with other McDonald's supplier relationships,' McDonald's said in a statement. 'Our company's unique three-legged stool model relies on mutual respect, and we look forward to ESN's contributions to the betterment of our system.' The presumed injection of capital into Allen's companies comes as they face the same pressures hitting all media companies due to cord-cutting and declines in advertising. He recently enlisted Moelis & Co. to explore a sale of his local TV stations. 'We are pleased to find a resolution that maintains our business relationship,' ESN and The Weather Co. said. 'During the course of this litigation, many of our preconceptions have been clarified, and we acknowledge McDonald's commitment to investing in Black-owned media properties and increasing access to opportunity. Our differences are behind us, and we look forward to working together.' Best of Deadline 2025 TV Series Renewals: Photo Gallery 2025 TV Cancellations: Photo Gallery 2025-26 Awards Season Calendar: Dates For Tonys, Emmys, Oscars & More
Yahoo
6 hours ago
- Yahoo
Prince Harry And Meghan Snubbed From The Trooping The Colour Again As Royal Rift Deepens
Prince Harry and Meghan Markle were not invited to the 2025 Trooping the Colour, marking their third consecutive exclusion from the royal event. Despite Harry's recent call for reconciliation, insiders say the rift with the royal family is deepening. King Charles reportedly remains distant due to trust issues, and Prince William is firmly against mending ties. Experts highlight that no palace aides are encouraging reconciliation, and the royals no longer trust Prince Harry and Meghan Markle with private conversations. According to People Magazine, Harry and Meghan have not been invited to this year's Trooping the Colour, the annual military parade held to celebrate King Charles' official birthday, set to take place on Saturday, June 14. This marks the third consecutive year the couple has been excluded from the event amid their ongoing estrangement from the royal family. The last time the pair attended the military parade was in 2022, during Queen Elizabeth II's Platinum Jubilee. Even then, they weren't permitted on the main royal balcony and instead watched from a separate area reserved for non-working royals. Since Queen Elizabeth's passing and Charles's rise to the throne later that year, Harry and Meghan have been entirely left off the guest list for Trooping the Colour. Royal commentator Richard Eden emphasized the significance of their continued absence. He noted that 2023 was "the first year of his life that Harry hasn't been invited at all." Reflecting on how their status has evolved, Eden said: "With Harry and Meghan, we've always had a sort of 'will they, won't they' before every big royal occasion." "Well, it seems like the palace has tackled this this time by just not inviting them at all," Eden added. "So, you know, it's significant. Despite stepping back from royal duties and relocating to California in 2020, there had once been hope that Harry and Meghan would still be included in major royal traditions. Eden recalled that "When Harry and Meghan quit royal duties, I think officials were very keen to stress that they would still be invited to occasions such as Trooping the Colour." The US-based royals' ongoing absence, however, has now reflected a deeper rift that might never heal between the warring parties. "The fact they haven't been invited is very significant," he noted. News that Harry and Meghan were not invited to Trooping the Colour for the third consecutive year comes amid fresh tensions within the royal family, and just weeks after Harry publicly expressed a desire to reconcile with his father. In a May interview with the BBC, the Duke of Sussex opened up about his strained relationship with the royal family after losing his final bid for taxpayer-funded security in the UK. "There have been so many disagreements between me and some of my family," he said, adding that he had now "forgiven" them. He continued: "I would love reconciliation with my family. There's no point in continuing to fight anymore. Life is precious. I don't know how much longer my father has. He won't speak to me because of this security stuff, but it would be nice to reconcile." Despite Harry's plea for peace, insiders suggest the damage may be beyond repair. According to royal expert Hilary Fordwich, there is reportedly "no turning back" for Harry and Charles after more than five years of fractured relations. "King Charles remains tender towards his son, but can't risk communication. Prince William now has absolutely no interest in mending fences," Fordwich told Fox News. "The animosity is so deep that William has shut the door on Harry," she added. "Charles is not willing to go against his heir's wishes." Fordwich emphasized that "Everything comes down to trust and the lack of it." Fordwich's remarks align with recent reports from People Magazine, which also highlighted the king's hesitance to reconnect with his youngest son. In the report, Royal biographer Sally Bedell Smith told the publication: "The underlying issue is trust. The king and William don't trust Harry and Meghan with any kind of confidential conversation." Insiders further revealed that Charles is not being advised by anyone within the palace to make amends, and William is firmly against extending any olive branch. As royal author Valentine Low pointed out: "There is not a good angel in [the king's] ear to say, 'Be a good dad and make the first move.'"