Finally a romcom that admits earning less than your partner can be a passion killer

Telegraph

2 days ago

Most romcoms like to pretend money is immaterial. But should it matter? This is the question Materialists thoughtfully asks, by giving Dakota Johnson's character a choice between a rich man and a poor man, and making their earnings such a transparent part of the equation. Whether the film works as an actual romcom is doubtful – but there's an almost radical lack of sugar-coating, which makes it worthwhile for plenty of other reasons.
Lucy (Johnson) works for a matchmaking agency, and we find out that her salary is $80,000 (£59,000). That's a lot less than most of her male clients, and some of her female ones. But it's also a lot more than her ex-boyfriend John (Chris Evans) makes as a 'cater waiter', paying the bills between off-off-Broadway acting gigs. At 37, he's living in a grimy flatshare with drop-outs, and in danger of never making it at all.
Money ruined their relationship the first time around, because John never had enough of it. Years later, Lucy starts dating a single, loaded businessman called Harry (Pedro Pascal), having successfully matched his brother with a bride.
Harry is what's known in Lucy's trade as a 'unicorn' – a perfect, rich, charming, bafflingly uncoupled specimen with great hair who is not even under 6ft tall. We get that love comes hard to him, but romance all too easily. Lucy is built to notice his smooth way of picking up the cheque in chi-chi restaurants, and wonders if he's husband material, while John – more skint than ever – pines for her on the sidelines.
The writer-director, Celine Song, broke hearts with another love triangle, in her feted debut Past Lives. This won't repeat the same trick, and doesn't intend to. After all, we're spending a lot of time with people referring to each other's 'tangible assets'. More than that, though, a rooting interest is curiously tough to find.
It's surprising that the performances from this hyped trio don't supply one. All are fine; all have been better. Johnson renders Lucy as such a cool-headed pragmatist, we're unsure if she's capable of love. Many Lucys wouldn't think twice about the offer Harry is tendering. So why would she?
The ubiquitous, ever-suave Pascal and a committed Evans will delight their established fans. (The Captain America star is arguably best in show here.) Still, it's a snag that the men they're playing are so sketchy, lacking quirks beyond their respective wealth and poverty. As a romcom, the film's too much like a scientific field study to give us that heady rush of watching two people realise they're soulmates.
It has been dubbed 'broke boy propaganda', but that's too rude. For all the plot's strain, at least Song has packed her film with crisp insights about the dating economy and our unrealistic standards – nowhere more cut-throat than in New York, surely. On height: 'Six inches can double a man's value in the market.' On a client's unrealistic expectations: 'Audrey, I don't know if there's a cat-hating, Christian, conservative lesbian in most parts of New York who wants to date a closeted 49-year-old with three children…'
Materialists may not persuade us that it has made any good matches at all – which is undeniably a flaw. But it's sharp and interesting for daring to admit what commodities dating apps have made of us all.
In cinemas now