Materialists FIRST Review Out: Chris Evans, Dakota Johnson's Film Is 'Funny And Modern'
Set to hit theatres on June 13, Materialists is primed to be a summer hit—blending aesthetics, smart storytelling and star power into a must-watch cinematic romance.
Chris Evans and Dakota Johnson's Materialists is one of the most anticipated films. While everyone is eager to watch Celine Song's directorial in theatres, a premiere was recently held in New York. Following the premiere, several social media users took to their respective X handles and shared their reviews of the movie.
Netizens heaped praises on Materialists and called it one of the best movies of 2025 so far. One of the social media users praised the makers for their 'refreshing" take on contemporary dating. Another shared that Chris Evans' film is not just 'fresh" but also 'modern". People also praised Chris, Dakota and Pedro Pascal's performances in the film and called it a must-watch.
'Loved Materialists. funny, sharp, modern in a way that's not distracting, and beautifully shot. Perhaps the best part, though, and this was true for Past Lives too, is that it takes the time to develop and have empathy for every vital character. One of my favourites of 2025 so far," one of the users wrote.
'MATERIALISTS is a refreshingly realist take on the transactional nature of contemporary dating until it wears its repetitive path out. Effective themes and character developments resolve far too neatly, and the realism fizzles into a predictable bow. Charismatic, but flawed," added another.
'I haven't been able to stop thinking about Materialists since i saw it last night. a truly layered, brilliant romance film that only Celine Song could make. Dakota, Chris and Pedro all deliver stellar performances that just make you *feel*. tears, laughs, smiles, I felt it all!" a third post on X read.
Materialists is set to release in theatres on June 13, 2025.
First Published:
June 11, 2025, 10:43 IST
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
6 hours ago
- Hindustan Times
Coldplay's Chris Martin will NOT remove jumbotron after Astronomer scandal: ‘Not prepared to be on international news…'
British singer Chris Martin has made it clear that Coldplay's Jumbotron Song segment is here to stay — despite the controversy that erupted last month when it accidentally thrust a corporate scandal into the spotlight. Coldplay's frontman Chris Martin will not remove the jumbotron song sequence from the band's future concerts 'This is not, never will be and never was a kiss cam,' the frontman told fans during the band's Music of the Spheres tour stop in England, recently. 'We put one couple, and it's branded as a kiss cam for the rest of your life. This is called a Jumbotron. We've done this for a long, long time. We pick people out to say hello. Sometimes they turn out to be an internationally, massive scandal, sure. But most of the time, we're just trying to say hello to some f**king people, that's all. Now, all of this bulls**t,' he said. The controversy Chris referenced stems from Coldplay's Boston concert in July, when the screen caught former Astronomer CEO Andy Byron and the company's head of HR, Kristin Cabot. Caught mid-song, Andy ducked from the camera and Kristin turned her back, prompting Chris to quip in real time: 'Uh oh, what? Either they're having an affair or they're just very shy.' The clip went viral, and both Andy and Kristin later exited the tech firm following an internal probe. On stage this week, Chris stressed that the incident won't change the band's plans. 'Life throws you lemons, and you've got to make lemonade. So, we are going to keep doing it because we are going to meet some of you,' he said. 'If you're not prepared to be on international news, please duck. We send pure love to those people,' he added jokingly. Coldplay first introduced the bit in Singapore last year, improvising lyrics about unsuspecting audience members as they appeared on the big screen. The segment quickly became a staple of their shows, even as the Byron-Cabot episode turned it into tabloid fodder.
News18
5 days ago
- News18
Home Alone Reboot Would Be A 'Mistake', Says Director Chris Columbus
Last Updated: Home Alone director Chris Columbus thinks it would be a "mistake" to reboot the franchise, and that it should be left alone. Chris Columbus thinks it would be a 'mistake" to reboot Home Alone. The 66-year-old filmmaker directed the 1990 Christmas classic and its 1992 sequel Home Alone 2: Lost in New York – which were both written by John Hughes and starred Macaulay Culkin – and he believes it would be impossible to capture the magic of the films so far into the future. He told Entertainment Tonight: 'I think Home Alone really exists as, not at this timepiece, but it was this very special moment, and you can't really recapture that. I think it's a mistake to try to go back and recapture something we did 35 years ago. 'I think it should be left alone." His comment came after Macaulay recently teased potentially reprising his role as Kevin McCallister if the salary was right. But he said during a screening of the film and a Q+A session: 'I have ideas, but I don't have time to write anything with my two children." Following the first two movies, the Home Alone franchise continued with Home Alone 3 (1997), Home Alone 4 (2002), Home Alone: The Holiday Heist (2012) and Home Sweet Home Alone (2021), but with other child actors at the forefront. And in 2018, Ryan Reynolds was attached to produce an R-rated reboot for Fox titled Stoned Alone, but the project has not progressed. Meanwhile, Chris previously admitted he wished he could erase US President Donald Trump's cameo from Home Alone 2: Lose in New York, branding his appearance a 'curse". In an interview with the San Francisco Chronicle, he declared: 'I just wish it was gone. 'If I cut it, I'll probably be sent out of the country. I'll be considered sort of not fit to live in the United States, so I'll have to go back to Italy or something." The seven-second appearance by Trump came when Macaulay's character checked into the Plaza Hotel and asked a man in the lobby for directions, seemingly oblivious to the fact it was the then-owner of the facility. Trump gave a simple reply and walked off screen. In a 2020 interview with Business Insider, Chris said the future president 'bullied his way into the movie" after only allowing filming to take place at the hotel if he could have a cameo role. He said: 'We paid the fee, but he also said, 'The only way you can use the Plaza is if I'm in the movie'." However, Trump later claimed Chris had 'begged" him to be in the movie. He wrote on his Truth Social platform: 'I was very busy, and didn't want to do it. He added: 'They were very nice, but above all, persistent. I agreed, and the rest is history! That little cameo took off like a rocket… now, however, 30 years later, Columbus (what was his real name?) put out a statement that I bullied myself into the movie. Nothing could be further from the truth." First Published: Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Indian Express
13-08-2025
- Indian Express
Materialists: Dakota Johnson plays the world's biggest red flag in Celine Song's misguided rom-com; she should be banned from dating anybody
The most distressing observation that Materialists makes about modern romance is that not much has changed since Elizabeth Bennet went on a quest to find a 'single man in possession of a good fortune' back in the 1800s. The business of marriage is still just that: a business, a financially motivated arrangement that many pretend is something purer. They do this to delude themselves into thinking that they aren't as superficial as the sort of people they enjoy passing judgement at. In writer-director Celine Song's highly anticipated second film, Dakota Johnson plays a rom-com version of Seema Taparia, a matchmaker who weighs her client's 'criteria' and connects them with potential life partners with the dispassion of someone tying two shoelaces together. The fault isn't Johnson's, but that of the script that she has been given — a script that harbours a fascination for the fantastic, but is too pragmatic to push past its own limitations. In that regard, it's a lot like its protagonist, Lucy — she is constantly on the lookout for someone who is described in matchmaking parlance as a 'unicorn'. This is the sort of man who could satisfy Poo with his good looks, good looks, and good looks, while sharing the same tax bracket as Mukesh Ambani. When Lucy finally finds one — Harry, played by Pedro Pascal — she keeps him for herself instead of matching him with one of her clients. Also read – Cha Cha Real Smooth review: Dakota Johnson's astonishing Apple dramedy is one of the year's best films Around the same time, Lucy reconnects with her ex; John, played by Chris Evans. She discovers that he hasn't exactly stepped out of the socio-economic class that they occupied together several years ago, when they were both struggling actors in New York. After Lucy discarded John for his perceived lack of ambition and — let's not mince words — his poverty, she went on to become a put-together professional in the matchmaking industry. A flashback shows us how tumultuous Lucy and John's relationship had become after a point. We catch them in a tense moment as they're stuck in traffic, late for an important appointment. Lucy berates John for bringing his car when he knew that he wouldn't want to pay for parking. She tells him that they could simply have taken a cab, while also making it clear that she can afford parking just fine. There's a sense that John insisted on driving only because Lucy had been passive-aggressively nagging him about it forever. His battered male ego couldn't take her taunts anymore, and so, he drove both of them into a surefire argument. When they meet years later, she seems to be doing rather well for herself, while he's still living with roommates in a ramshackle apartment, and working as a part-time waiter to fund his acting. John represents everything that Lucy has moved on from in her life — he is the living manifestation of heart. Harry, on the other hand, represents logic. Lucy finds herself torn between them, and the two versions of herself that she has still not found a balance between. While her mind is drawn to Harry and his $12 million apartment, her heart directs her towards John. A love-triangle blossoms, as Song persuades us to root for perhaps the biggest red flag protagonist since Junaid Khan in Maharaj. Because Materialists adheres to romantic comedy conventions, it leaves Lucy with no option but to choose John at the end. Lucy's decision, however unbelievable, is meant to suggest that she is finally following her heart again, after having carefully calibrated her lifestyle around materialism. Shockingly, however, a climax designed to draw oohs, aahs and awws did the opposite. It left younger audiences — the movie is about millennials — disappointed in Lucy's choice. She should've gone for Harry, they declared on TikTok and Reels, even though the movie had made it clear that they didn't really have feelings for each other. They ranted and raged about it, revealing not only their lack of media literacy, but also basic decency. They even called it 'broke man propaganda', which sounds like a term that Manu Joseph might come up with. How could Lucy choose someone who is incapable of bringing material value to her life; does she not recognise her own worth? The film's detractors seemed to be completely overlooking the fact that John genuinely seems to like her, while Harry views her as a lost sock, finally united with its partner. It's odd to observe that the Gen Z's view of romance seems to mimic that of the Boomers. Only a social anthropologist can explain why the melancholic Millennials haven't had the idealism beaten out of them. This trait is what leads them, and perhaps the 36-year-old Song as well, to demand a grand correction for Lucy. However, what about the condescension with which she simply offloaded John in the first place, like he was a sandal whose heel had snapped off? She made him feel inferior for not meeting society's standards. She ridiculed him, belittled him, and ultimately dumped him. When they run into each other, years later, it's clear that he's still hung up on her. What's also clear is that Materialists is trying to go against its own core by trying to ship them as a couple. They're incompatible; they won't last more than six months. John will be heartbroken again; Lucy will realise that she was never a romantic in the first place. Read more – Am I OK? movie review: Dakota Johnson is at her delicate best in Max dramedy about misguided millennials She's only two films old, but Song views women as particularly cold creatures. Her sympathies are always with the men around them. In her breakout movie, Past Lives, the female protagonist leaves her unambitious childhood love behind in Korea and moves to America, hungry for a better life. She gets married to a lovely guy, but her sudden decision seems to bring her old partner's life to a grinding halt. He continues living in Korea, going through the motions of life in a daze; he simply cannot understand why she couldn't have waited for him. Was her ambition greater than the love they shared? In Past Lives, this idea was implied. But, in Materialists, it is explicit. Lucy's unbelievable transformation at the end is unearned; it is impossible to imagine that someone so set in their classist ways could ever view a real human being with basic empathy. She lays conditions for him when they get back together at the end of the movie; he must find a 'real job' if he wants to be with her. As if being a struggling actor is somehow inferior to being an investment banker. Who decides? The same society that views its poor as a burden? There's an argument to be made that women simply have to be pragmatic in this big, bad world. But that's an argument for another time, waiting to be made by somebody else. Post Credits Scene is a column in which we dissect new releases every week, with particular focus on context, craft, and characters. Because there's always something to fixate about once the dust has settled.
