Materialists (2025)
Directed by Celine Song
No — Materialists is not especially woke, scoring 32 out of 100 on our wokeness meter.
Celine Song follows her celebrated debut with a film about a New York matchmaker who cannot match herself.
Consciousness Markers
The film's central thesis concerns courtship under capitalism: class differences, Harry's $200,000 height surgery, and Lucy's admission that John's finances overshadowed their love all frame romance as an economic transaction, a reading Jacobin explicitly advanced.
Written and directed by a woman (Celine Song) and centered on a female matchmaker navigating her own romantic agency, the film interrogates how women are commodified in the dating market and includes a sexual-assault subplot handled with a survivor's perspective.
Dialogue-heavy and philosophical, the film offers social observations about love and money, but it dramatizes rather than preaches, keeping its thesis embedded in character rather than sermon.
The cast is overwhelmingly white, led by Dakota Johnson, Chris Evans, and Pedro Pascal, with only minor supporting turns from Joseph Lee and a Baby Rose cameo. Diversity is incidental rather than a stated aim.
Harry's tibial-lengthening surgery to appear taller gestures at male body-image insecurity, but the film treats it as a character quirk rather than a body-acceptance message.
No LGBTQ+ characters, relationships, or themes appear anywhere in the narrative.
Race is not a thematic concern; the story is a class-and-romance drama with no engagement with racial dynamics.
No environmental or climate themes are present.
No neurodivergent characters or themes are depicted.
The film is a contemporary fictional story with no historical subject matter to revise.
Why it received this score
Celine Song follows her celebrated debut with a film about a New York matchmaker who cannot match herself. Lucy, played by Dakota Johnson, arranges other people's marriages for a living while her own romantic life sits in a state of studied disrepair. She is torn between a wealthy financier named Harry and an impecunious actor named John, and she performs the arithmetic her profession demands. The premise is sturdy. The observations are sharp. The whole enterprise carries the faint exhaustion of a woman who has read too many intake forms.
The film's real subject is money, and it is not shy about saying so. Harry's two hundred thousand dollar leg surgery, John's catering shifts, the way Lucy admits that a partner's finances once eclipsed her affection: these details frame romance as a transaction with a balance sheet. A Jacobin essayist found the reading irresistible, and the film invites it. The costume department does much of the arguing, dressing Harry in quiet luxury and John in a borrowed t-shirt. We are watching courtship priced by the square foot.
Song writes and directs from a woman's vantage, and the material concerns the commodification of the matchmaker as much as the clients she serves. A sexual assault subplot arrives late and is handled with a survivor's perspective, though it sits awkwardly against the froth. The height surgery gestures at male body anxiety without committing to the theme. The result is a drama of class and appetite that thinks aloud, often well, occasionally too long. It is a talky, adult, mildly melancholic picture that trusts its audience to do the arithmetic.
---
**Classification: Materialists (2025)**
| Marker | Score |
|---|---|
| Representation Casting | 18 |
| LGBTQ+ Themes | 0 |
| Feminist Agenda | 45 |
| Racial Consciousness | 0 |
| Climate Crusade | 0 |
| Eat the Rich | 55 |
| Body Positivity | 15 |
| Neurodivergence | 0 |
| Revisionist History | 0 |
| Lecture Energy | 30 |
**Thematic Tags:** None. Debuted third at the domestic box office, so it does not qualify for box_office_number_one. No Oscar wins recorded, no sequel or remake status, not a true story, not a book adaptation, and not a superhero property.
**Verdict:** A romance that keeps its ledger open on the table. The progressive sensibility here is economic and gendered, and it is presented with a straight face, which is more than most of its peers manage. The film's cultural awareness resides almost entirely in its wallet and its wedding rings. It does not lecture. It itemizes.
**Final Woke Score:** 16.3 / 100
Analysis generated by our Consciousness Algorithm
Part of
Synopsis
A young, ambitious New York City matchmaker finds herself torn between the perfect match and her imperfect ex.
Questions about Materialists
Is Materialists woke?
No — Materialists is not especially woke, scoring 32 out of 100 on our wokeness meter. That earns it a verdict of Based.
Does Materialists have any woke elements?
3 of the 10 markers register at 30 or above, led by Eat the Rich (55), Feminist Agenda (45) and Lecture Energy (30). On Eat the Rich: The film's central thesis concerns courtship under capitalism: class differences, Harry's $200,000 height surgery, and Lucy's admission that John's finances overshadowed their love all frame romance as an economic transaction, a reading Jacobin explicitly advanced.
How does Materialists compare to other 2025 movies?
It ranks #60 of the 217 films from 2025 we've scored; their average is 26. The wokest is STRAW (92).
How is the Woke Score calculated?
An AI-assisted process researches the film and its reception, scores it 0–100 on ten markers, then combines those into one 0–100 Woke Score. It measures a specific set of 2020s cultural themes, not film quality.