Celine Song responds to people who called Materialists 'broke men propaganda: "Feminism has been about anti-capitalism and fighting classism, so I’m very concerned about the way that we talk about people who are poor. Distress is important to me. Poverty is not the fault of the poor. The classism, the hatred of poverty, of poor people… it’s not their fault that they’re poor."
That is a troubling result of the way that wealthy people have gotten into our hearts, about how it’s your fault if you’re poor, and you’re a bad person if you’re poor. The whole movie is about how capitalism is trying to colonize our hearts, and colonize love.
Posted by artbasiI
11 Comments
i thought people understood that the movie was a callback to old school romcoms where love wins above all. even the design and marketing of the movie was all about taking people back to old romcoms.
So why didn’t she make a movie about a poor woman?
Whats the name of the movie?
The problem is I didn’t believe Dakota’s character chose him out of love. There was no build up or character growth that made it clear why she chose Evan’s character.
Yes i agree in theory but next I want to see a movie about a man helping out a woman financially even though he is not trying to sleep with her.
The movie did not do well showcasing any of her points. Her analysis is more intriguing than what the writing in that movie. What poor execution of a great concept on her part.
I’m personally glad she responded to this. So much of that broke boy propaganda felt like such a shallow view of the film and a way to justify completely missing the point of the movie. Obviously you’re allowed to dislike and think she didn’t execute it good, but I didn’t see any good faith arguments against the movies besides broke man bad and rich man good. Also been thinking about the capitalist/feminist view but also the amount of people continuously asking for romance movies that were unrealistic but highlighted the emotional connection and yearning between the characters and why humans make decisions with our emotions, only to shit on the concept of this movie because the dude was broke. Ok dats it
The actual problem with the movie was that Dakota Johnson and Chris Evans didn’t have any chemistry, and the movie didn’t give us any reason to root for them. We knew nothing about their relationship or why they liked each other. We needed to see some romantic scenes, at the very least.
The matchmaking parts was the best aspect of that movie, they should have made the movie about that, or spend more time making the central romance work.
Feminism is about equality of the sexes.
Dakota’s character deserved better. Her ex had years to change during their prior relationship and when they were broken up yet he didn’t. He’s had numerous years to better his financial situation yet hasn’t, what’s going to happen if they want children. She can’t support all of them while he’s still chasing his dreams. The reality is, stabilty and reliability are needed yet he’s not able to offer that because he hasn’t done anything to change his financial situation. He can barely support himself and you want the audience to believe that he’ll be able to support her too?
She was better off choosing neither of the 2 men, instead falling in love with someone who was worth it.
Love isn’t enough to build a solid lasting relationship in the real world.👍🏼
Materialists is finally releasing near me and I can’t wait. I loved Past Lives and now hearing Celine talk like this, it makes me even more excited. She really cares about her work and about spreading the best message she can in the best way.
She’s right. The problem is, she didn’t do a good job portraying it as such. Chris’ character was an almost 40 year old struggling stage actor. In the years since the flashback shown, he was in the same struggle situation as he was when they were together, doing dead in jobs and living in a bad apartment with roommates- no growth or a desire to better his situation.