Writer-director Celine Song, of Past Lives fame, expressed her concern over a trending opinion about her new movie Materialists. Song has impressed critics and audiences in recent years with unconventional sort-of rom-coms, with her 2023 directorial debut Past Lives earning Oscar nods for Best Original Screenplay and Best Picture.
This summer, Song returned in full force with Materialists, starring a love triangle played by Dakota Johnson, Chris Evans, and Pedro Pascal. Materialists follows Lucy (Johnson), a matchmaker for wealthy Manhattanites who is wooed by financier Harry (Pascal), while she still harbors feelings for her down-on-his-luck ex-boyfriend John (Evans).
Materialists is an exploration of the pressures of capitalism on love, but some people online have taken to calling it “broke man propaganda,” as Lucy (spoilers) ends up with John, despite Harry offering her everything she says she wants. In an interview via TikTok, Celine Song unhappily responded to the “broke man propaganda” comments, as it disappoints her that people are missing the point of the movie.
Check out Song’s comments below:
I think that it doesn’t make me laugh, because it really is disappointing to me. I think that there is a very real confusion about feminism and the history of feminism. Through intersectionality, so much of feminism has been about anti-corporate and anti-capitalist and, of course, it was always at the forefront of fighting capitalism, so I’m very concerned about the way that we talk about people who are poor.
While Song recognizes here the complex relationship between historical feminism and Lucy’s desire to live luxuriously, her primary concern about the “propaganda” statement is how it paints John as a character, and whether he is deserving of Lucy’s love. Check out Song’s additional comments below:
The thing that’s very important to me is to stress that poverty is not the fault of the poor. And I think that given that, it is very brutal. I find it very cruel to talk about John as a character who loves Lucy, and who is a beautiful character being played beautifully by Chris, to talk about him in such cruel terms as “broke boy” or “broke man.”
There is something about the classism of that, the kind of hatred of poverty, the hatred of poor people, who, again, it’s not their fault that they’re poor. I think that is a very troubling result of the way that the wealthy people have gotten into our hearts about how it’s your fault if you’re poor, you’re a bad person if you’re poor. So it doesn’t make me laugh, actually.
What Celine Song’s Comments On “Broke Man Propaganda” Mean For Materialists
Materialists shows Lucy reckoning with the implications of her own materialistic nature, presenting it as something she can’t change about herself. Some viewers seem to be taking the fact that Harry is so perfect as a signal of virtue in wealth, fueling the opinion that the “broke man” shouldn’t have “gotten the girl” when he has nothing to offer.
Yet Materialists suggests a soft tragedy in how economics are huge factors in modern dating and marriage. Song standing up for her movie is significant, as she calls out a bigger system where people are often locked into their economic status, but that certainly doesn’t make them undeserving of love.
Our Take On “Broke Man Propaganda” & Materialists
Thankfully, the better reviews for Materialists that I have read seem to understand the point of the movie — that the world would be so much better if money weren’t a factor in love — while admiring how it handles certain rom-com tropes. Its ending doesn’t suggest the financial problems have disappeared, just that Lucy and John now have a better plan to handle them.
But Song is right to be upset with this interpretation of the movie. Supposedly, people are watching Materialists and thinking that John should be pursuing a more lucrative career than acting, another way of saying that money should always be prioritized. And this only ignores a thousand other economic scenarios where it still takes courage to fight for love.
