Two anti-romantic comedies position Dakota Johnson as a central, unknowable presence whose desirability drives contrasting relationship narratives. Materialists follows Lucy, a chilly matchmaker weighing marriage for status against marrying for love, and frames marriage as an antiquated gateway to security and privilege. Splitsville follows Julie, a bored partner in a staid open marriage who redirects attention toward her husband’s recently separated friend. Both films resist conventional charm and sympathy for their female leads. Johnson’s performances emphasize inscrutability and distance, making her both subject and object of desire while complicating romantic-comedy expectations.
Materialists and Splitsville are thematically aligned though chronologically at odds. The former is about all the horrible stuff that can happen in dating before marriage, and the latter is about all the horrible stuff that can happen in dating during and/or after marriage. In Materialists, Johnson's Lucy is a chilly matchmaker trying to decide if she will marry for status and worth (like all her clients seem to do) or for love (like her parents did, to disastrous ends).
Julie is bored, saddled with their son, Russ (Simon Webster), while Paul stays out late anywhere but his own home. In her boredom - or maybe loose sense of vengefulness - Julie turns her attention to Paul's best friend, Carey (Kyle Marvin), who has recently split from his wife. Traditional romantic comedies often ask us to fall in love with, or at least be charmed by, Lucy or Julie, but neither film is keen on that kind of coddling.
Collection
[
|
...
]