What 'Materialists' got wrong (and right), according to matchmakers
This article contains spoilers for Materialists.
In Celine Song's latest movie Materialists, matchmaker Lucy (Dakota Johnson) is cynical about love. She sees love as a numbers game and a business transaction, both for her clients and herself.
In fact, matchmaker and CEO of Agape Matchmaking Maria Avgitidis told Mashable that if Lucy were her client, she'd tell her to be single. "I think Lucy's character has a lot of work to do as a person," she said.
SEE ALSO: Daters: Stop obsessing over height
Avgitidis, author of Ask a Matchmaker, was initially excited when the Materialists trailer came out. "I remember thinking, 'Oh my god, they're finally showing that matchmakers are in an office with other people, and like everyone else, we have Excel sheets," she said. It seemed that Materialists was going to portray the validity of her profession and show how matchmakers build community.
Then she, like the other matchmakers Mashable spoke to, saw Materialists at an early screening.
"When I left the movie, I was just like, 'Oh shit,'" she said. Materialists got some parts of matchmaking extremely accurate, but others so wrong. Two other matchmakers told Mashable much of the same.
Let's start with the positives — if you could call a superficial society a positive. "Certain parts were quite accurate, especially when you're first sitting down with someone, when they're just barking numbers at you," Avgitidis said.
Several montages in Materialists feature daters specifying height and incomes they want (women looking for men), along with ages and even BMI (men looking for women).
"The very demanding client is true," said Adam Cohen-Aslatei, CEO of matchmaking service Three Day Rule.
"A lot of people come to matchmakers, and I think that their perception is, 'Well, I'm paying, I'm going to get exactly what I want.' It's sort of the Build-A-Bear model. And humans aren't objects. We're not material. And so we have emotions, we have personality, complexity, layers."
Featured Video For You
Chris Evans and Dakota Johnson weigh in on 'Materialists' big street fight and their cocktails of choice
Another accuracy, as cynical as it is: Dating is a market, like Lucy says.
Cohen-Aslatei said Lucy oversimplifies the process, but dating is indeed a market. "If you think about buyers and sellers, there's singles, single guys, single girls, LGBTQ, everything. So it truly is a marketplace," he said.
"What [Materialists] got right was this…there are 'high-value men' and 'high-value women' that exist in the market, because it ultimately is a dating marketplace," said Nandini Mullaji, founder of AI matchmaking app Sitch. "High value" less than in a manosphere way and more of a "man in finance, trust fund, 6'5", blue eyes" type of way.
"Height and hairline are two things that women really care about," Mullaji said. Materialists puts a big emphasis on men's height in dating, as does online dating in general.
"Dating apps have become all about filtering," Mullaji said, but daters don't realize that narrows their dating pool. If women set filters for six feet and over while average men's height in the U.S. is 5'9", they're losing out on a lot of potential matches.
The "Tinderfication of dating" (as Avgitidis called it) has resulted in people filtering out people based on genetics that they don't have control over — unless they have hundreds of thousands of dollars for surgery, Mullaji continued.
Another thing Materialists gets right is that people are very open and vulnerable with their matchmakers, said Mullaji. Since Sitch uses AI, she said users are "200 percent" honest about what they want because they're not speaking to another human.
A more wholesome aspect that Materialists got right, according to Cohen-Aslatei, is celebrating client wins. In the movie, Lucy's office celebrates when clients get engaged and married.
"What was cool about the movie is in the office, all those matchmakers truly were so excited when their clients found a person, got engaged, got married, had a milestone in their relationship," he said. "That is exactly what happens in our company."
While "barking numbers" is accurate with clients first coming to matchmakers, Avgitidis said the movie didn't take it to the next step, which is the conversation she has with clients afterwards.
"When someone says to you, 'He has to be at least six feet when they're five foot two, it's like, 'Well, why is that important to you? And what if you met someone at a friend's wedding and they were five foot seven? Would you not talk to them?'" Avgitidis explained. "And then you break down a little bit of the social expectation barriers that are given to these people. So I thought that's what it was like missing [from Materialists] in a big way."
She also said that good matchmakers are inherently community builders. What hurts the industry, she said, is not showing that, and not showing how they move clients away from their wish lists and back to the reality check.
Another issue matchmakers had in the film is the plotline of one of Lucy's clients getting assaulted.
"It sort of seems like this is an everyday occurrence, and…at least in our case, that's in our case, that's in my experience in the industry, has not been the case," said Cohen-Aslatei.
Three Day Rule has a vetting process, including video calls and background checks. "Of course, you can never completely know who a person is, but we do our best to weed out people who we feel like can be in any way, shape, or form, seen as abusive, harassing, etc.," he said. "I just don't think that's as prevalent in their industry as the movie suggests."
Avgitidis argued the same about the crisis in the movie. A crisis like setting up a singles event and not knowing enough straight men would be more realistic, she said, as she's been in that situation many times before. Now "the phones have not stopped ringing, and some of them, most of the calls, are [liability] lawyers…I'm used to people who are single call me. Now, [it's] people who want to sell me services," she said.
SEE ALSO: We asked daters what dating in 2025 is like so far
And what Materialists got half right and half wrong, Mullaji said, is that love has to be part of the equation. In the film, Lucy says relationships are a math problem, but eventually learns love needs to be part of it too.
"It's not just a checklist of being like, anyone XYZ, and the other person wants A, B, and C, and since you both have those things, therefore it's a perfect match," Mullaji said. "We have multiple people who meet our criteria, but who you ultimately pick is because you feel some real degree of love."
Avgitidis said Celine Song showed the commodification of dating, but she portrayed it through the prism of matchmaking rather than dating apps.
"It's not like you can show someone just swiping away," she said. "We've seen that, right?"
Daters may choose apps over matchmakers because the latter isn't cheap. Three Day Rule packages start at $5,900 for three months of matchmaking, and the company has a million-dollar package as well. It is launching an AI matchmaker this fall, which will run on a freemium model.
Sitch, on the other hand, charges for packs of setups ($90 for three, $125 for five, and $160 for eight).
But daters are growing increasingly tired of the apps — which, in recent years, have begun charging more for features that used to be free.
Despite the movie's flaws, Cohen-Aslatei said it's an important movie for people to see, because it shows an alternative to dating apps.
"Younger people have no concept of matchmaking," he said. It's not a tradition in America like it is in other community-based cultures, like in Indian or Jewish culture. In the U.S., which is a more individualistic society, daters think they know what they want and they're on the journey on their own.
Some apps have even tried to bake in this form of community, like Tinder with its Matchmaker feature and new Double Date feature. That may be because, as Avgitidis said, "Dating was never meant to be done alone."
"You were never meant to do it on your couch with your phone in your pocket." She advocates for a more communal approach.
As matchmakers, all of these people obviously want more people to use their services. But there's something to be said for a more community-based form of dating. Whether Materialists will help or hurt the matchmaking industry, only time will tell. Everyone seems to agree, though: the apps continue to suck.
Materialists is now in theaters.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Forbes
2 hours ago
- Forbes
Self-Driving Cars Need Therapy Too — At Least In This Universe
The sentient self-driving cars in artist Lawrence Lek's fictional smart city function as ... More protagonists in a story that delves into the relationship between humans and the AI entities they create. Life isn't always easy for self-driving cars. Humans fear them. They glitch. Sometimes they get anxious and depressed and have behavioral issues. At least that's the case with the sentient autonomous vehicles featured in 'NOX: High-Rise,' an immersive installation by award-winning multimedia artist Lawrence Lek that explores the increasingly complex relationship between AI entities and the humans who create them. Lex — whose work often reflects science fiction themes through cinematic storytelling — steeps viewers in a fictional smart city of the very near future where an AI conglomerate operates a therapeutic rehabilitation center for self-driving cars in need of a mental tuneup. Treatment at the center includes equine therapy with real horses and sessions with AI therapy chatbot Guanyin, named after the Buddhist goddess of compassion. The center is called NOX, short for 'Nonhuman Excellence.' But what, exactly, does excellence look like for artificial intelligence in an age of highly controlled automated devices? It's just one question posed by 'NOX: High-Rise,' which opens Saturday, June 28 at the Hammer Museum in Los Angeles and runs through November 16. The London-based Lek, known for his work in virtual reality and simulation, combines floor-to-ceiling video displays, an interactive video game, objects and a moody electronic soundscape to relay multiple stories, each reflecting a particular car's unique soul-searching journey, sometimes narrated in its own words. Lek likens the experience to entering the physical version of a free-roaming role-playing game. In the universe of "NOX: High-Rise," self-driving cars with mental health health issues get ... More treatment that includes equine therapy with real horses. In a storyline straight out of dystopian anthology series Black Mirror, one aging police vehicle becomes erratic and violent out of panic it will be replaced and discarded. A younger car named Enigma is sent to NOX after getting a little too creative with company property — it used its camera to channel Ansel Adams on work time and take 3D, stereoscopic photographs of landscapes. For doing that, it gets disciplined, just as an employee might for misusing a work-issued laptop. 'I see many common issues that my science fiction versions of AI face and humans face,' Lek said over Zoom from Los Angeles, where he was busy getting ready for the installation's opening. Road Movie Starring Self-Driving Cars The 42-year-old artist described the piece's tone as part dark, brooding noir film and part sunny road movie. Here, however, the open road is less a classic onscreen symbol of freedom than a well-trodden commute along lonely highways dividing clusters of high rises. 'It's ironic thinking what the road movie would look like for a self-driving car, because the road to the car represents their job and a certain sense of what they might want to escape from,' Lek said. 'It's like this search for freedom in a world where maybe that's no longer possible. What does individuality look like for machines that don't have the means to own their actions?' Machines With Memories And Moods With 'NOX: High-Rise,' Lek joins a growing number of artists tapping their creativity to make sense of a world in which AI plays an increasingly integral role. An immersive AI-infused exhibit now on exhibit in St. Joseph, Michigan from Nathaniel Stern and Sasha Stiles, for example, explores how humans and technology evolve side by side, inextricable and directly reflective of one another. 'As we've learned in the past, some of the most daring answers to questions of our time come from art,' Pablo José Ramírez, curator of Lek's exhibit at the Hammer Museum, said over email. The Hammer installation marks the latest entry in Lek's ongoing series exploring the intersection of AI and urban life through the lens of transportation history. For a 2023 installation commissioned by the LAS Arts Foundation, he filled three floors of an abandoned Berlin shopping center with the interactive first chapter in his NOX narrative arc about a futuristic universe where self-driving cars recur as characters. The following year he won the Frieze London 2024 Artist Award, with the judges praising his 'essential interrogations into the use of AI and its relationship with the human experience.' The cars in NOX: High-Rise have experiences most humans will be able to relate to — they ponder their futures and their place in the world and what it means to forge their own path. In one video, Enigma spots a junkyard filled with old-fashioned cars, the kind that required drivers. 'What a strange fate it is not to drive, but to be driven,' it says. That line gets to the heart of Lek's inquiry about AI agency and consciousness and empathy between humans and the machines they make. It's hard not to feel something for Enigma when it waxes nostalgic about its childhood. 'Lurking under the overpass were the same kinds of cars I grew up with,' it says. 'Bright minds in cheap bodies, dreaming of getting permits and making it out of town.' Will spending time with Lek's sentient autos change the way you feel the next time you hop into a Waymo? Mileage, of course, may vary. Lawrence Lek was intrigued with the idea of a road movie for self-driving cars in which the highway ... More is less a classic symbol of freedom than a path the vehicles can't escape.


Business Upturn
4 hours ago
- Business Upturn
Is Fallout season 2 releasing in July 2025? Everything we know so far
By Aman Shukla Published on June 28, 2025, 18:30 IST Last updated June 28, 2025, 11:39 IST Okay, Fallout fans, let's cut through the noise. Season 1 of the Prime Video show had us all losing our minds with its retro-apocalyptic chaos, and now we're itching for Season 2. There's this stubborn rumor about a July 2025 release, but is it true? Here's everything we know so far Is Fallout Season 2 Releasing in July 2025? Look, we get why people thought July 2025. Season 1 hit in April 2024, and fans were doing mental math, hoping for a quick turnaround. But here's the real talk: Amazon spilt the beans at their May 2025 Upfront thing, saying Fallout Season 2 is coming in December 2025. They wrapped filming in May 2025, and even with all the fancy CGI (those deathclaws don't draw themselves), December makes sense. It's not as fast as we hoped, but it's way better than the 2026 vibe some folks were dreading. So, mark your calendars for a winter wasteland binge. Fallout Season 2 Potential Cast The gang's all here, and we're getting some fresh blood too: Ella Purnell as Lucy, still rocking that Vault dweller optimism (kinda). as Lucy, still rocking that Vault dweller optimism (kinda). Walton Goggins as The Ghoul, serving looks and sarcasm in equal measure. as The Ghoul, serving looks and sarcasm in equal measure. Aaron Moten as Maximus, the Brotherhood bro with big dreams. as Maximus, the Brotherhood bro with big dreams. Kyle MacLachlan as Hank, who's got more secrets than a Vault-Tec exec. as Hank, who's got more secrets than a Vault-Tec exec. Moisés Arias as Norm, Lucy's sneaky brother stirring up trouble. as Norm, Lucy's sneaky brother stirring up trouble. Leslie Uggams as Overseer Betty, maybe stepping up this season. A major casting highlight is Macaulay Culkin, who joins as a 'crazy genius-type character,' though details about his role remain under wraps. There's also speculation about Anthony Misiano returning as Mr. House, the enigmatic ruler of New Vegas, potentially in a recast or expanded role. Other surviving Season 1 characters, like Zach Cherry's Woody and Annabel O'Hagan's Stephanie, are expected to appear, though not all have been officially confirmed. What to expect in Fallout Season 2 Season 1 left us hanging—Lucy's dad, Hank, is up to some shady Vault-Tec stuff, The Ghoul's chasing ghosts from his pre-war days, and Maximus is trying to be a Brotherhood of Steel rockstar. Now, Season 2's taking us to New Vegas. If you've played Fallout: New Vegas , you're probably freaking out like other hardcore fans. Set leaks show cool stuff like Dinky the T-Rex and hints of the New California Republic (NCR). Maybe even Caesar's Legion? The plot's gonna dig into New Vegas' power games, with Lucy (Ella Purnell) hunting her dad, The Ghoul (Walton Goggins) getting answers, and Maximus (Aaron Moten) dodging wasteland drama. Oh, and expect more Fallout game nods to make us geeks squeal. Ahmedabad Plane Crash Aman Shukla is a post-graduate in mass communication . A media enthusiast who has a strong hold on communication ,content writing and copy writing. Aman is currently working as journalist at


USA Today
4 hours ago
- USA Today
Spoilers! Why 'M3GAN 2.0' is actually a 'redemption story'
Spoiler alert! We're discussing major details about the ending of 'M3GAN 2.0' (in theaters now), so beware if you haven't seen it yet. 'You wouldn't give your child cocaine. Why would you give them a smartphone?' That's the sardonic hypothetical posed by roboticist Gemma (Allison Williams) at the start of 'M3GAN 2.0,' a high-octane sequel to the 2023 hit horror comedy. When the new movie picks up, Gemma is tirelessly advocating for government oversight of artificial intelligence, after creating a bratty, pussy-bowed animatronic named M3GAN that killed four people and a dog in the original film. 'Honestly, Gemma has a point,' jokes Williams, the mother of a 3-year-old, Arlo, with actor Alexander Dreymon. 'Any time my son looks at my screen, I'm like, 'This does feel like the way people react to cocaine. This is not going to be easy to remove from his presence.' ' The first movie was an allegory about parenting and how technology is compromising the emotional human bonds that we share with one another. But in the action-packed follow-up, writer/director Gerard Johnstone wanted to explore the real-life ramifications of having M3GAN-like technology unleashed on the world. 'With the way AI was changing, and the conversation around AI was evolving, it opened up a door narratively to where we could go in the sequel,' Johnstone says. How does 'M3GAN 2.0' end? 'M3GAN 2.0' introduces a new villain in Amelia (Ivanna Sakhno), a weapons-grade automaton built by the U.S. military using M3GAN's stolen programming. But when Amelia goes rogue on a lethal mission for AI to rule the world, Gemma comes to realize that M3GAN is the only one who can stop her. Gemma reluctantly agrees to rebuild her impudent robot in a new body, and the sequel ends with an explosive showdown between Amelia and M3GAN, who nearly dies in a noble attempt to save Gemma and her niece, Cady (Violet McGraw). 'If Amelia walked out of that intact, that's a very different world we're all living in. M3GAN literally saves the world,' Williams says. 'When the first movie ends, you're like, 'Oh, she's a bad seed and I'm glad she's gone.' But by the end of this movie, you have completely different feelings about her. There's a feeling of relief when you realize she's still here, which is indicative of how much ground gets covered in this movie.' M3GAN's willingness to sacrifice herself shows real growth from the deadpanning android that audiences fell in love with two years ago. But Johnstone has always felt 'a strong empathy' towards M3GAN and never wanted to make her an outright villain. Even in the first film, 'everything she does is a result of her programming,' Johnstone says. 'As soon as she does something that Gemma disagrees with, Gemma tries to turn her off, erase her, reprogram her, and effectively kill her. So from that point of view, M3GAN does feel rightly short-changed.' M3GAN's desire to prove herself, and take the moral high ground, is 'what this movie was really about,' Johnstone adds. 'I love redemption stories.' Does 'M3GAN 2.0' set up a third movie? For Williams, part of the appeal of a sequel was getting to play with how M3GAN exists in the world, after her doll exterior was destroyed in the first movie. M3GAN is offscreen for much of this film, with only her voice inhabiting everything from a sports car to a cutesy smart home assistant. 'She's just iterating constantly, which tore through a persona that we've come to know and love,' Williams says. 'It's an extremely cool exercise in a movie like this, where we get to end the movie with a much deeper understanding of who this character is. We've now interacted with her in so many different forms, and yet we still feel the consistency of who she 'is.' That's really the fun of it.' In a way, 'she's like this digital poltergeist that's haunting them from another dimension,' Johnstone adds. 'It was a way to remind people she's more than a doll in a dress – she's an entity.' In the final scene of 'M3GAN 2.0,' we see the character living inside Gemma's computer, in a nostalgic nod to the Microsoft Word paper clip helper. (As millennials, 'our relationship with Clippy was very codependent and very complicated,' Williams quips.) But if there is a third 'M3GAN' movie, it's unlikely that you'll see her trapped in that virtual realm forever. 'M3GAN always needs to maintain a physical form,' Johnstone says. 'One aspect of AI philosophy that we address in this film is this idea of embodiment: If AI is ever going to achieve true consciousness, it has to have a physical form so it can feel anchored. So that's certainly M3GAN's point of view at the beginning of the movie: She feels that if she stays in this formless form for too long, she's going to fragment. 'M3GAN always has to be in a physical body that she recognizes – it's another reason why she won't change her face, even if it draws attention to herself. It's like, 'This is who I am and I'm not changing.' '