\n<\/p>\n
\u201cM<\/span>arriage is a business deal and it always has been.\u201d So says Dakota Johnson\u2019s Lucy, an elite Manhattan matchmaker in Celine Song\u2019s second feature, Materialists. Lucy may be a modern woman, but her world looks eerily similar to the marriage mart of Jane Austen\u2019s day. For Lucy and her clients, it is a truth universally acknowledged that a single man in possession of a good fortune must be in want of a wife. Or rather, a \u201chigh quality woman\u201d, as Lucy would unironically put it.<\/p>\n Materialists drops us head first into a world where coupling off with a partner is a purely financial endeavour; where foolish notions of love are not merely ignored, but deemed to be irrelevant; where women must choose passion or practicality.<\/p>\n If all of this sounds rather archaic or even regressive, that\u2019s because it is. And Song knows it. After all, she frequently cites Jane Austen, specifically Pride and Prejudice, as one of her biggest inspirations for the film: \u201cWhat an amazing fantasy Pride and Prejudice is, because in that story, the love of your life is also the answer to all your practical problems,\u201d she said to Curzon.<\/p>\n Just as this year\u2019s best picture winner Anora was widely viewed as the anti-Pretty Woman for flipping the fantasy of the rich-guy-falls-for-sex-worker-and-whisks-her-out-of-poverty on its head, Materialists functions as a sort of anti-Pride and Prejudice. As Song notes, Austen\u2019s beloved novel offers a similar fantasy: that the man you love might also be the answer to your practical financial problems.<\/p>\n <\/span>Burned by passion \u2026 Chris Evans as John and Dakota Johnson as Lucy in Celine Song\u2019s Materialists.<\/span> Photograph: Atsushi Nishijima\/Adore Matchmaking<\/p>\n In Materialists, as in Anora, the fantasy doesn\u2019t quite play out. Not that Lucy is naive enough to expect it to. No, this heroine is all practicality and sense. \u201cI will die alone or marry a rich man,\u201d she says with resignation at the beginning of the film. This businesslike approach to love doesn\u2019t just come from her day job: she has been burned by passionate love in the past: her ex-boyfriend John is a 37-year-old waiter who, despite having the face of Chris Evans, can\u2019t seem to make it as an actor.<\/p>\n Each of these reverse fantasies are driven by heroines who are adamantly uninterested in romance<\/p>\n She gets her chance at the dream marriage of convenience when she meets Harry, an uber rich guy who seems nice enough and has a $12m apartment. He is, her colleague says enviously, a \u201cunicorn\u201d. This is another unexpected echo of Anora \u2013 when Ani, a sex worker looking for a way out of poverty, meets and marries a wealthy young Russian, Vanya, her colleague, also envious, snarks, \u201cOh, you caught your whale\u201d.<\/p>\n <\/span>Whale catching \u2026 Mark Eydelshteyn and Mikey Madison in Anora. <\/span> Photograph: FlixPix\/Alamy<\/p>\n Each of these reverse fantasies are driven by heroines who are adamantly uninterested in romance. It marks new territory. Even in Austen\u2019s day, heroines clung to the fantasy of a love match despite the practical realities of their time. And we progressed from there. The early screwball romcoms of the 1930s and 40s brought us headstrong heroines, while the 80s and 90s screen romances were filled with \u201cworking girls\u201d who were independent, self-sufficient women. Now, it seems, we are entering a new era defined by heroines who openly, proudly proclaim their desire for a practical match \u2013 an era of young women who have given up on love.<\/p>\n Fascinatingly, this is playing out in the real world, too. For a generation of young heterosexual women, a \u201cunicorn\u201d or a \u201cwhale\u201d is seen as the ultimate prize. \u201cWatching Materialists when the poor man propaganda wins and Lucy picks a broke 37-year-old failed actor over rich, loving Harry who would give her the world,\u201d one person wrote in a TikTok video in response to Materialists that scored more than 22,000 likes. \u201cI will not<\/em> fall for broke guy propaganda, she fumbled hard<\/em>,\u201d another wrote \u2013 also liked more than 22,000 times. I can\u2019t help but recall last year\u2019s \u201clooking for a man in finance\u201d TikTok trend.<\/p>\n <\/span>An economic proposition \u2026 Timoth\u00e9e Chalamet and Florence Pugh in Greta Gerwig\u2019s Little Women. <\/span> Photograph: Wilson Webb\/Columbia Pictures\/Allstar<\/p>\n Young women are also reappraising certain female characters who were once judged for their practical approach to love. Meredith Blake, the gold-digging villain of the 1998 The Parent Trap who threatens to stand in the way of true love, now has a new troop of young fans who think she was an \u201cicon\u201d, actually. \u201cMaturing is realising that Meredith just knew [sic] what she deserves and wouldn\u2019t settle for less\u201d \u2013 TikTok again. Then there\u2019s the growing idolisation of the money-oriented Amy March, kickstarted by Greta Gerwig\u2019s 2019 adaptation of Little Women. Gerwig put the character\u2019s motivation into words: \u201cDon\u2019t sit there and tell me that marriage isn\u2019t an economic proposition because it is. It may not be for you, but it most certainly is for me.\u201d<\/p>\n But wait. Little Women and Pride and Prejudice were written years ago when women often really did need to marry well to escape their circumstances. Why is this resonating with young women now? Haven\u2019t we moved on? Wasn\u2019t decades of feminism meant to dig us out of this reliance on men and marriage? Why are Lucy and Ani and, it would seem, tens of thousands of young women on TikTok, thinking and operating as if they were characters in a Victorian novel? What, in other words, is going on?<\/p>\n <\/span>Lindsay Lohan and Elaine Hendrix as the gold-digger Meredith Blake in The Parent Trap. <\/span> Photograph: Entertainment Pictures\/Alamy<\/p>\n Song has some ideas. \u201cI think it has so much to do with how deeply broken our economic systems are, especially in the US,\u201d she said in a recent Guardian interview. \u201cAs we have learned, the American dream is not achievable. You cannot jump your class. But what\u2019s one of the few ways that you can still jump your class? Well, marriage.\u201d<\/p>\n It\u2019s all rather cold and depressing. Thankfully, though, while these films may be reflecting a real, somewhat unsettling cultural shift, they defy the philosophy that romance is merely a business deal. They stand up for love. Lucy finds her \u201cunicorn\u201d and Ani gets her \u201cwhale\u201d \u2013 but each \u201clove\u201d story ends in disappointment. Lucy has to face up to the fact that she does need a little love in her life, actually \u2013 even if it means forgoing the nice restaurants.<\/p>\n Meanwhile, Ani is confronted with the reality that Vanya doesn\u2019t love her or even respect her enough to stand up for their marriage once his oligarch parents arrive to break them up. In each film, the third act delivers relief in the form of real human connection. Love does matter \u2013 even, and perhaps especially, in our increasingly money-obsessed world. And cinema is still fighting for it.<\/p>\n