Why a Real-Life Matchmaker Thought Materialists Was Satire

by

In the movie titled “Materialists,” Dakota Johnson’s character Lucy, who serves as a matchmaker, contends that love is similar to playing statistics. She appears more like an actuary than a romantic at the start. The primary question in this film revolves around what constitutes a good match, and Lucy may have found the answer to be more convoluted and messy than she initially imagined. One of the aspects that makes “Materialists” captivating is its exploration of matchmaking, considering the abundance of dating apps in today’s world; could this ancient profession hold the secret to discovering your soulmate?

To delve into the contemporary aspects of matchmaking and understand its professional implications, we reached out to a real-life matchmaker, Gabi, who operates primarily online from upstate New York. Following her early pregnancy during the pandemic, she trained under a seasoned matchmaker named Rachel Russo, who conducts sessions over Zoom for aspiring matchmakers. Today, Gabi works independently as a matchmaker, symbolizing a trend in the industry moving away from corporate agencies and toward a more personalized approach. We discussed various topics such as handling first dates, client education, and how modern matchmaking has evolved beyond the model presented in the film “Materialists”.

How did you perceive Materialists at first, both as a viewer and in your professional role as a matchmaker? To be honest, I found the movie’s tone to be quite peculiar, especially when it emphasized the transactional aspects and the market-driven nature of it all – I felt that it could have been more satirical than it turned out to be. When the love triangle and the storyline involving sexual assault became prominent, it lost me. Overall, the movie seemed overly cynical about matchmaking and particularly about singles. While it’s true that there are some entitled single individuals, in my experience, most of the people I’ve worked with are quite reasonable. You certainly encounter men who prefer younger women, and meet women who only consider tall men, but they aren’t the norm. When Lucy compares her job to working at a morgue or as an insurance underwriter, it was disheartening to say the least. In my practice, we aim to move away from such negative portrayals.

In essence, I believe the film hints at a genuine sentiment about how single individuals experience dating today. Modern apps have turned the process into a game, making people feel like mere items. You encounter bots and falsified profiles; it’s not always secure. To align with the movie’s themes, traditional matchmakers offer a safer option as we personally vet each individual.

What’s the procedure for vetting clients like in this matchmaking service? Since the matchmaking industry isn’t regulated, there aren’t any specific guidelines everyone follows, but many matchmakers place a high emphasis on it. The process typically involves background checks and social media investigations, but what truly matters is the qualitative aspect – something that often seems overlooked in movies. I got interested in this field because I’ve witnessed people enduring abusive relationships or unhappy marriages, and there isn’t much guidance out there about what to look for in a relationship unless your parents had a flawless, ideal marriage – which is quite rare. Can you imagine anyone saying they’ve experienced that?

As a standard practice, I blend coaching into my matchmaking services. This involves organizing mock dates with male clients, enabling me to identify potential issues or red flags more effectively. During these interactions, I ask thought-provoking questions since many of my clients express a desire to start families. In traditional interview settings, some red flags may be overlooked as individuals might simply say what they think you want to hear. However, in the context of ongoing coaching or mock dates, people tend to reveal more about themselves. If someone appears uncomfortable, that’s one thing, but I had to terminate my services with a client once due to his poor communication skills. He became confrontational at one point, and while another professional might choose to work with him, I decided it was not the right fit for me.

In the movie, Lucy contacts her clients for feedback a day after their date. Do you do something similar? Well, my approach is more about finding compatible matches based on specific criteria from both parties. If I find a potential match, I’ll reach out to them and propose a date. Sometimes, it might be a client of another matchmaker that I find in a shared database. Once everyone agrees, I arrange the date. I try to make things as smooth as possible for my clients, including handling phone numbers to avoid any mix-ups. Clients often struggle with this part. I provide phone numbers 24 hours beforehand, which I think is reasonable. After the date, I call them up for brief feedback. In New York, the price per match is usually around $1,000 for just the first date. If a character like Zoë Winters’s went on ten dates, that would mean she spent about $10,000. A good matchmaker wouldn’t send someone on ten unsuccessful dates without intervening at some point to prevent further frustration or potential trauma.

In your question, you’re asking about the balance between following established procedures (or “tickling boxes”) versus seeking a more comprehensive approach when working with clients. This could apply to various fields such as therapy, consulting, or coaching.

In the movie scene, the character seems to prioritize immediate success (such as engagements) over fostering genuine connections based on shared values. However, it’s important to remember that relationships built on superficial reasons are not sustainable in the long run, and those matches aren’t truly successful.

I often engage with people deeply to uncover the roots of their firm requirements, as sometimes these rigid preferences can mask deeper issues. For instance, if someone insists on a tall partner, it could stem from past experiences or feelings of protection. By exploring these needs directly, individuals tend to reveal more about themselves. I’m not fond of dealing with inflexible people because my aim is to help establish lasting relationships, and those who are rigid in their ways may struggle in the long term. Some nonnegotiables can be related to lifestyle choices, such as a preference against dating someone with children or who smokes, which are generally reasonable concerns.

When it comes to balancing personal values against the needs of clients in a professional setting, such as matchmaking, self-employment offers more flexibility compared to working at an agency. In this case, I prefer to collaborate with individuals whose values align with mine, while still being open to diverse perspectives. Although my clients may not share my exact political leanings, it’s essential that they are emotionally mature and have rational life philosophies, even if they differ from mine. I make an effort to avoid working with bigots, but I also see opportunities to learn from people who are different from me and gain insights into their relationships.

In your initial comments, you brought up a scene involving sexual assault in the movie that seemed to pause the narrative emotionally. I found this plot point quite intriguing because it raises questions about potential responsibility within an agency. To clarify, I sought opinions from experienced matchmakers who have worked in such agencies, and they shared their experiences. One of them has encountered such incidents once in her 20-year career, while another had one instance in her 12 years. The company’s response to the incident, including the subpoena and the matchmaker being unable to communicate with the client, seemed authentic to their experience. As matchmaking transitions away from corporate structures, I believe the risk of such incidents decreases. Although I haven’t worked for an agency myself, my friends who do say the environment is less seedy than portrayed in the movie. However, it’s important to note that not all agencies are free of these issues — a friend told me about one where they request women’s bra size — but overall, matchmakers make great efforts to conduct thorough background checks.

The Zoë Winters character seems to represent an average client in the film, considering factors like appearance, success, and age. Do most of your clients fall within her age range, say 30s and 40s?

While I do have some younger clients, it’s more common for me to work with individuals between 30 and 45 years old. Interestingly, I also recently took on a senior client, a lively 78-year-old widow. She’s quite amusing! In her past, she was a formidable figure in advertising in the city. She doesn’t have any children and is open to relocation, which is quite beneficial for our global matchmaking network. If Zoë Winters’ character were my client, I might suggest exploring international matches instead of limiting options to New York men. I met my husband abroad, something I never would have imagined possible. It’s not about making people compromise or lower their expectations; it’s about encouraging them to expand their aspirations.

Read More

2025-06-20 21:55