So then what's more important in a relationship?

I think that is part of the movie's message maybe? Or at least what one could get out of it. In any sense, it depends on the people involved, I suppose. Being close wasn't enough for Celeste, but unfortunately, I think she realized too late the consequences of her choice and so went through that bad time.

I think the movie was a bit hopeful in the end in the way that she was beginning to be less critical (I'm not sure if that's the term) when she didn't start a confrontation with that guy in line.

While I agree, closeness would be the most important thing for me in a relationship, I also get the rationalizing that one could get into if one partner doesn't seem to be "contributing" in "real life" ways.

It was definitely a bitter sweet movie. Bitter, because they obviously still had love for each other (though, not necessarily in love), but couldn't be together. Sweet, because it seems like it was only when they were apart that they were able to grow as people...

I don't really think the movie was trying to say anything or generalize the values of men and women (I could be wrong), but rather was just trying to paint a picture of two specific types of people that would make the fact that they connect on a personal level and their best-friendship believable while also making believable the fact that they wanted different things out of life/a partner. What I mean is, if the writer painted them as best friends, and they had similar personalities and goals in life, then the movie would seem forced if they didn't wind up together. One of the reasons I loved this movie so much though was that it really did do a great job of showing how certain people "get in their own way" when it comes to happiness.

On one hand you have Celeste who is painted as very insecure and concerned with how other people see her, which is one of the reasons why the scene with her falling in the garbage and Jesse's new fiance being "a sophisticated and simple European" are so painful for her, and it's no mistake that the career the writer chose for her is one that not only is time consuming and ambitious but also totally based around superficial BS (trend forecasting in consumerism & media, does it get anymore superficial lol). She is extremely controlling, unable to really adapt early in the movie, and like many modern hipsters, she wanted to exude artistic authenticity and the artistic lifestyle, but was actually very put off by the realities of what being an artist is (relegating Jesse to the shed haha). This is what was so fitting about her relationship with Messina's character, another corporate guy (he was in finance and lived in a Brentwood condo and drove a Porsche) but liked to "vacation" in the spiritual/artistic world as we saw with yoga & the Latin club despite the fact that he's motivated in his career by $. None of these things make her a "bad person", she actually seemed like a good person, but just has flaws like we all do (maybe exaggerated a bit for story). Celeste definitely grew a lot by the end of the movie with regards to her fears about how people perceive her and her insecurities, but by that point things between her and Jesse had changed too much. Also, what made Celeste interesting as a character, is that she seemed trapped by these insecurities, as in she wasn't blissfully going along thinking about how great her business and her life full of luxury was, but early on seemed to almost be doing it just bc she thought she should be and was kind of saddened by it, which is one of the few statements I think the movie was trying to make.

Jesse on the other hand, was an artist who really didn't seem to care about material things or much of anything at all. He was painted as the other extreme end of the spectrum, living in a shed in the backyard, unable to turn in simple projects on time, all around pretty "irresponsible" and unreliable. He ends up with the European girl described as "simple" bc Jesse is the same way, he doesn't care much about "stuff", but at the same time he doesn't seem to care much about anything in general except being almost mothered by Celeste. The movie really was more about Celeste though, and Jesse's character was a lot more one-dimensional and easier to like (well, depending on your values I guess), which I think was done on purpose to make the story less convoluted. He feels pretty empty, like he never really thinks about anything, but instead is just looking for someone to cling onto, which is probably why they had him building a family off of a one-night stand with a woman who seemed equally empty, and I don't use empty as an insult, but remember the interactions we're shown between them, they're SO dull.

To oversimplify it though, Celeste seems to be a lot more self-absorbed, worried about how everything makes her look or how she feels, while Jesse seems to not really be worried about himself, Celeste, or anything else at all really besides being loved by another person.

To speak to your point though, I don't think the movie was trying to say much of anything about relationships in general, just this specific relationship and what happens when 2 people either outgrow each other or despite a great friendship, have different desires in life. It also did a great job of showing how different people have different priorities in life and love. Jesse just wanted to be in a relationship, that was #1 to him, while for Celeste it seemed that, despite what she said, she wanted a successful man and a certain image/life for herself, and the rest was secondary.

Despite how you might feel about it, just like real life, neither is "right" or "wrong". One may be right or wrong to you, but who is to say which is more important. I know plenty of people who value having a certain image and/or lifestyle way more than who they specifically end up with, who would take a beautiful man or woman or someone with $ or status over an averagely attractive person with whom they were best friends, and at the same time I know probably just as many people who would be happy living in a shed with someone they love or starting a family above all else. You can make a compelling argument for/against either really, it ultimately comes down to the values of those involved though. Just speaking to my own experience, I make a lot of $ and have a lot of education but could care less about who I'm dating when it comes to those things, but at the same time, I couldn't be with someone without a career/passion, even if they only made $10k a year doing it. Maybe it all comes down to just relating to someone on your core values, I don' know, but it's a great topic of discussion, thanks for bringing it up.