Saturday, March 1, 2025

THE SUBSTANCE 2024

Spoiler Alert. This is a critical essay, not a review, so plot points will be revealed for discussion purposes.

Have you ever come across one of those hysterical clickbait links with a headline screaming, “You’ll be shocked to see what (insert any celebrity ...99% of the time, a woman) looks like today!” only to discover that the person has simply aged naturally?
Or maybe you've noticed that—while the posting of heavily filtered, augmented, and body-tuned selfies is nothing new—they all now seem to be aiming for the same standardized mannequin aesthetic.
ALL ABOUT EVE (1950)
Or you may have seen the male fitness influencer (who stays mum about his secret cycle of HGH injections) who cloaks run-of-the-mill narcissism in the aspirational rhetoric of discipline and self-mastery. Employing aggressive Alpha language (fight, power, winning, conquer pain), it all feels like obvious compensation for an underlying unease with what might be perceived as a “socially feminine” preoccupation with one's looks. 
And then, perhaps you’ve had the misfortune of encountering the AI artwork of a “creator” who wants to share with you his/her depiction of the ideal in female beauty: Which somehow ALWAYS means a vacantly staring white woman with the exaggerated eyes and lips of a Bratz doll and a body of Jessica Rabbit cartoon proportions.
VEEP- 2019
The most successful form of oppression is when
you get the marginalized to enforce their own subjugation
Even my citing these examples reflects the hegemony of body politics that we all perpetuate, participate in, and endure. Underscoring how, as a society, we continue to intrude upon the personal, private domain of others (our bodies are our own and no one else’s business) by asserting that we all, collectively, have some kind of say in the matter. Consequently, our bodies and physical appearance come to significantly influence our experience of the world, our self-esteem, and in far too many cases, our mental health. 

Where once fashion magazines and advertising were the primary suppliers of unrealistic beauty norms,  now, selfie-culture (with its "take 500 photos to get the ideal one to post" standards of phone-filter perfection) makes sure that every moment of every day, we're bombarded with images of how we think we're supposed to look.  

In The Substance, French filmmaker Coralie Fargeat takes a laceratingly frank look at bodies- our own and the bodies of others- and our relationship with them. Using vivid imagery and startling symbolism, Fargeat confronts the attitudes, conflicts, phobias, and fetishes we attach to our all-too-weak flesh with a take-no-prisoners bravado. Forcing us to examine how our reckless pursuit of beauty standards has blurred the jagged line between self-care and self-mutilation. And Fargeat does so without offering solutions, reassurance, or much concern for our comfort zones. 
THE MIRROR CRACK'D (1980)
Only the second feature film from the gifted director/writer/editor, The Substance is a darkly surreal fairy tale exploring body image, beauty standards, aging, self-loathing, misogyny, disposable people culture, patriarchy, psychological violence, and two of my all-time favorite themes: dualism and the human desire to connect and be loved. 
Though in so many ways unlike anything I’ve ever seen before, The Substance possesses a visual richness that pays homage to classic cinema while blazing an audaciously unique path all its own. Psychological, cultural, and emotional truths merge with a barely-linked-to-reality narrative that evokes a monstro-mutation of the cinema of our past: All About Eve, Showgirls, Death Becomes Her, The Portrait of Dorian Gray, Perfect, Black Swan, Carrie, and of course--
This movie is 75 years old. A society really must have a serious talk with itself to explain how a woman losing her mind because she's turning 50 is still a thing

Embodying the tagline of 1974’s The Day of the Locust: “It Happened in Hollywood, But It Could Have Happened in Hell,” The Substance is set in a present-day Hollywood of the mind—a Hollywood where it sometimes snows, people still read newspapers to find jobs, nighttime talk show hosts are Black, exercise TV programs are ratings blockbusters, and ‘80s/‘90s aesthetics...like legwarmers...have never really left. 
The film's anti-heroine is once-popular, Oscar-winning actress Elisabeth Sparkle (it’s her real name; for we learn in school she was called Lizzie Sparkle, “the most beautiful girl in the world”…at least according to Fred in 10th-grade homeroom). Elisabeth is on the verge of an existential crisis.
Demi Moore as Elisabeth Sparkle
Margaret Qualley as Sue

The (de)evolution of Elisabeth’s career suggests perhaps ageism played a role in her no longer acting in movies (roles for women over 40 make up only 5% of available female film roles), leading her down the B-List showbiz path of TV aerobics guru -"Sparkle Your Life with Elisabeth" - and advertising spokesperson exploiting her catchphrase "You Got It!" A career in which her success and fame are entirely linked to her physical appearance and age-defying physicality. 
Alas, age-defying doesn't mean age-less. On her 50th birthday, Elisabeth receives (in the harshest way imaginable) the world-shattering news that she and her long-running TV show are to be put out to pasture to make room for a tighter, firmer, younger version of both. 
Dennis Quaid as Network Executive (wouldn't you know it) Harvey
These guys don't think you're hot enough. 

As emphasized by the film’s Kubrick-esque camera angles and macro closeups, The Substance is partially an allegory about distorted perceptions. TV executive Harvey's lack of self-perception makes him think he's a charming winner instead of a bullying sociopath whose inner sense of inadequacy manifests in external outbursts of psychological violence. Always targeting women.  
On the distaff side, Elisabeth's lack of self-perception is a kind of mind blindness. She has an inability to latch onto any yardstick of self-evaluation not linked to impossible aesthetic norms and the validation of the male gaze. Her lack of self-esteem manifesting in escalating internal (and later, VERY external) outbursts of self-directed violence...psychological, emotional, and physical. In fact, she hates herself.
The fact that an entire wall of Elisabeth's Barbarella spaceship-style penthouse is dominated by a
floor-to-ceiling portrait of herself tells us everything we need to know about her priorities
 

It can be said that Elisabeth's lack of inner substance—exemplified in her complete embrace of superficial beauty ideals that undermine her worth as a human—is the fatal character flaw that sets the conflict of The Substance in motion. Instead of directing her anger at a social construct that diminishes her in every way, she directs her anger at herself for failing to live up to these ridiculous standards. Still, it's impossible not to feel empathy. 

One can always detect discernable traces of self-loathing behind the physical perfection-seekers of our culture, but since we're a society that values overachievement no matter how hollow the reward -as in celebrating "good" plastic surgery or the "quickest" fad diet- we reinforce the notion that "looking" like we're okay on the outside is more important than actually "being" okay inside.
That's one of the reasons why I think fame and celebrity are so sought-after by those plagued by self-disgust; though meaningless in the larger scheme of things, the external validation of strangers can work like lead to the kryptonite of introspection. 
Letting others define you and tell you exactly what you need to be, do, and look like to make yourself worthy of love is a doctrine that clearly works for a great many people. Religions have been doing it for centuries, and they swear by it (literally). 
Of course, the implicit caveat behind the conditional love and transitory admiration offered by celebrity and fame is the understanding that said "stars" must never change or age. 

"Youth and beauty are not accomplishments. They're the temporary happy by-products 
of time and/or DNA. Don't hold your breath for either."  Carrie Fisher -2015
For someone like Elisabeth, being told that she's at the end of her career is like telling her she's at the end of her life. The Substance—an underground youth elixir that promises a younger, more beautiful, and more perfect version of oneself—enters Elisabeth’s life at the exact moment she starts to feel its impending erasure. How convenient.
And while the promise of that little Day-Glo vial is irresistible and appears to be the solution to all of Elisabeth's problems, anyone who's read a Stephen King novel, watched an Amicus anthology horror film, or seen an episode of The Twilight Zone knows- 
...there's always a catch.
Whoopi Goldberg - Ghost (1990)
That image above of the injected and divided egg yolk will have to serve as summary of how the drug known as The Substance works. Fargeat is far too compelling a visual storyteller (and it's all too far-out and surreal) for anything I write to do it justice. 
I will say that The Substance does indeed create a new, fully formed, independent person from Elisabeth’s DNA (picture Botticelli’s "The Birth of Venus" reimagined by David Cronenberg); however, Sue, as she names herself, is more a “side” of Elisabeth than a new “version.” 
Self Care
"I guess I just try to be myself. To be sincere and grateful for all that I have. And to always remember to lead with my heart." - Sue, spouting the empty affirmations of selfie-caption psychology 

The ultimate Odd Couple, Elisabeth and Sue, share an apartment and an irksomely inconsistent consciousness while living an alternating existence of one week on, one week off. 
It’s a bit like if the adult, self-possessed part of me and the side that still compulsively bites my fingernails existed as two separate people. It’s definitely ME biting my nails; however, in most cases, it’s something I do without conscious awareness. I often “catch” myself biting my nails, which sounds absurd since it’s ME, yet that’s how it works. You’re one, yet it’s still possible to act as though you are disconnected from yourself. 
Sweet Sue
No one else, it seems, ever shared my dreams.
And without you, dear, I don't know what I'd do.
In Robert Altman's 3 Women (1977), Sissy Spacek plays a character named  Pinky Rose (!) who cultivates a hyperfeminine personality that comes to dominate and drain the life force of her roommate Millie (Shelley Duvall). A similar dynamic develops between Elisabeth and Sue in The Substance, turning this already ingeniously assaultive allegory into an absolutely demented roar of anger confronting the horrific violence we’re willing to inflict upon ourselves (body and psyche) in the pursuit of unattainable perfection.
The Violence of Beauty
Hard to imagine a male director including a detail like this. When Elisabeth is taken to the hospital after an accident, there is a brief shot of her bare legs dangling over the edge of the table. Barely visible are the callouses of friction blisters...the kind that come from wearing high heels


WHAT I LOVE ABOUT THIS FILM
I don't often write about contemporary films, but when I do, I've noticed that most of them tend to be of a "sort": Hereditary (2018), Black Swan (2010), Midsommar (2019), Maps to the Stars (2014), Nocturnal Animals (2016). This sort being movies that convey a sense of auteurist vision, independent daring, and a kind of artistic audacity that reminds me of that unpredictable, "Only in the '70s," off-the-wall quality that made so many films from that era so great. And so insane!
I love everything about The Substance: its immersive use of sound (incredible!), color, camera angles, editing, and locations. All is in service of the film's meticulously-crafted worldview. A worldview wherein absolutely everything feels excessive, yet nothing feels wasteful. 
Best of all, I think it's a very smart movie. It knows what it wants to say and, by refusing to spell everything out, doesn't mind if what's being expressed is misunderstood. Indeed, in some ways, it could be said that The Substance dares you to like it. 
A valid argument could be made that the film's points are made with a sledgehammer, but to that, I'd say, if in the year 2025 we're still having men legislate women's bodies, then perhaps a sledgehammer is necessary to get these (to me) obvious points across.
These guys don't think you're hot enough.
Daniel Knight and Jonathan Carley as Casting Directors
I have four sisters, and according to them, the "Seinfeld Syndrome"—their term for the phenomenon of utterly unprepossessing guys expecting physical perfection from women—is far from a social exaggeration. 

I found The Substance to be compelling, grotesque, ingenious, and as sharp as a razor. It moved me and grossed me out, and the ending, in particular, is so poignant (major waterworks) that it’s a shame the scene itself is so difficult to watch. Speaking of which, I've seen The Substance four times—well, make that three; the first time shouldn't count because I spent so much time covering my eyes—and each time, I continue to discover new things. There's something powerfully honest about a movie that examines how the marginalized can internalize and identify with society's hatred of them. 

The Final Metamorphosis
"Few things are sadder than the truly monstrous." 
                                           Nathanael West - The Day of the Locust -1939

THE STUFF OF DREAMS
For a film about an actress, set in Hollywood (filmed in France) and exploring the pressures placed on women to be perfect, I appreciate how Coralie Fargeat and her team utilize a visual storytelling style that has the viewer perpetually processing this new story (The Angry Young Woman has yet to become a trope, but I think it might be on its way) through the echo of familiar cinematic imagery. 
The power of images is immense, which is why it's crucial to ask ourselves who is behind the representations we see of ourselves in movies, TV, and advertising. If those controlling what we see are also the people who hate us, then their only vested interest is in teaching us how to hate ourselves. 
The obsession with perfection is the core theme of both
The Substance and Darren Aronofsky's Black Swan 

The Substance and Stanley Kubrick's 2001: A Space Odyssey
Grids and Richard Strauss' " Thus Spake Zarathustra feature in both films

These bold callbacks to Kubrick's The Shining heighten The Substance's use 
of confined spaces to create tension and convey a sense of imminent violence.

PERFORMANCES
This is a two-hander as far as I'm concerned, with both Demi Moore and Margaret Qualley delivering full-throttle, pull-out-the-stops performances that are each unimaginable without the other. Qualley is new to me, but she had me in her pocket in the silent scene where Sue comes upon an indented easy chair and TV remote- evidence that Elisabeth has been wasting her allotted time doing nothing but watching television. The acute level of disapproving judgment and disgust that comes across Qualley's face at this moment speaks volumes about her character.  I don't know how she did it. 
American Beauty / Black Dahlia
I have to confess I'm not the best Demi Moore fan. I checked on IMDB to see how many of her films I'd seen...grand total: five (my favorite being Mortal Thoughts -1991). Before The Substance, I had not seen Moore in a movie since the 2007 Kevin Costner thriller Mr. Brooks, and I hadn't even REMEMBERED she was in it!
Moore came back into my awareness when a relative gifted me her 2019 memoir (which I initially met with a WTF? but it turns out the book is really terrific). And then, last year, she turned in a brief but powerful performance in the FX series FEUD: Capote vs. The Swans. And I was besotted. 
"You got it!" 
I would like to say that Demi Moore in The Substance gives a career-best performance, but it's already been established that I'm ill-equipped to make such a call. What I will say is that she gives my #1 favorite performance of this year. There's no better testament to the truth and humanity she brings to her character than the fact that The Substance works at all. In some ways, it is an absolutely lunatic movie that takes risk after risk with the audience's suspension of disbelief. Yet, it stays grounded due to the reality and meta-authenticity Moore delivers. 
In a largely silent role, Moore is wonderfully expressive in conveying everything that Elisabeth feels and experiences. Much like what I've always admired about Julie Christie, Moore meets the challenge of giving an essentially superficial character enough depth for us to relate to and empathize with.


BONUS MATERIAL

Reality + (2014)
In this early short film by Coralie Fargeat, she touches upon many of the same themes
explored in The Substance, only from a male perspective. You can watch it HERE.
Men aren't immune to the prevailing pressure to conform to unrealistic beauty standards--though, being men and inherently fragile, we find it necessary to disguise appearance obsession in "action" language: strong, fit, athletic, healthy, muscular, powerful, and so forth; or label it a "masculinity standard" and infuse it with an alpha illusion of self-actualization ("The only reason I work out is because I'm always my BEST me, and it gets me lots of sex. I'm the one in control."). In other words, anything to mask acknowledging the inherent passivity and loss of power that goes with courting the objectifying gaze.    
Revenge (2017)
Coralie Fargeat made her feature film directing debut with this action thriller
starring Matilda Lutz and Kevin Janssens
Actor Vincent Colombe, cast as one of the silent "suits" in The Substance, has featured roles in both Fargeat's Revenge and the short film Reality +.

Jurassic Fitness
Having enjoyed a long career in the fitness industry myself (1985 to 2019), I absolutely loved that Elisabeth Sparkle was an aerobics instructor! That brief "Sparkle Your Life with Elizabeth" sequence was like watching my past flash before my eyes. Every move executed in her class was one I'd done thousands of times. Even the toxic inspirational/abusive language rings true - "Think of those bikini bods! You wanna look like a giant jellyfish on the beach?"
The photo on the right is an outtake from a mercifully unproduced step-aerobics video project.

As a group instructor and personal trainer, I was pretty much immersed in a world that feeds on and perpetuates everything that The Substance is about (explaining in part why this movie so resonated with me). The promotion of oppressive beauty standards has always been a part of our culture, but the kind of perfectionist extremes The Substance speaks to have their roots in the "exercising for the aesthetics" trend of '80s fitness culture. 
In fact, that tiny figure in the far left side of the movie screencap at the bottom is me working as an extra in the 1985 John Travolta/Jamie Lee Curtis aerobics exercise opus called...you guessed it, "Perfect." 

Sue's "Pump It Up" exercise TV program is satirically over-the-top, but from 1980 to 1982, the cable network Showtime ran a truly hilariously overheated "erotic exercise" program called "Aerobicise" that makes Sue's show look like a documentary. There's a YouTube channel devoted to it HERE.

Take Care of Yourself 

Copyright © Ken Anderson    2009 -  2024

20 comments:

  1. Wow, Ken, so you worked with Travolta! I certainly thought The Substance was a superb film, more of a parody than a pure genre film. But discovering your side as a cinematic extra far outweighs any other circumstance.

    Regards,
    Juan

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hello, nice to hear from you again, Juan -
      Ha! I didn’t work “with” Travolta so much as worked “Travolta adjacent,” but as a lifelong film fan, it was a utter and complete thrill to actually work as an extra on a major (albeit unwatchably terrible) feature film and see how it was made, up close.
      I was actually more excited about Gordon Willis (Klute, The Godfather) being the cinematographer. While everyone was trying to get Travolta’s attention between set-ups, I was watching how Willis worked. What a dream!
      Anyhow, thanks for reading this so soon.
      Glad to hear you thought The Substance was superb, too. I think it’s one of those films that fully resists fitting comfortably into a specific genre description.
      Comedic, horrific, surreal, dramatic, satiric, grand guignol, allegory... all apply, but none exclusively.
      Your view of it as a parody sounds intriguing…perhaps you will write about it on your film blog? (Given how many films you see, and what a prolific writer you are, you probably already have. I’ll check.)
      Thanks for commenting, Juan, and your excitement about my film extra experience (I think the Blu-ray aspect ratio cuts me out completely) brought back a few happy memories of how exciting the whole thing was.
      Hope all is well, Cheers!

      Delete
  2. Great critique! Very insightful! Enjoyed reading it!

    All the best,
    Kendrick

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hello, Kendrick! -
      I appreciate that. Very much.
      I often read things I enjoy online, but all too often, I never take the time to drop a line to the writer to let them know. Writing is hard, solitary work, and I forget how much a gesture like that can mean.
      Given the number of blogs out there, I'm grateful you stopped by and read my essay. That you also took the time to let me know you enjoyed it is a bonus.
      A tip of the hat to you, Kendrick. Cheers!

      Delete
  3. I'm sure I speak for many when I say I'm still devouring everything you write (thanks RSS!) even when I'm not commenting. I opened this one thinking "Ken reviewed a movie made after 1980?" and was glad to see your rundown of the very short list you've seen fit to cover.

    As for _The Substance_, I definitely didn't like it as much as I was expecting going in. While I don't have any trouble with the science fantasy aspects, I generally have to work really hard to suspend disbelief when the economics makes no sense. Another dumb complaint was that by an hour in I was so sick of seeing those same two goddamned hallways but yes, we did then have to see them each another dozen times. The ending in the theater was quite welcome just to have a change of scene.

    You haven't reviewed _The Phantom of Paradise_, have you? Apparently there is an annual festival in (for no reason) Winnipeg devoted to it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Allen!
      How great to hear from you. And thanks for letting me know you’ve remained a reader all this time. I’d thought we’d lost touch contact way back when there was such a thing as Google +.

      Regarding THE SUBSTANCE, I think your complaints about the film are far from unfounded. Isn’t it often the small or ancillary details that pull us out of the reality a movie tries to immerse us in?
      While this doesn’t apply to THE SUBSTANCE, suspension of disbelief is always challenged when I watch a horror film where the characters behave as if they’ve never seen a horror film before. For instance, that overused trope of someone who turns out not to be a threat silently approaching a person and placing their hand on their shoulder, scaring them senseless. Why wouldn’t they say something first?
      And I laughed--in empathy--at your frustration with all those hallways! HA! Once you started taking notice of it, the sheer number of those hallway shots must have driven you bats.

      I’m a fan of PHANTOM OF THE PARADISE, but have yet to write about it. But thanks for sharing the news about that annual Winnipeg festival. It seemed so random that I had to Google it to find out more. You probably already know this, but I had no idea that back in 1974, PHANTOM flopped everywhere except Winnipeg. It apparently ran there for months! It’s such an isolated thing; were it a movie, the answer would be there was something in the water.
      Thanks for reading this post and commenting. And especially for sticking with this blog since waaaaay back.
      Take care.

      Delete
  4. I don't know if this movie will ever cross my path (I see far fewer contemporary movies than even you do!), but it seems interesting. (A serious rumination on some themes found in "Death Becomes Her?") I had a couple of pals almost cheering that fact that Demi didn't win an Oscar, which sort of mystified me because, even though she isn't some big favorite of mine, I always admire someone (especially a female) who can stick in out in a savage business like Hollywood screen acting for a long haul, and succeed! I don't watch the Os anymore, but looking at the clothes this morning I saw a lot of really bad, scary trends among the "actresses." And they probably think they look really great! (They don't. As far as I'm concerned.) When you wrote this: "And perhaps you’ve had the misfortune of encountering the AI artwork of a “creator” who wants to share with you his/her depiction of the ideal in female beauty: Which somehow ALWAYS means a vacantly staring white woman with the exaggerated eyes and lips of a Bratz doll and a body of Jessica Rabbit cartoon proportions.," my mind immediately went to a person called Julia Fox who attended the Vanity Fair party nearly naked and resembled the description you gave. There isn't much further for a person to go....! It's surreal. Glad to see you busily writing. And fun to see the flyer from your aerobic days!!! (I did do one of my crazed write-ups of "Perfect" quite a few years back, though I'm sure you've seen that.) Take care and thanks!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi Jon –
      Thanks for reading this. My partner, who has no interest in horror films—especially not body horror—had no desire to see THE SUBSTANCE. However, after reading about its central themes, he has said he now wants to watch it with me (hello, 5th time!).

      I think, especially considering what you shared about Demi Moore (I feel the same way... she has certainly paid her dues throughout her career, and I’m glad that at an age when Hollywood has historically discarded actresses, she is experiencing a kind of renaissance), you may want to give it a shot one day. It’s definitely worth pondering a topic that was once seen as very Hollywood, but has now permeated all walks of life thanks to selfie culture and the internet.
      And you’re right; it’s just as outrageous as DEATH BECOMES HER, but it offers a bit more humanity to the women who are so critical of themselves and feel the pressure to conform. Additionally, it provides a clearer perspective on the patriarchy that continues to fuel the idea that a woman’s appearance is the only measure of her worth.

      Writing about THE SUBSTANCE so close to the OSCARS (which I have never missed since the year Bonnie and Clyde was nominated) was so interesting because it informed so much of my viewing experience.

      I was aware that while I felt comfortable with criticizing the fashions I liked or didn’t like (that’s the fun), but I was aware of not wanting to get into evaluating anyone’s physical appearance or judging their choice of what they felt made them look nice.

      My mind went to Dolly Parton and (paraphrasing) how she once said that she knows there are those who think her look is extreme, but she felt pretty this way and that when she feels she looks good, she’s happy. That it didn’t really matter if others agreed.
      That’s one of the more poignant points THE SUBTANCE makes, and watching the Oscars really made it hit home. If you like the way you look in something, more power to you. There’s really nobody else to please but yourself.

      I have no issue with how anyone chooses to dress or what they do to themselves, as long as it makes them happy. If I have an issue at all, it’s with how narrow and uniform the standards are. There’s a conformity that suggests to people there is only ONE way to look good (i.e., skinny, crease-free, young, and fit). It was nice to see older stars like Goldie Hawn and June Squibb there.

      By the way, with each new year of Oscar watching, there are more “Who’s that?” coming from my corner. Like, I have no idea who Julia Fox is!

      And, yes, I'd read your excellent and hilarious review of PERFECT (could it really be as far back as 2011?) and in revisiting it loved your laughed aloud (again) at your rumination on the fate of cinematographer Gordon Willis "Having to set up his camera in a stark, artless dance studio and aim his camera at Curtis's taint for hours on end." Ha! it's so true. As is your speculation that a lot of the men's prominent bulges look suspiciously fake.
      Though I think its a dread movie and very hard to watch, I think i should write about it so i can at least relay some of what I remember about participating in it while I can still remember.
      Thank you for reading this and commenting, Jon.
      You're the best! Take care.

      Delete
  5. Great review! I haven't seen the movie yet (though I thoroughly spoiled myself to make sure the body horror didn't include something I cannot handle), but your essay is moving it farther up my to-watch list.
    I had seen the director's earlier film, Revenge, and while it was entertaining, I didn't find it nearly as insightful as many seemed to consider it, and many sequences were too unrealistic or cartoonish to take seriously. I'm curious to see if these flaws are also present in The Substance.
    Reading your essay, I'm kind of glad I've never been a beauty, and now that I'm older, I'm definitely in the "it is what it is" phase and prioritizing my health over trying to get back into single-digit-size jeans. One benefit of aging is not longer feeling the pressure to keep chasing something that will inevitably fade/has already faded.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hello, K Cozy –
      And thank you! I’m happy you liked this post.
      Your decision to spoil the movie a bit to ensure you could handle the body horror is clever. I approached the film completely unaware of what to expect. As I mentioned in the essay, I spent much of my first viewing of THE SUBSTANCE with my hands over my eyes.
      I recently watched REVENGE, and I really enjoyed it. However, like you, I didn’t find its themes particularly insightful. But I’m not a heterosexual male, so perhaps the idea that a woman can choose to be flirty and superficial while still having the right to consent is a novel concept. That, along with the notion that “macho” resilience is just as much a part of the female arsenal as “girly” self-owned sexuality.
      You’ll see a great deal of REVENGE in THE SUBSTANCE, and it’ll be interesting to know if you find the director has learned to elaborate on her themes or if you think she is merely repeating them. But the best thing about THE SUBSTANCE is that, like it or hate it, it’s hard to deny that it’s a work of passion.
      And I’m with you on aging. As I’ve gotten older, I’ve discovered there’s a real sense of liberation in being freed from the need to meet anyone’s expectations of me beyond my own. But I say this as someone who’s been in a loving relationship for 29 years. If I were single, I can’t say how much I’d still feel the pressure to look a certain way. The tyranny of youth and appearance in the gay community is just as damaging to the human spirit as anything imposed on women by patriarchy.
      Of course, what’s so odd about ALL of this is that everybody ages, and everybody dies. Being pretty or hot doesn’t stop any of that.
      You’d think as a society we would build a way of dealing with one another that accepts the fact of nature…like EVERYBODY is beautiful but different, and that EVERYBODY is going to wrinkle and grow old...neither thing being a negative.
      What a waste of human potential it is to want to reverse or stop the clock.

      Thanks for offering up more food for thought! I so appreciate your commenting on this post and hope that perhaps when/if you do see THE SUBTANCE, you stop back and gift us with a follow-up. Cheers!

      Delete
  6. Brilliant as usual. I have missed reading your observations. And so disillusioned by
    images of unattainable constraints propagated by media and society.
    It’s as if the all we fought for freedoms and knowledge of the sixties has been all but
    obliterated .

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Lynn! You're so sweet to comment. I definitely miss you on IG, but I can't say my sanity has missed social media. Thanks for reading this.
      We truly live in such a paradoxical time. It's remarkable how we’re experiencing social de-evolution at the same time as very acute social awareness. The kind that makes a film like THE SUBSTANCE not just possible but also profitable.

      I agree with you about how the hard-won progress towards freedoms and knowledge from the 60s and 70s is being obliterated. It’s as if several decades of human advancement never occurred.
      This leads me to think that patriarchy, racism, and capitalism have all done their jobs remarkably well. We’ve created a nation of individuals who have internalized these lessons and are now actively engaged in their own oppression.
      You could easily swap the theme of beauty standards in THE SUBSTANCE for wealth, race, or sexuality, and nothing in the film’s perspective would change. Culturally, it seems we’d rather loathe ourselves and each other than confront the creators and profiteers of these myths.

      Thank you for reading this essay (I can't quite imagine you watching this movie, though!) and especially for your generous compliment.
      Take care, Lynn!

      Delete
  7. Loved reading your take on this film Ken - and your list of similar films is spot on. My husband adds Fedora to the list with Demi's Elizabeth living vicariously through her younger self. I guess that makes Quaid William Holden... Demi is great casting in this and I was like you in that I was hiding behind a cushion in my first and only watch because of those later scenes..

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Why, thank you Gill!
      I'm so happy you enjoyed this.
      And tell your hubby what a wonderful connection he made by alluding to "Fedora"...that film fits perfectly with the themes of THE SUBSTANCE.
      I love Demi Moore in this (perhaps one day the director will reveal who were her first choice actresses who turned the role down for being too raw and close to home). Because the movie still packs an emotional wallop for me, I have yet to be able to fully watch certain scenes without peeking through my fingers. And that's after four times!
      So appreciate whenever you stop by and check out a post. As busy as you are with your own wonderful blog,, your generosity in taking the time to drop a complimentary comment isn't lost on me. Thanks so much, Gill. Cheers!

      Delete
    2. I always love your taste in movies Ken... and if you have anything brewing that might fit this, be lovely to have you (no pressure)...

      https://weegiemidget.wordpress.com/2025/03/16/news-announcing-a-may-blogathon-the-adventurethon/

      Delete
  8. Ken, I was thinking about your writing last night and realized I hadn't seen you on social media (while I have left some platforms I haven't left all but I get wanting to abandon ship!) but I'm so glad I can always come back here and see what you have to say.

    I agree with your assessment and I am most assuredly NOT a horror aficionado, but Fargeat has such an impeccable eye and I love the visual storytelling of The Substance. I confess I went down a rabbit hole of "behind the scenes" stories on You Tube and seeing her process and the ingenious way she made this (injecting the fake substance into her arm to get the shot, etc.) just speaks to my thrifty nature, lol! I love a budget-friendly queen.

    I admit, I felt a little sad on Oscar night (even though we all know it's just a popularity contest) to see the whole story play out in the best actress category. But kudos to Moore for going there in her performance. As I get older every year, because let's face it, age is the great leveler and is coming for us all, movies like this speak to me on a much more personal level. One thing I always think to myself is are we just are bodies? Don't we have minds and souls? As women, do we even have a choice in society's eyes? Big questions and I love how this movie tackles them.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Hello Tanya - Although it seems weird seeing your name without the “diva “behind it!
    Nice to know I was in your thoughts. There are so many people like you I miss on social media, but the breather has been nothing short of heaven.

    It’s great to hear that you, as a non-horror fan, enjoyed THE SUBSTANCE. I think after I watch it one more time with my partner, I might go down that YouTube rabbit hole and see some of the behind-the-scenes stuff. I’m still such a fantasist when it comes to movies that I try to prolong the illusions as long as I can…then, I’m like you…I can find the behind-the-scenes stuff so engrossing.
    I’ve seen a few interviews with Fargeat while she was going through the Awards Season treadmill, and I’m very impressed by her “indie” approach—using her imagination to create things out of slim-budget necessity. Very inventive.
    She reminds me of directors like Michael Cimino and Francis Ford Coppola, who made significant films when they had reasonable budgets to work with. I hope history doesn’t repeat itself with Fargeat when she gets her first mega-budget feature. Her work excites me similarly to how I feel about Ari Aster (Hereditary, Midsommer)... lots of risk-taking and little interest in focus-group appeal.

    I was disappointed that Demi Moore didn’t win on Oscar night, partially because it's hard to believe she will ever get a challenging, pull-out-the-stops showcase like this again.
    But the larger benefit is that a popular movie like this has found a way to address the very questions you raise… very important ones for young women to be asking themselves during this time in our country’s social and cultural de-evolution.

    Thank you for reading and commenting, Tanya. It’s so good to hear from you, and I hope you’re doing well. I’m sure I’ll return to social media at some point, but for now, you know you can find me here or on my YouTube channel. Cheers!

    ReplyDelete
  10. I am the MOST squeamish filmgoer ever, so I avoid movies I fear I'd be watching through the narrow gaps between my fingers covering my eyes. I have only seen snippets of "The Substance" and it looked too gory for me but your review makes me want to "man up" and give it a shot. There's something about casting Demi Moore, whose own plastic surgery mishaps (that Paris runway appearance a couple of years ago -- bad fillers?) and recent redemption (second only to Lindsay's recent miraculous glow-up), that gives me icky exploitation vibes. It's that same icky feeling I get knowing that Judy Garland was originally cast as Helen Lawson (thank God that crashed) or seeing Lana Turner in all those films where she's playing a negligent mother or step-mother ("Imitation of Life," "Peyton Place," "Portrait in Black," "Madame X," The Big Cube" -- her entire late-Fifties--Sixties oevre!). Isn't casting an actress with real-life bad-plastic-surgery notoriety and making her act out what are likely her own issues exploitive and arguably misogynistic? Or is it just savvy casting? I've been fascinated by plastic surgery for decades -- not for myself but in "aging" actors and actresses; obviously it's an obsession my others share. I follow a popular YouTuber whose shtick is very detailed facial analyses of (mainly) actresses who claim never to have gone under the knife, and who herself clearly suffers with some sort of facial dysmorphoria (if there is such a term) herself. But she promotes her channel as empowering to young women who might otherwise believe that their aging-backwards screen idols are that way naturally (a certain Latina popstar/actress from the Bronx who swears by olive oil comes to mind). But it's also (intentionally or not) a big advertisement for plastic surgery. My point is that I wonder if "The Substance" is just flogging the plastic-surgery/youth-obsession horse yet again. I mean, the desire to find the fountain of youth goes back centuries. Is the film telling us anything we don't already know, and creating another can't-look-away grand guignol car crash dressed up as cultural critique? I don't have the answer. You make me want to see this film -- and make me grateful they didn't cast Madonna.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi Peter –
      I’m glad this piece has at least prompted you to consider putting your squeamishness aside to check out a movie that, from what I can tell, you’ll approach with plenty of ideas and concepts at the ready.

      The whole exploitation angle you mention is a fabulous point to bring up, as I’m one of those who sees the whole Hollywood star system as being built upon precisely that.

      Movie stars all seem so willing to exploit their mythic images (like Warren Beatty with SHAMPOO) or tease the public with illusions of truth (Tom Cruise & Nicole Kidman in EYES WIDE SHUT, Richard Burton & Liz Taylor in everything). But shy away from the exposure of their authentic selves.

      Until reading your comment, I wasn’t aware that Demi Moore was known for plastic surgery mishaps (I had to Google the Paris runway incident). She has never been much on my radar, but I was under the impression that part of her notoriety was built on how great she looks. How she defies aging.
      Her remarkable agelessness and the fact that her keen attention to her fitness and appearance has been at the forefront of so much of her magazine and movie publicity (I remember the hubbub about how she looked so startlingly fit in a bathing suit in one of those CHARLIE’S ANGELS films).
      That’s at least part of the angle used in the meta casting of Moore in THE SUBSTANCE - a 60-year-old, stunningly beautiful actress playing a 50-year-old stunningly beautiful actress who STILL thinks she is not enough. Her character is presented as an example of someone who actually achieves what society says older women must forever maintain— agelessness — but it’s clear that society isn’t so much interested in keeping women young as it's in keeping women in their place.

      And that’s what THE SUBSTANCE dramatizes that (unfortunately) we as a society still don’t already know…
      that if we’re talking freedom, it means a woman should be free to go under the knife as often as she wants to, age as naturally as she wishes, turn herself into a Barbie doll, or live her life out as Whistler’s mother…any choice a woman makes about herself and her body should be OK, simply because it’s her body to do with as she wishes.
      It’s a plea for women to make whatever choices they want about their bodies if it brings them happiness while being kinder to themselves and one another in the process. It begs that women stop tearing each other down like they’re in battle, and acknowledge that both young and old face the same dehumanizing, misogynist scrutiny.
      It also feels like that is why the movie is so over-the-top with the gore…like you said, there’s a supposition that this is a topic we're all familiar with. But here we are in 2025, and men still think it’s their business to legislate women’s bodies. With the willing assistance of self-loathing women who hate other women.

      I hope you do check out THE SUBSTANCE.
      Even if you wind up hating it, you express such an active interest in so many aspects of the theme already; it’s unlikely you won't find it at least edifying to witness how director Coraline Fargeat exorcises some of her “woman turning 40” demons.
      Demi Moore wasn't the first actress approached for the film, and the director has remained mum about her early casting considerations.
      I wonder if Madonna might have been on the list.
      If so, a bullet was dodged.
      Thank you for such a thought-provoking contribution, Peter.
      As you can see, you brought up enough interesting topics to spark another essay.

      Delete
    2. Ken, you are always so generous with your replies; I always feel privileged to receive one! I will have to see this movie, that's it. And I will be back with a fresh comment!

      Delete