It’s the talk of cinephile circles and Demi Moore gives a career-best performance. But is The Substance too icky for the Oscars?
At its best, cinema will sneak up on you and deliver something no one could have expected. A dazzling kaleidoscopic rollercoaster body horror starring Demi Moore? No one would have predicted a project like that being greenlit a few years ago. What’s the last Demi Moore film you can remember before The Substance? What in her CV ever suggested a turn-off into Cronenbergs-ville quite like this?
Coralie Fargeat hit the consciousness of UK and US film fans with her breakout film Revenge in 2017. Given its cult following and gnarly subversion of exploitation cinema, there would have been a big clamour among film nerds waiting for her sophomore picture and it’s been a long old wait. Somewhere between Fargeat completing her screenplay and taking the film to cameras, Demi Moore was given the leading role as a fading star being pushed out in favour of a younger replacement by an industry run by ageing men.
It’s fair to say that in terms of mainstream successes, Moore’s best days were last century. As an actress, she was a rare antithesis to a general preference in Hollywood for blonde starlets and was often cast as a love interest slightly beholden to a male cast protagonist. Not uncommon for many actresses, and yet the industry and critics were unconvinced she had the chops or range to smash her way out of that pigeonhole in the same way Meryl Streep did in the late 70s.
On occasions where the movie was entirely built around her as the leading lady, the films proved contentious at best. Striptease was torn apart by critics and audiences alike. GI Jane had its fans but the movie is mostly remembered because of the press attention gained by Moore shaving her head for the role. Despite excellent performances proving the contrary, Moore has often unfairly been labelled as a bad actress. She has enough recognition to have worked solidly but has been confined to TV show guest spots and films barely anyone remembers. The last time I saw Moore on the big screen, besides a walk-on in The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent, was a fun bit part in the otherwise forgettable comedy Rough Night. She still looks incredible, like a movie star, but it’s tough to get a moment in the spotlight in a watercooler film when you’ve long past the peak of your popularity. That is unless you get something impossible to ignore.
The Substance is just that. Forgeat’s brilliantly written and even more brilliantly realised picture is a perfect platform for Moore to let loose. Throwing aside all traces of ego and going to places you would never in a million years have imagined her going, it’s the greatest performance of her entire career. It shows the power of good writing, direction and chemistry between the star and director. We saw it with Mickey Rourke and Darren Aronofsky in The Wrestler too. Years in the wilderness with below-par performances compared to his electrifying early days, Rourke found a project and a director that perfectly suited him. There was also enough crossover between character and actor to help provide a useful bridge to authenticity when it came to performance.
In The Substance, Moore cast as a glamorous sex symbol being shoved out of the spotlight after hitting a milestone birthday was something she was able to draw upon. In terms of being a leading lady, it felt like Demi was cast asunder right as she was pushing 40. To the point she had a “hey, it’s Demi Moore! Remember her.” type role in Charlie’s Angels: Full Throttle some 21 years ago.
The Substance may well be the most perfectly realised director’s vision in years. There’s never a moment, whether you like the film or not, where it doesn’t feel like a shot, cut, effect, line or performance hasn’t been landed exactly as Fargeat wanted. It’s a pure Auteur work that more importantly doesn’t get lost in indulgence or ego. Despite running two hours and twenty minutes, it also manages to grip from the first minute until the last. Even a master like Martin Scorsese of late has made films entirely his way but with a plodding excess that probably needed cutting. Then there were the much-maligned visual effects in The Irishman which unsuccessfully portrayed the cast of actors pushing 80, in their younger image. No such problems in Fargeat’s body horror which also has impeccable practical FX and excellent CGI on a fraction of the budget of films pumping out awful CGI.
The foundations were perfectly laid for Moore to dive into the compelling character, Elizabeth Sparkle. The film nicely builds intrigue, working its way to the discovery and first implementation of the titular substance, that allows one to spawn an idolized and perfect version of themselves. Demi births (horrifically I might add) Margaret Qualley and the film then gradually simmers up to the wild final act that I won’t spoil. Needless to say, the film has had people talking about it, even if they fled the cinema in disgust.
Qualley it should also be noted gives an incredible performance as Sue. She has an interesting arc as she not only inherits perfected aspects of Elizabeth aesthetically, but also a concentrated lust for stardom which got Sparkle to her standing in the first place. The arcs of both characters are impossible to look away from. Then you have Dennis Quaid in a barnstorming role as one of the most grotesque characters ever brought to life on screen. So you can add a wonderful supporting cast for Moore to play off too.
Moore does indeed dive into Sparkle fully. Injecting the character with personable charm and warmth that she projects to fans (on screen and in person), pathos, narcissistic tendencies, crushing apathy and sharp humour. It’s one of the performances of the year and more than worthy of gaining recognition at the Oscars, and other major awards. The stumbling block is clear though: The film.
The Oscars don’t generally give much to horror pictures bar some notable exceptions. Many expected Toni Collette to get a well-deserved nomination for Hereditary back in the 2019 ceremony. It never happened, despite the film being a critical and commercial success and Collette being utterly breathtaking. Perhaps more hope than realistic expectation, but there was a clamour for Mia Goth for her grand performance in Pearl a couple of years ago. Moore, in this icky and gut-swirlingly grim body horror, has even less chance on paper.
Can a film with so many jaw-droppingly horrific moments really be given a major award at the Oscars? Moore aside, its visual aspects all warrant recognition, from the editing, cinematography, practical FX, makeup, costume, production and set design. The sound design in the film is insanely good, probably the best in years with a fantastic score to boot. Like I said it’s a technical and creative masterclass in every field, even if the overall film will certainly alienate and repulse some.
Above all though, Moore is just too good to ignore. Where she may have a chance is that Collette’s been at the peak of her game for over a decade and has been a perpetual mainstream presence. Goth is the next big thing. Moore on the other hand is very much in triumphant comeback mode here and Hollywood loves a comeback story. She’ll have plenty of goodwill from Academy voters, happy to see someone of her ilk being given a role like this.
One other problem the film may have is the disappointing box office. Whilst the small budget means its success is less reliant on big screen earnings, the Oscars tend to ignore most films that trickle in numbers below a certain level or below expectation. The Substance in this respect is something of an oddity. It’s trending high, being discussed among cinephile groups and generating plenty of buzz and interest (including among the difficult to snag, Gen Z demographic).
It’s very quickly already accruing a cult following, and yet the takings don’t seem to reflect the way occasionally feverish topicality of the film. Given the 17.5 million dollar budget, it’ll end its theatrical run making a reasonable chunk back that streaming and physical will undoubtedly push to success, but this felt like a film that could have matched or even exceeded something like Longlegs as an example, given the buzz and hype building and yet it needs to increase its takings tenfold just to catch Longlegs. Were Moore to have starred in Longlegs and delivered a tour-de-force performance, she may have been a safer Oscar bet. Still, we can but hope that the Academy might recognise the likelihood that this film will have a lasting legacy and that Moore’s performance will be described as iconic in time.
Did you see The Substance? Does Demi Moore deserve an Oscar nomination? Let us know on our social channels @FlickeringMyth…
