The Substance Without Substance
On one hand, it’s positive that the movie The Substance (2024) is about our world’s age, beauty, and even race tyrannies (there are very few nonWhites in this movie). I am sure that the majority of the audience for this movie will benefit from it somehow. It is a step in the right direction, worth watching once. That said . . .
On the other hand, I was disappointed by how much substance it lacked (I am no longer disappointed Ms. Moore did not win Best Actress; at this point I wonder why she was nominated) and its numerous plot holes that do not withstand scrutiny (the character arcs, the company that makes the Substance, et cetera). There are too little sense and logic — things just happen without explanation.
(What does Ms. Sparkle get from the deal? Not explained. The Self and Other Self seem to have a psychic connection — maybe? Not explained. After months of cooperation, why does the Other Self suddenly jeopardize her own existence by violating the strict procedures? Not explained, beyond “I feel like having sex.” Why does Elisabeth, who cares for nothing more than her own appearance, not cancel immediately at the first screwup? Not explained. Why does she decline to stop it after more goes wrong? Not explained. Why does Elisabeth go crazy with French cooking? Not explained. Why does Elisabeth say Sue represents the best of her? Not explained. After Elisabeth changes her mind about killing her Other Self, how do they both end up conscious at the same time? Not explained. Why doesn’t the fatal injection kill her? Not explained. These big holes are unacceptable.)
Elisabeth Sparkle is a woman who needs to be famous and popular and never outgrows that need. At the same time, she hypocritically urges her audience to take care of itself while never taking care of herself. Somehow we are supposed to sympathize with her, though I don’t know how. She’s a false person enslaved by her need for attention, a hollow shell of a character. All I kept thinking was, “I hope this fake person grows up.”
The entire thing could and should have been much better, and I find it amazing this movie was written by a woman. In our society violence is frequently sexualized, and that happens again here. Thoughtful discussion of the primary issues is absent, leading to missed opportunity after missed opportunity. (The scene in which Dennis Quaid eats shrimp and gets them all over his face and the table while firing Elisabeth should have been overlaid with a discussion about how women need to be beautiful. It wasn’t. The contrast of his being disgusting while lecturing her on impossible beauty standards she failed to meet, sorry, would have been perfect. This movie’s biggest missed opportunity was that this did not happen. Wow.)
What is present are gratuitous gore, grotesque imagery of food, far too much nudity (they said it was to convey a political message, but even so there was still far too much of it), and even too many shots of a single hallway. Visual references to other movies (Carrie, The Shining, et al) only made me wish I were watching them instead. Oh, well.
Do you remember the moment in The Shining when Danny rounds the corner to find the ghost twins? He cannot scream, his mouth open but silent, paralyzed with fear. The moment is terrifying. There is no such suspense or drama in The Substance.
I would say that The Substance illustrates the hazards of showing without telling, but that is only half of it. Twilight Zone episodes “The Invaders” and “Two” show how it’s done. In this case, it is not the lack of dialogue but the poorly managed showing that is the problem. Either the writer did not know what she wished to say, or she knew what she wished to say but not how to say it. It is hard for me to believe that writer/director Coralie Fargeat worked on the script for two years, but apparently she did. The best thing I can say for it is it is a good first draft.
