The question I wrestle with is: is this a different movie with an Ann Dowd instead of a Demi Moore? Which then invites the question: who gets famous from a workout show anymore? If that was supposed to be a metaphor, I confess I didn't understand it.
Yes and no. The defining characteristic of Elisabeth isn't that she's a woman who's aged as well as Demi Moore has, but the fact that she hates herself. Her age is important since it establishes
that she has a younger self to negatively compare herself to (or, more accurately, she's comparing her experience as her younger self to her experience now), but I also think the fact that Demi Moore has aged as well as she has invites the realization that this movie is less about bodies and more about the emotions and reactions that inhabit them. That's important.
With that said, I also found myself wondering what this movie would be if the protagonist was someone who didn't have a prior relationship to that influx of attention and faux love. I would love to watch it.
As for the workout show bit, it's established near the beginning that she's actually an Academy Award-winning actress who just fell into this show later on in her career, so the aerobics program wasn't actually what made her famous. If you mean Sue's show, it was mostly just one, albeit very prominent outlet for Sue as a brand and as a product. The billboards weren't advertising the show; they were advertising Sue.
Yeah, I remember the mention of the Oscar (which would explain the Walk Of Fame star). But she really has no other former collaborators, stars or writers, directors or reps beyond Harvey? You don't see ANY other media in this movie, no shows (infomercials, yes), no movies, no songs, and most pointedly, no internet.
I just feel like the movie was so invested in its subtext that there was almost no text, which to me, for 140 minutes, was near-deadly.
Your analysis of The Substance brilliantly connects its visceral body horror to the emotional devastation of self-commodification. The dynamic between Elisabeth and Sue reflects the tragic pursuit of external validation. By challenging our obsession with comfort, the film forces us to confront the destructive consequences of seeking shallow, conditional love.
Yeah that's a fair critique, though I do think there's something to be said about how the absence of all her past collaborators and works (which almost certainly exist and are plenty) can be read as the superficiality that they were predicated upon. The "You are the matrix" bit could be in play here, too.
It would be a different movie - the life of Elisabeth sparkle. I think Denis Villeneuve’s recent comments about images versus dialogue applies really well to The Substance.
I mean the film is brilliant as is and didn't need those things, I agree. But there was absolutely potential to examine her relationship with a past work/collaborator with something other than complete absence, though I maintain the absence was the most effective choice in the context of the film as an organism.
I guess the prospect of a more tangible past is mostly fascinating in the way that a protagonist who didn't have a prior relationship to that attention-drenched stardom would be. Ineffective (even counterproductive) in the context of the film, but worth thinking about nevertheless.
The question I wrestle with is: is this a different movie with an Ann Dowd instead of a Demi Moore? Which then invites the question: who gets famous from a workout show anymore? If that was supposed to be a metaphor, I confess I didn't understand it.
Fromtheyardtothearthouse.substack.com
Yes and no. The defining characteristic of Elisabeth isn't that she's a woman who's aged as well as Demi Moore has, but the fact that she hates herself. Her age is important since it establishes
that she has a younger self to negatively compare herself to (or, more accurately, she's comparing her experience as her younger self to her experience now), but I also think the fact that Demi Moore has aged as well as she has invites the realization that this movie is less about bodies and more about the emotions and reactions that inhabit them. That's important.
With that said, I also found myself wondering what this movie would be if the protagonist was someone who didn't have a prior relationship to that influx of attention and faux love. I would love to watch it.
As for the workout show bit, it's established near the beginning that she's actually an Academy Award-winning actress who just fell into this show later on in her career, so the aerobics program wasn't actually what made her famous. If you mean Sue's show, it was mostly just one, albeit very prominent outlet for Sue as a brand and as a product. The billboards weren't advertising the show; they were advertising Sue.
Yeah, I remember the mention of the Oscar (which would explain the Walk Of Fame star). But she really has no other former collaborators, stars or writers, directors or reps beyond Harvey? You don't see ANY other media in this movie, no shows (infomercials, yes), no movies, no songs, and most pointedly, no internet.
I just feel like the movie was so invested in its subtext that there was almost no text, which to me, for 140 minutes, was near-deadly.
Fromtheyardtothearthouse.substack.com
Your analysis of The Substance brilliantly connects its visceral body horror to the emotional devastation of self-commodification. The dynamic between Elisabeth and Sue reflects the tragic pursuit of external validation. By challenging our obsession with comfort, the film forces us to confront the destructive consequences of seeking shallow, conditional love.
Yeah that's a fair critique, though I do think there's something to be said about how the absence of all her past collaborators and works (which almost certainly exist and are plenty) can be read as the superficiality that they were predicated upon. The "You are the matrix" bit could be in play here, too.
The movie would be ruined if all that backstory was added
How do you figure?
It would be a different movie - the life of Elisabeth sparkle. I think Denis Villeneuve’s recent comments about images versus dialogue applies really well to The Substance.
I mean the film is brilliant as is and didn't need those things, I agree. But there was absolutely potential to examine her relationship with a past work/collaborator with something other than complete absence, though I maintain the absence was the most effective choice in the context of the film as an organism.
I guess the prospect of a more tangible past is mostly fascinating in the way that a protagonist who didn't have a prior relationship to that attention-drenched stardom would be. Ineffective (even counterproductive) in the context of the film, but worth thinking about nevertheless.