Nothing there. Seriously

Film still of Semi Moore in The Substance. Photo: publicity handout

By Mao Shan Wang

There is no substance in The Substance. That is easy to say. And I regretted watching it. I was going to give the Oscars Best Picture contender a miss primarily because I read some—okay, quite a few—unfavourable reviews about it. Not that I am generally swayed by reviews, but somehow, I sensed that this film, with an inane storyline, was going to bore me to tears. But after Demi Moore lost the Best Actress award to Anora’s Mikey Madison and aroused the vexation of those who rooted for her, I thought I should appreciate it for myself if she is really that good. My curiosity was further heightened after seeing on my PC screen the unimaginably tasteless Oscars opening sketch that showed host Conan O’Brien emerging from her character’s split-open back. And, finally, how unable Ms Moore was in masking her disappointment when her name was not called. She had really thought she would win.

The come-back vehicle that landed her on the Oscars Best Actress nomination is one of those films you either love or loathe. I shan’t offer a detailed synopsis of the movie (no spoilers either) in case you desire to watch it. The thing you need to know about the plot is that it lacks sense or suspense. And, as a “body horror”, it is not one bit scary, although there are a lot of body shots. In fact, there are no ghosts or apparitions, just one silly beast (self-created?) that was not at all terrifying. You would not scream in horror. Great fear never came—not for me (even when I am quite easily scared)—and what is worse is that you’d have waited too long for an extremely frightening climax that… never came. When the gore became slapstick and no gore at all, I knew I had to turn off the screen and go to bed. But I really wanted to see how wholly bad it was.

Ms Moore on the Oscars 2025 red carpet. Photo: Getty Images

Okay, just a quick sketch. Demi Moore plays a middle-aged TV fitness star, Elisabeth Sparkle, more in the vein of Victoria Principal’s The Body Principal than Jane Fonda’s eponymous Workout. When she accidentally heard that her network boss would replace her with a younger, nubile woman, she became very upset and decided to try ‘the substance’ to restore her youth. The existence of this injectable was brought to her attention by a medical orderly when she was hospitalised after an accident. I’ll leave it there. You can imagine that the substance will wreck her life. And Mr O’Brien’s stupid stunt would have given you an idea about the birth of the demonic monster. Additionally, since you know that Margaret Qualley is in the film, there would be a beautiful-for-contrast alter-ego.

A film about a woman unable to accept her ageing body is as exciting as any movie about seeking the fountain of youth. Don’t ask me why Elisabeth Sparkle (why do I keep thinking of the Maria Carey vehicle from 2001, Glitter?) did not seek plastic surgery. I am not sure if the horror element is meant to say that ageing is horrifying. But the film does allow the camera to spend a lot of time on Ms Qualley’s body, especially her buttocks with very bitsy leotards that leave little to the imagination. As if to say, this is perfection. And the young body is the only body to be desired. But who exactly is madly desiring? In The Substance, don’t hope to meet any decent guy. Everyone of them is just awful and boorish, and lascivious. And youthful beauty is a money-making machine, at least to the sleazy boss, played to the greasy hilt by Dennis Quaid.

Elisabeth Sparkle in front of an image of herself. Photo: The Match Factory

There are many reasons why The Substance is senseless, unexciting, not scary, inadequately pacey, numbingly linear, and very cartoonish. In the end, when the monstrous self/selves appear, they look like failed projects of the SyFy reality series Face Off. Bad rubbery prosthetic makeup aside, I find it hard to understand how an aged face and body could still be so expressive and, best of all, run crazily fast. At a point Elisabeth Sparkle’s face became that of a hag’s, yet her facial muscles showed no signs of atrophy. And very curiously, for a woman who is rich and who lives in a fancy apartment with a panoramic view of the city, she has only one coat—a yellow trench that she wears everywhere. And the strange set: She has a fairly nicely decorated living room, but she has a bare white-tiled bathroom. And why does the bathroom in which the substance did its damaging work and the old and young selves fought look like the set of Saw, which is also about killing each other off?

Demi Moore’s acting has been lauded. Maybe it’s how American audiences like their Best Actress hopefuls to act: be willing to morph into total hideousness. But her transformation into the monster that she became was, in fact, already explored by Charlize Theron in a film actually titled Monster, which allowed Ms Theron to win the Oscar for her role in that film in 2004. I am inclined to believe that Ms Moore’s fans are impressed that she, in The Substance, was willing to show her naked 62-year-old body (although her character is not of that age), go full-frontal nude, and allow herself to be filmed from odd, unflattering angles. She put vanity aside to look ugly. The thing about dramatic performances is that you are as good as the film you’re in. Ms Moore’s performance my be passable, but I now remember very little about her screen presence. “She was robbed!” was a common reaction to her award loss. How MAGA is that?!