Originally published at: "The Substance"— an incredible, indelible, and viscerally inedible film I loved and will never watch again - Boing Boing
…
2 Likes
(brought to you by Natalie Dressed)
saw it 2 1/2 times so far. lots of layers.
a really good take on it;
yes. while laughing pretty hard. great movie.
2 Likes
Is it indelible or inedible? Make up your mind.
1 Like
It’s one of the least subtle, most single-minded movies I have ever seen — it is out to horrify you, come what may — and I loved it. I will definitely be watching it again. Not just yet, though.
3 Likes
I and my partner got pretty bored.
It’s a splatter movie. Outstayed its welcome.
3 Likes
Before all the current hype, I watched a really thoughtful review on this film a few weeks ago (which I now cannot find because I cleared my history.)
I personally don’t care for modern body horror in general, so full disclosure: I have no desire nor inclination to ever view this film.
That said, the content maker did a really good job of breaking down the narrative and stating his case for the reason that he considered it a feminist take on the genre. He espoused that the way the script is written, the audience are meant to empathize with the main character, not judge her… which is encouraging.
4 Likes
Not to be confused with The Stuff.
7 Likes
I probably won’t watch this one but the premise reminds me of an episode of Guillermo Del Toro’s Cabinet of Curiosities horror anthology series:
4 Likes
I thought the grossest part was when Quaid said “Donald Trump is my favorite president in the 21st century” and then tried to blame something on Mexicans.
2 Likes
Even from the trailer (I’ve since seen the movie) I was pretty convinced that they did mean for it to be confused with The Stuff.
I will warn those who might see it: as sci-fi it’s pretty terrible. That’s not meant to be a value judgment; for example, Fury Road is likewise terrible as sci-fi, and is a fantastic movie. Just tellin’ ya, don’t go in with a sci-fi mindset. Moore is great, Qualley and Quaid are fine.
1 Like
That one, I did see; and was reminded of it, while watching the aforementioned review in my previous comment.
I didn’t know going in that it was going to be a body horror narrative; and while I didn’t care for that aspect, I did appreciate the positioning of some people’s desperation to attain the unachievable standards of beauty and “erfection” we’re all programmed to pursue (sometimes at too high a cost) as a horror trope.
2 Likes
I have never walked out on a film, but this was the closest I have ever come. I did not love this film. I thought it was appallingly bad, but I had to stay until the end to see if there was some last minute redeeming twist. There wasn’t.
2 Likes
Just ‘cause the two words sound alike doesn’t mean it can’t be both.
Give Dennis Quaid the time of day? No thanks.
1 Like
thats because its not sf? its a grotesque satire.
And indeed, if you go in with the grotesque-satire mindset you’ll enjoy the movie more, which is all I was trying to suggest. It has a few trappings of science fiction, so one might legitimately fall into that mindset, and I’m telling people, maybe don’t do that.
4 Likes
All in all, I felt like about 20 minutes of almost 2 1/2 hours was worth the time I spent watching. I waste plenty of time in my life, so it didn’t make me angry or anything. Even if I don’t care for a film, I can usually see why other people could dig it. This is one of the (thankfully) rare occasions where I’m actually baffled by the broad love for a film.
Cronenberg flicks are my limit as far as body horror fare. I watched the trailer. Planet-size nope.
My mom refused to see it for that reason, but I will say that the film makes good use of him as utterly repulsive.
2 Likes
I’ve been reading a bunch of Emily Carroll’s graphic novels. She gets a writing credit for “The Outside.” Her work is really good.
1 Like
