Nameiscensored

Coming from all the corners of the internet, "Substance", especially in the way that its main theme was portrayed through the memes, at first glance, appeared to be just one of those flicks, that while being popular in media culture, were frustrating and hence not worthwhile in itself. Thus, watching this movie rendered me an unexpectedly good feeling, when it turned out to be nothing of this sort of films, refuting the given presumption. In fact, it's hard to believe, that they still can make good quality body-horrors in 2024. In my opinion, "Substance" fairly deserves to be, not just one of the best movies particularly in its genre, but overall in the last couple of years.

Despite all that, it's not impeccable - in my view, some moments rightly require to be spoken of in a criticizing way. The biggest complain of mine (which, I guess, many would find very subjective, but nonetheless) is the main idea of "Substance" - making a better and younger version of yourself. It's impossible not to see here a clear portrayal of a materialistic worldview, expressed in the form of a person's strong affection to corporeality, that is so pervasive among the majority of modern people. At the same time, it would be a mistake to think of this movie as an alleged propaganda of this view and the values that come with it. By any means I have no intention to claim it to be a propaganda; quite the contrary - for, the situation that main character ends up in - grueling and shocking for some, or incredible and brilliant for others (like me) - could be considered as the moral of the story, which makes you change the attitude to your body and embrace one of its main flaws - the aging. But regardless of its seemingly redeeming moral value, the whole portrayal of this truly detestable way of life could not but be a turn down for me, even it's just a picture.

In addition to that, there's also a couple of moments in this movie, that raise some suspicions - a scene, where a very feminine, sylphlike heroine destroys the wall and does a very professional job on making a clean secret door to a secret room; and that she manages to build very quickly a carrier of a big pop-star, seemingly not having any identification documents (There's no Sue in database). Those are some nuances that bereave "Substance" of flawlessness, but which do not so greatly effect an overall perception of the movie.

It's fair to say, that the film has a very good quality, so good - that you ask yourself ironically - am I not watching a high resolution body-horror from the 80s? And this is completely normal, since "Substance", in this sense, takes some elements from carpenter and cronenberg cinema, not to mention the final scene of pure rain of blood that resembles the opening scene of the first "Blade". For the matter of fact, you can justly go as far as to say, that it is "Substance" is homage to classical body-horrors such "The thing" or "The fly".

The movie's length is almost 2.5 hours, but its dynamism and extraordinary plot do not let the intrigue to disappear. It is an indication, that the film is really interesting, constantly serving you up with unexpected things. That is why "Substance" is great both as a horror and a movie as such, and must certainly become a watch for someone who likes classical body-horrors.

Even though, I come a long way from being a fan of romance movies, i felt in love with this one. Now I know, that when it's directed by Linklater, there's something much to be anticipated for. As in here, and as in other of his movies, what makes them tied together and so special is incredibly accurately captured naturalness of the moment. The acting of young Ethan Hawke and Julie Delpy is outstanding, and it brings in light and warm atmosphere into the film - in this respect, Linklater is second to none. All feelings and emotions, which characters express, the way they move and use their bodies - there's no flaw. The characters and their dialogues are so alive and feel so authentique, that every now and then a thought would visit me - "is there any script, or they just let them speak they way they want?" - it is a distinguishing feature of such movies as "Before Sunrise" or "Dazed and Confused" - it's hard to find expressed emotions and spoken words as faux and adulterated. It must certainly a prowess of the actors and the director to make it work and be on point. I like that awkwardness is not completely amiss here either, and that it finds its place exactly where it seems most fitting, where it adds most naturalness to a conversation, gestures, a whole scene and never does the opposite. As of Hawke, I deem it was his best acting, his jokes and stories were beautiful, as were beautiful his gestures and emotions. Coupled with charming Julie Deply, they make you feel, nay, live genuinely and in its fullest the elevated feel of love, imprinted in their momentous and volatile meeting. There's also no complicated, jumbled plot, nor dazing story twists, the very life without any fantasy and complexity is shown here in it its purified form, which lets us grasp that specialness of the given moment. So, in conclusion, "Before Sunrise" can be described as an exalted and breathtaking manifestation of devine Eros.