Awards pundits and prognosticators online have been theorizing about whether or not this signifies a cultural shift regarding voting bodies and their relationship to horror. Perhaps the folks who refused to give horror the time of day are finally recognizing the artistry, mastery, and cultural impact of films like "The Substance." This, of course, would be a game-changer for the genre moving forward, allowing other films and filmmakers to have a fair shot at an awards campaign and carving out space for more unconventional material in future seasons.
Unfortunately, this perspective is too optimistic, considering how the unconventional film has had a surprisingly conventional awards campaign. At the end of the day, the messaging of "The Substance's" Oscar campaign has not been about the need to take horror seriously; rather, the focus has been on the comeback of Demi Moore, an underrated career veteran who is finally getting her much-deserved flowers. If there is anything taking "The Substance" all the way to the Oscars, it's not shifting industry biases about horror, although the genre's many fans would love that to be true. Instead, the defining factor of the campaign has been the narrative of the overdue career veteran which, despite appearances, is nothing new.
via @allurequinn
How Horror Films in the Past Made it the Oscars
Horror films have been slighted at the Academy Awards time and time again, with a few exceptions—“The Exorcist,” The Silence of the Lambs,” and “Get Out,” to name a few— that were able to secure nominations in the coveted Best Picture category. How were those films able to break through? While they were all commercially and critically successful, they also met the cultural moments of their times and captured the zeitgeist in different ways. “The Exorcist” tapped into social anxieties from the late 1960s and early 1970s, from women’s liberation to questions of faith. “The Silence of the Lambs” took an unflinching approach to its portrait of gender, creating a feminist hero in Clarice Starling (though the film subsequently received backlash for its characterization of the LGBTQ+ community). Jordan Peele’s “Get Out” was a darkly comedic critique of racial politics in the United States that became especially relevant after 2016.
These horror movies were all about something profound and topical that transcended the perceived limitations of the genre. It seems that in order for a horror film to make it to the Academy Awards, it needs to fulfill this prerequisite.
Thankfully, “The Substance” easily checks off that box. Coralie Fargeat’s memorable vision is a clear social critique of unrealistic beauty standards for women—especially women in Hollywood. It also touches on themes of self-harm, body dysmorphia, and the male gaze. While the body horror subgenre may be entirely new at the Oscars, “The Substance” powerfully utilizes this style to critique society in such a way that makes the film Important—with a capital I—which is hard for Academy voters to ignore. Of course, it also helps that on social media, “The Substance” became a cultural phenomenon.
The Hollywood Comeback Narrative
Despite the fact that “The Substance” is an undeniable social critique, the awards campaign has made a clear and intelligent choice to lean into the classic Hollywood comeback narrative as its primary focus. If anyone loves a Hollywood comeback, it’s the Academy. Last year, it was Robert Downey Jr.’s return to “serious roles” after a long road from personal lows to finding his feet again with Marvel highs, all leading back to his bid for prestigious industry recognition and his Best Supporting Actor win for “Oppenheimer.” The year before, it was Brendan Fraser’s comeback that led to his win for “The Whale,” despite competition from (arguably) far better performances (Austin Butler and Colin Farrell, to name two). In the supporting race that year, Ke Huy Quan had his own comeback narrative and swept the season for his performance in “Everything Everywhere All At Once.” Before that, Renée Zellweger, Shirley MacLaine, Leonardo DiCaprio, and Brad Pitt all centered their awards campaigns on the comeback or overdue narrative—and they all won.
When Demi Moore took the stage at the Golden Globe Awards last Sunday, she doubled down on this narrative in her acceptance speech, which was the best of the night: “Thirty years ago, I had a producer tell me that I was a popcorn actress. At that time, I made that mean that this wasn’t something that I was allowed to have. That I could do movies that were successful and made a lot of money, but that I couldn’t be acknowledged, and I bought in, and I believed that.” Moore expertly articulated why her win matters here, unapologetically leaning on the historically compelling comeback narrative to make her case… and it’s working.
After her speech last week, Moore is now considered a frontrunner in the race for Best Actress, and “The Substance” is widely expected to make it into the Best Picture category as well. Although there is still plenty of time before the big night—the Academy Awards ceremony will be held on Sunday, March 2nd— there is already a clear lesson to be learned from this awards strategy. Sure, genre bias is real, and horror films need to be “Important” to be remotely considered, but the real key to getting an unconventional film like “The Substance” to be taken seriously by the Academy has been the highly conventional comeback narrative, something that even voters unaccustomed to horror can easily get behind.
Stay up to date by following us on Facebook!