Coralie Fargeat Loves Her Inner Monster

At the Walk of Fame, it’s clear that the image people carry in their minds differs greatly from reality – more like a remnant of a tourist trap on the fringe of civilization. On Super Bowl Sunday morning, during a break in the usual Oscar season whirlwind of events and celebrations, I encountered Coralie Fargeat, the filmmaker behind The Substance. She showed little interest in the stars on the pavement until we arrived at Jeff Goldblum’s star. With a sparkle in her eyes, she expressed her adoration for him, “I love him,” she said, pausing to snap a photo. Her affection for Goldblum stems from her admiration for David Cronenberg’s The Fly, one of her key influences. Their paths crossed after he reached out to express his appreciation for her movie. As we stepped off the curb, narrowly avoiding being hit by a car.

Following its premiere at Cannes, “The Substance” has garnered recognition as a chilling body-horror film, earning five Oscar nominations for Fargeat in categories such as Best Picture, Best Director, and Best Original Screenplay. As depicted by Fargeat in “The Substance”, Los Angeles is not so much a physical location (the movie was filmed entirely in France) as it is the concept of “Hollywood”. This portrayal presents a recognizable yet disconnected reality, reminiscent of a fairy tale, where characters enact a cautionary tale that reflects our deepest fears and desires. Demi Moore plays Elisabeth Sparkle, an aging actress grappling with her obsolescence, encouraged by Dennis Quaid’s character, who is inspired by Harvey Weinstein. In search of rejuvenation, Elisabeth undergoes “the substance”, a revolutionary procedure that results in the emergence of Sue (Margaret Qualley) from her spine. Along with Sue’s birth comes a set of rules: The pair must exchange places every seven days. Overdrawing from one side can lead to an unpayable debt.

The unexpected triumph of “The Substance” is an intriguing tale — it managed to thrive despite the challenges posed by COVID and skeptical studio executives. Following her debut feature, “Revenge,” in 2017, Fargeat declined numerous project offers. She penned “The Substance” independently, eventually collaborating with Working Title and Universal, and filmed the entire project in France to capitalize on national tax incentives. A screening for Universal executives went awry: They disliked it, particularly the third-act twist featuring a monstrous character named Monstro Elisasue. The parties were at an impasse. Fargeat was uncertain if the film would ever be released, but she stood firm on her creative vision. “If you falter with a movie that you didn’t wish to create,” she says, “you’ll never know whether you would have succeeded if you had made the movie you truly desired.

As a movie enthusiast stepping into the heart of Tinseltown amidst an Oscar race, it felt like diving headfirst into the pulsating core of Hollywood – symbolically speaking. Los Angeles, I must admit, wasn’t what I expected; it was better. The city’s unique charm, the everlasting sunshine, and the cinema omnipresence were a powerful concoction that swept me off my feet.

This journey has been a whirlwind of excitement, tension, and anticipation. Naturally, one can’t help but hope for a victory – it’s the dreamer in us all. From the moment I first held this script, I sensed its potential; a feeling that grew stronger with each passing day.

In a world where ambition is often seen as unbecoming for women, I refuse to be silenced. I yearn for the top, not just because it’s a place to be, but because it represents the dream of creating meaningful cinema. The struggle lies in rallying others to join me on this journey. When we speak of campaigns, think of political campaigns – power, money, and influence are at play. It’s a realm dominated by men, unconsciously so. But I persist, pushing my distributor to invest their faith in the director’s campaign, for without belief, dreams remain just that – dreams.

Are you the one advocating for it?
Indeed, I am, as I believe another trend is more fitting. It’s an intricate system that requires a significant shift, but it can be exhausting. A brief respite – perhaps a few weeks – would be beneficial. These award campaigns can be quite taxing since you’re essentially putting energy into something whose outcome remains uncertain.

What sparked your interest in exploring the physical aspect in this film? It seems there’s a profound connection with the body portrayed. Can you trace back where this fascination with the body originated for you?

From a very young age, I found myself captivated by the stereotypical images of beauty presented to me, such as Barbie dolls – petite, thin, blonde. Despite not fitting that mold with my curly hair and glasses, I yearned to be that pretty girl. However, I was more of a tomboy and had a free-spirited nature which was often stifled due to my mother’s fears about my safety as a young girl walking home alone at night. This sense of injustice, feeling restricted while my brother wasn’t, fueled my desire for freedom. In the film industry, I noticed that male directors were able to tackle action, sci-fi, and high-budget films, even when they failed, but the consequences were not as severe as for female directors attempting other genres. This observation echoes my personal experiences.

What led you to pursue a career in filmmaking? Well, I’ve always harbored a passion for directing since my teenage years. At 17 or 18, I was creating short films with our family camera, even remaking ‘Star Wars’ with friends and animating small toys frame by frame. It was an incredible period in my life. Despite being shy, when I was directing, I felt like a completely different person. My ambition was to attend La Fémis, France’s most prominent film school. To apply, one must first complete two years of general studies at a university. I opted for political science at Sciences Po, which proved to be an extremely demanding program with no free time for personal pursuits. Towards the end of that period, I realized I didn’t want any more formal education; I wanted to dive right into the field and immerse myself in it. During my final year at Sciences Po, I landed a job as a production assistant on an American film called ‘Passion of Mind,’ directed by Belgian director Alain Berliner and starring Demi Moore, which was being shot in France.

Absolutely! That’s where I unveiled an entire world within a film. I was like a tiny spy observing everything. It was a miniature society with conflicts, relationships, both loving and indifferent ones, and unexpected turns of events. That experience turned out to be my most enriching education.

Do you remember Demi?
It was my first experience. Of course, I remember everything so precisely.

Compare her back then and now, you’ll notice both stark differences and striking similarities. At that point, she had reached the pinnacle of her career and was a true legend. Witnessing her in France was awe-inspiring. Bruce Willis himself was planning to drop by on set to visit her.

How did it happen that Demi eventually took on The Substance role so many years later, considering it was crucial for me to have a legendary figure embody the stardom?

In other words, I wanted to capitalize on their celebrity status within the narrative. Being bold, I wasn’t hesitant to aim high. So we began by sending them our initial script concepts.

What was the age range of the actors you had approached for the project? They were approximately fifty years old. The role was quite intense, which is why it took about five or six months before any responses came in. The financier experienced a similar wait. It would have been simpler if the script had followed a typical revenge storyline that could be easily categorized as action or horror. However, The Substance was not that straightforward. There seemed to be some difficulty in understanding it from their perspective. As a result, we persisted. I only work on one project at a time and invest heavily in its success. I had been working on the script for a year and a half without any other offers. I couldn’t afford to fail, so not being able to switch to another project was nerve-wracking but also invigorating, as it fueled my determination. Initially, I thought Moore wouldn’t be interested in something like this, considering her careful management of her public image. Yet, I took a chance and said, “We have nothing to lose. Let’s send.” To my surprise, I found an unexpected side of her that I hadn’t known before. What was more significant, she was at a point in her life where she wanted to reclaim her narrative rather than conforming to what others might expect from her.

Did you discuss that topic?
Reading her book provided an insight into her intelligence. She was determined to make the movie, and I believe she recognized that her book could demonstrate her ability to take such risks. The book offers a glimpse into another side of her life experiences and potential. It certainly changed my perspective on her. I found a daring and avant-garde individual who possessed the needed rock-and-roll instinct for the project.

To ensure she fully grasped my vision for the film, particularly concerning aspects like the movie’s making, nudity, and prosthetics, I had numerous in-depth conversations with her. Given her background in Hollywood, it was crucial to determine if she would be open to shooting in France without an extravagant entourage that we couldn’t accommodate financially. Every penny needed to appear on screen. It’s essential to be upfront about the film’s nature as it cannot be improvised during production – it’s not something that can be figured out while filming.

At what point were you both clear and ready to go?
I needed maybe five or six meetings.

To be sure, she was eager and well-prepared for this role. She felt it would provide an opportunity to showcase her acting abilities in a unique manner, possibly after a prolonged absence. However, there were aspects of this project that differed significantly from other films she’s worked on, pushing her out of her usual comfort zone.

In my approach, I deviate from conventional filming methods. Instead of starting with a master shot followed by close-ups, I zero in on the heartfelt aspects of each frame, often opting for intimate close-ups that focus on an actor’s eye. This method can be challenging for some actors who are accustomed to more traditional scene setup, but when they grasp its necessity, they truly immerse themselves in it.

How does she approach her work? She focuses on the emotional aspects and positions the character, whether it’s a close-up of a hand or a full shot. It’s crucial for her to stay grounded. For this project, we dealt with numerous prosthetics. The techniques involved in applying these prosthetics are so intricate that certain scenes had to be filmed first, then allowed to rest before moving on to other shots.

As you turned 40, your connection to filmmaking underwent a significant transformation, culminating in your creation of your debut feature, “Revenge.” Could you share more about this transition?

The fact that it occurred at the age of 40 held deep significance since it is often a time when one’s perspective can drastically change due to societal expectations. At this stage, you are no longer viewed as the attractive, child-bearing individual, and this shift in perception can alter your sense of self-worth and purpose.

I had made a conscious decision that I needed to complete my first feature film before reaching 40. This determination infused me with an extraordinary drive, enabling me to persevere despite obstacles. I entered a state of relentless focus, dedicating myself solely to bringing my movie to life. I understood that my passion lay in waking up and contemplating films. That recognition marked the first major step in acknowledging who I was, embracing my love for filmmaking, and ceasing to feign interest in things I did not genuinely appreciate to preserve a typical social life or attend parties and dinners. Now, I no longer feel compelled to conform to societal norms; I am unmarried without children, and that is simply how it is. This acceptance allowed me to fully embrace the fact that my sole source of joy and vitality lies in filmmaking. It was a truly liberating experience.

In a different twist, “Revenge” paved the way for me to create “The Substance,” a more expansive endeavor that delved into the intricate aspects of my connection with my body, my fears, and my beliefs about the world. In “Reality+,” the protagonist is male. Initially, I wasn’t comfortable narrating this story from a woman’s viewpoint; it seemed too personal, too close. It’s ironic because while working on “Revenge,” I couldn’t categorize it as a feminist film.

Were you considering it as feminist?
No, I wasn’t at the time. It was more an emotional response that I didn’t have the words for. When the movie came out and people started labeling it as feminist, I was surprised because I hadn’t planned it to be that way. I was simply dealing with the issue like any woman does, such as when someone inappropriately touches you on public transportation. It’s just a part of everyday life that we don’t often think about as a larger problem.

After the success of Revenge, I found myself flooded with opportunities – offers to direct projects and meetings with studios. It was incredibly flattering to be in such demand, but also challenging because I wasn’t entirely sure what I wanted to do next. As a result, I politely declined every offer that came my way, whether it was for directing scripts or financing my writing. I felt the need to remain independent and free to pursue my own vision.

In those moments of doubt, I would look at the opportunities passing me by and wonder if I was making the right decision. I had friends who had found success in France only to be disappointed when they started working on American projects. I didn’t want to make the same mistake. While I’d love to believe that I’m unique, I knew that if I followed the same path as others, the outcome would likely be the same.

So, I made a conscious decision to trust my instincts and find a way to work within the American system while still maintaining control over my projects. A part of me yearned for this experience, to establish my own system here, if you will.

Is it like securing American financing but filming in France? It’s about collaborating with American resources, or aspiring for my project to have an association with the U.S. To maintain this connection while still having control over my work, I decided to produce the movie myself, and partnered with other producers who could safeguard me within the studio system. I chose Working Title as my production partners, as they were receptive to my ideas since our previous collaboration on Revenge. My primary concern was maintaining creative freedom throughout the process. The crucial fight is in the editing room. It’s the final battle. You can have all the liberty you desire during pre-production, shooting, and scriptwriting. However, the fight that truly matters is in the edit room, because it’s there where my movie can transform into something entirely different from what I initially intended.

Could you share some insights about your struggle in maintaining your vision for the film’s edit? You’ve established a strong rapport with Working Title, and Universal was on board for distribution. However, a contentious screening resulted in a disagreement over the movie’s edit. What were their proposed changes? It seems they wanted extensive alterations. The film mirrored exactly what you aimed to portray – depicting the brutal, excessive, and grotesque aspects. They didn’t find appeal in these elements. This revelation was quite surprising. One element that was particularly disfavored was the monster. The monster represented the most honest and daring part of your work, a reflection of your inner self. It showcased feelings you’ve held since childhood, as you don’t entirely conform to societal expectations. Exposing one’s true self can be unflattering, and they found it distasteful. Yet, you stood firm, arguing even monsters must adhere to certain beauty standards. This struggle appears to be an ongoing battle.

They found Monstro Elisasue unacceptably ugly? That’s when I realized it wasn’t wise to engage in such discussions. Essentially, they dismissed the monster. It was neither appreciated nor comprehended. In post-production, you’re vulnerable and exhausted. And when you lack affection, it’s challenging. But I could empathize with their desire for change. However, the alterations they sought would have been so significant that the end result might not have been realistic to achieve.

Initially, Universal decided to part ways with the film, leaving it without a distributor. This predicament prompted us to submit the movie to Cannes. The situation unfolded because the independent distributor Mubi, who appreciated the raw essence of our production, fell in love with my creation – the monster, the excess, and my unique style that doesn’t shy away from showcasing repetitive actions like eight mirror hits.

What’s the source of your affinity for indulgence? It stems from the desire to freely express aspects of myself that are not allowed in my daily life. I continue to grapple with my dual nature, balancing between the self that is expected to be feminine and reserved.

“Have you found yourself often advised to mold yourself in certain ways, even though those ways don’t truly reflect who you are? It could be anything from being told a woman should speak softly, to being encouraged to diet. These expectations can make us feel we need to conform, but they don’t define us. For me, ‘Revenge’ was a liberating moment where I allowed my authentic self to shine – the one who loves to be bold, sarcastic, and humorous, and who delights in creating something unexpected. This experience has significantly influenced my life as well, making me feel more empowered because I no longer feel the need to pretend to be someone I’m not. Furthermore, I thrive on surprise and creativity. I love to create things that challenge expectations. Most importantly, ‘Revenge’ provided a platform for me to express all the aspects of society I can’t voice in my daily life without causing upset. On screen, I can say, ‘Here is Harvey, just as you might encounter him in real life.’ It allows me to reflect reality in a way that I can’t always do in person.

Is Dennis Quaid’s character similar to Harvey Weinstein?”

The response then explains that the character represents all toxic behaviors and serves as a commentary on reality rather than an idealized portrayal of the world. The phrase “Calm down with the shrimps” is used humorously to express discomfort, while also emphasizing a crucial scene in the movie that makes viewers uneasy. Lastly, it suggests that uncomfortable scenes often hold significant meaning and should not be dismissed.

Overall, the response provides a clear explanation of the intent behind portraying Dennis Quaid’s character and how it relates to Harvey Weinstein, while also using colloquial language to engage the reader.

Which specific episode of Revenge are you referring to? I believe you’re describing the scene where Emily Thorne searches for the incriminating glass and encounters the man with the foot problem, which was a memorable and controversial moment in the series. Many viewers found this scene to be lengthy or excessive, but it remains one of the show’s most discussed scenes due to its powerful impact. The scene featuring the shrimp, symbolizing the raw reality of certain situations, also resonated with audiences despite some initial reservations.

The significance of the shrimp scene lies in its role of setting the visual style of the movie quite early. On the other hand, the fly shot could potentially be eliminated from the film without affecting its overall narrative. However, it’s important to note that a movie is not solely dependent on what’s necessary for the story; many elements that may seem unnecessary contribute to making a good film. This is something I often find intriguing in David Lynch’s movies – his appreciation for the seemingly useless elements which ultimately shape the film as much as its essential components do.

There seems to be a fascinating contrast in your work as it’s meticulously controlled yet designed to convey a sense of chaos or disorder. In order for the madness to resonate with the audience, it needs to be impeccably managed. Each element plays a crucial role. If it’s overdone, it falls flat. If it’s underdone, it fails to engage. It’s all about striking that delicate balance. The rules guide us into accepting the unconventional, like when her back cracks open and gives birth to another entity. If this sequence isn’t executed perfectly, the craziness becomes inaccessible to the audience. It’s a progression, and each step is crucial for the audience to fully immerse themselves in it.

Is there an instance you carefully checked over to ensure it was accurately portrayed for maximum effect, such as the cooking scene in your narrative? This scene is crucial because it shows the character letting go, a way of exacting revenge on her other self due to her indifference. Each detail is meticulously crafted to reflect the level of insanity Lis must endure. If this scene is underplayed at the outset, the audience may not fully appreciate the moment where she plunges her hand into the chicken and wreaks havoc with the eggs, becoming incredibly erratic.

When did the transformation of the monster signify the beginning of the third act in the film?

The monster marked the liberation from societal expectations, becoming a symbol of self-acceptance. It was the instant when she looked at herself in the mirror without self-judgment or fear. For the first time, she felt a sense of tenderness towards herself. It was also the moment where she declared, “I’m going to wear my dress, I’m going to wear my earrings, and I’m going to step out into the world, claiming my spot on stage and having my moment.” What was significant was when she affirmed, “It’s me. I am still me.” She saw herself for who she truly was, beyond physical appearances or societal expectations, and finally learned to love herself and feel deserving of center-stage glory.

At that instant, the crowd symbolizes our collective society. Unfortunately, our society clings tightly to its antiquated methods of defining what’s acceptable, what’s considered beautiful, and what isn’t. This stubbornness often leads to a great deal of hostility being directed towards her. This accumulated aggression culminates in an explosive reaction, which can be seen as a form of retribution, almost like she’s saying, “Take a good look at the violence you perpetuate. Take a good look at the violence you foster.”

To express the intensity of my frustration with this situation, I felt the need to create an image of an apocalypse. I believe women have kept their feelings of rage bottled up within them for too long. I wanted to release it all and show just how massive, chaotic, violent, and pervasive these feelings truly are.

I envisioned the creature to embody fragmentation, where each body part stands alone – boobs, butt, legs, teeth, smile, all separately highlighted. I wanted this disjointed appearance to be reminiscent of Picasso’s style, with everything out of place and seemingly misplaced.

Yet, paradoxically, I desired this monster to be lovable as well – a creature that evokes the desire to embrace and shield. Striking this balance was challenging. I recall having lengthy discussions with the prosthetic designer to ensure he grasped my vision of creating empathy for the monster.

To me, the monster symbolizes our true selves, encompassing all aspects of humanity – its flaws, truths, and imperfections. Achieving this balance was crucial in making the monster relatable and human-like.

As a movie enthusiast, I couldn’t help but notice you wielding the fake blood hose, squirting it into the crowd during the film. Was that single, continuous spray all done in one take?

The initial burst was indeed a single take, but once everyone was soaked, we kept going, gradually increasing the intensity until we ran out of fake blood.

Wow, I can’t even begin to fathom it, but there were over 20,000 liters of this convincing fake blood! What an extraordinary encounter! The atmosphere among the extras was electric with excitement. Once we were drenched in the stuff, the chill set in. But when we suggested they step out for some warmth, they surprisingly refused and asked for more action! It was truly a once-in-a-lifetime experience, something you don’t get to relive every day.

The movie primarily explores self-contempt. Despite scenes of intense violence between Sue and Elizabeth, they’re essentially the same individual, two conflicting aspects. I’m eager to learn about your insights on characterizing Sue.

Sue embodies the idealized version of ourselves that society encourages us to strive for. She represents the male gaze, the way men perceive our worth and desirability, instilled in us from a young age. Sue is not liberation; she’s a cage. Sue symbolizes the oppressive image that doesn’t exist, an image that makes us feel unworthy because we don’t measure up to it.

When I was younger, I had thoughts like, If I lose two kilos, I can go outside and everyone will admire me. This is the oppression that hinders us from claiming our place in the world, as we believe we’re not worthy until we embody this perfect fantasy that society has constructed for us.

As a cinephile, I’m eager to delve deeper into the concept of the male gaze, which has long been a subject of intrigue for me. The allure lies in the fact that Sue seems to be appreciated and rewarded for her beauty. It’s captivating to observe her, not just because she is visually appealing but also because it’s a reflection of how society has valued women – through their attractiveness. However, this dependence on others’ perception raises an intriguing question: What if women could freely control and express their bodies without fear or judgment? Could they choose to be as sexy or unsexual as they wish, age naturally or artificially at will? This is the hope I harbor for women – a freedom that allows them to exist authentically, not just based on societal expectations. Yet, it’s crucial to consider whether these choices stem from personal desire or the unconscious need to conform in order to be acknowledged and valued by others. Existence is essential, and sometimes, one might find themselves making compromises merely to ensure it.

Are you willing to consume this substance?
I think I might. [Laughs.] This is a pact with the devil, and the devil is formidable. The movie embodies all my fears, doubts about my identity, my centrality, and aging. As a filmmaker, who I am has become more significant to me. I worry less about other things, but they’re still there. I can’t deny it. Having been raised under such strict standards of appearance, those ideas never truly leave you. That side of me is more subdued now. It’s more manageable. But I’m unsure how I’ll feel about myself in a decade. It’s an ongoing quest to find peace with oneself.

Read More

• INJ PREDICTION. INJ cryptocurrency
• SPELL PREDICTION. SPELL cryptocurrency
• How To Travel Between Maps In Kingdom Come: Deliverance 2
• LDO PREDICTION. LDO cryptocurrency
• The Hilarious Truth Behind FIFA’s ‘Fake’ Pack Luck: Zwe’s Epic Journey
• How to Craft Reforged Radzig Kobyla’s Sword in Kingdom Come: Deliverance 2
• How to find the Medicine Book and cure Thomas in Kingdom Come: Deliverance 2
• Destiny 2: Countdown to Episode Heresy’s End & Community Reactions
• Deep Rock Galactic: Painful Missions That Will Test Your Skills
• When will Sonic the Hedgehog 3 be on Paramount Plus?

2025-02-18 18:56