The Substance

Trivia: The film contains many nods to the films of Stanley Kubrick, most obvious being the hallway at the studio, which looks very much like one of the hallways from the Overlook Hotel in "The Shining." Even the carpet is a similar pattern.

TedStixon

Trivia: Dennis Quaid reportedly ate about four pounds of shrimp for the scene where his character disgustingly eats shrimp in front of Elisabeth while ranting at her.

TedStixon

Trivia: Whenever we see Sue nude (which is quite often), her breasts are actually completely fake. Director Coralie Fargeat wanted Sue's figure to be very exaggerated and almost cartoonish, likening her body to Jessica Rabbit from "Who Framed Roger Rabbit." Actress Margaret Qualley thus had to wear prosthetics to enhance her figure, including a fake set of hyper-realistic large breasts. Qualley joked that the effects teams gave her "the rack of a lifetime... just not my lifetime."

TedStixon

Continuity mistake: When Sue's boyfriend walks to the bathroom door and looks down at the blood on the carpet, he's wearing shorts, but in the next shot, he's suddenly naked.

Sacha

More mistakes in The Substance
More quotes from The Substance

Question: Why would the New Year's Eve special at the end of the movie allow naked women to be viewed by the audience and on public television without censorship? Also, why would a mother allow her young daughter in the audience (the little girl in the blue dress) to see these naked women on stage?

Cody Fairless-Lee

Answer: The film is depicted in a very fantastical and even "cartoonish" way. It doesn't really take place in "our world" so much as a sort of twisted "fairy-tale" version of it. If you notice, everything is very heightened and extreme. The film explores themes like the impact of aging, beauty standards, and the way women are mistreated and exploited by the industry. So you shouldn't be asking why these things are literally happening, but rather why they're thematically happening. The New Year's Eve special broadcasting nude women builds off the themes; it's more exploitation the film has been analysing. In this "world," it's just accepted. As for the little girl? I took that as a satirical statement on how normalized the mistreatment and exploitation of women in the industry is. It's so normalized that a little girl is idolising it, and her mother is allowing her to see it.

TedStixon

More questions & answers from The Substance