The Oscars have historically been the birthplace of discourse and viral memes, whether they are about the films themselves, their cast and crew, or the “deservingness” of the eventual winners. From Adrian Brody throwing gum on the floor to the songwriters of “El Mal” from the movie Emilia Perez (2024) singing during their acceptance speech, you might already be familiar with some of the mainstream celebrity drama around the 97th Academy Awards, which fell on March 2. However, if you’re a regular Letterboxd user, you might be familiar with a larger point of contention: the victory of Anora (2024) protagonist, Mikey Madison, and not The Substance (2024) acting veteran Demi Moore.
Over the course of the acting season, both Moore and Madison had taken home neck-and-neck victories for their work: the former secured the Golden Globe, Critics’ Choice Award, and Screen Actors’ Guild Award for Best Actress, while the latter won at the BAFTAs and the Independent Choice Awards. Still, when Madison edged out Moore for Best Actress at the Oscars, many took to social media to voice their opinions on Madison’s unprecedented win, with The Substance supporters vehemently claiming that Moore had been “robbed” or “snubbed.”
The Substance was undoubtedly one of the most unique films in this year’s Oscars line-up, featuring
substantial shares of body horror, female rage, and a mysterious substance known as — you guessed it! — The Substance. Coralie Fargeat’s second feature film sees Demi Moore as Elisabeth Sparkle, a television personality who resorts to sinister measures to regain her previous relevance upon being dropped from her long-held television host role. Demi Moore delivers a visceral performance teeming with the deep-seated jealousy of watching the “younger, more beautiful, more perfect” version of herself, Sue (played by Margaret Qualley), flourish where she once did. The intensity of her anguish mounts as the movie builds towards its unforgettable climax, featuring 36,000 gallons of fake blood and a grotesque, inhuman amalgamation of both Elisabeth and Sue’s characters, that was met with audible gasps when I watched it in theatres. Moore reportedly endured four to five hour stints in hair and makeup donning prosthetics for various scenes in the film, which secured the Oscar for Best Makeup & Hairstyling.
In comparison, Anora’s plot seems far less complicated, though no less layered. Mikey Madison plays the eponymous Anora (or Ani), a sex worker who finds herself in a fairytale-turned-disaster when her husband’s Russian oligarch family catches wind of their elopement. Madison spent six months learning to pole dance for her role (which is much harder than it looks). She recalls being “covered head to toe in bruises” to the point that they incorporated a line about it into the script. Moreover, she had to learn Russian for the film, as well as work with a dialect coach and move to Brighton Bay before filming to match her accent to those of its inhabitants.
The main argument posited by The Substance diehards is that Moore’s performance in The Substance was more outwardly complex and impressive than Madison’s in Anora. Admittedly, the physicality of Anora is less pronounced than that of The Substance, which required intense physical acting to solidify its genre-typical body horror elements. That being said, this stance diminishes the physical efforts Madison did invest into her role. In fact, the fact that she underwent so much training for small nuances in her role exemplifies her meticulous characterisation and performance. It also speaks volumes about the often unsung physical labour required of exotic dancers.
Beyond the quality of their performances, a rampant sentiment regarding Madison’s victory was that it “proved the point of The Substance,” which was that older women would always lose to fresher faces on the scene. Additionally, some expressed that Moore deserved the award “because Madison would have more opportunities to win it in future,” while Moore was less likely to because of her age.
Firstly, this sentiment is categorically untrue, considering the fact that the average age of the last 20 Best Actress winners is 43 years old, and the Academy has historically favoured older actresses. Secondly, such a viewpoint is reductive of both Moore and Madison’s impressive performances. It inherently shoehorns Moore into the box of the “old” woman, discrediting her performance, all the while belittling Madison’s win into one she took home simply because she is a younger actress. There is nothing wrong with thinking that Moore gave a better performance. However, the idea that Madison’s win reinforces The Substance’s message swings so far left that it goes right in terms of its anti-ageism stance. To say that Moore was more deserving of the title of Best Actress because of her age is more patronising than empowering.
All interpretations of art hold value. Engaging in film discourse is all well and good and in fact encouraged — however, it still has to be done critically. Much of the hate directed to Moore and Madison focused on comparing them in terms of their age and looks (misogynistic precepts of a woman’s worth, by the way, what a coincidence) rather than their actual acting ability, which needlessly pit them against one another despite both actresses’ mutual recognitions of each other’s work. It only makes for a shallow and cheap argument to degrade one party and diminish their efforts in support of another, whether or not you agree with the outcome.
There needs to be a reframing in our perception of these awards. The Academy Awards are not the Olympics, where there is a clear definition of “winner” and “loser,” or first and second place. The Best Actress title was not a competition between Moore and Madison alone — there were other equally deserving candidates. Fernanda Torres also delivered an emotionally rich and phenomenal performance in I’m Still Here (2024); in fact, she was slated by the New York Times to win Best Actress. Thus, one’s attainment of an Oscar, unlike, say, the 100-metre sprint, is not determined by any clear metric other than a majority vote. Moore and Torres, and every other nominee in the Best Actress category, didn’t “lose” in the sense that their performances were definitely worse than Madison’s; Madison just happened to win the Academy’s majority vote.
Personally, I would have been happy with any result, though I had my official bets placed on Madison (after oscillating back and forth between options, might I add). In the end, the Academy works in mysterious ways. They’ve made good decisions, bad decisions, and everything in between — ultimately, they are beyond our control as mere viewers. What we all can do is sit back and enjoy the movies that come out year after year for what they are, rather than what they win. And no matter what people say, you don’t have to agree with the Oscars. Create a Letterboxd account or something. Leave your own review.