Movie origin stories finally reach their nadir this week with “Transformers One,” the super-violent, toy-selling vehicle that tells the tale of how Optimus Prime and Megatron went from besties to foes. Did anyone ask for this? Did Wile E. Coyote and the Road Runner ask for too much money?

The computer-animated “Transformers One” is out of time, a throwback to a few years ago when Hollywood mined popular IP for forgotten heroes, built overly complex worlds and then ramped up the action so that the audience just got numbed to a blur of battles. But “Transformers One” isn’t good enough to watch on a plane, even a trans-Pacific flight. The inflight map is better.

A map isn’t a bad idea, actually: You may need some sort of guide for this one — those uninitiated to the folklore of Cybertron are flung helplessly into references to Energon, Alpha Trion, Quintessons and something called the Matrix of Leadership. You come in halfway into a conversation.

Advertisement

The story by Andrew Barrer and Gabriel Ferrari is basically the Bible’s Cain and Abel with a detour into the Roman Empire and the Hasbro figurines’ accumulated mythology, which seems to be a series of never-ending epic battles between good and evil. Some stuff just seems downright weird, like why these robots need a gym or why after running they become breathless.

The main heroes here are buddies Orion Pax and D-16 — who will become mortal enemies Optimus Prime and Megatron by the end — and we meet them when they are lowly miners, basically non-transforming bots digging for reserves of the energy cleverly called Energon. This is a society in which the upper class is made up of Transformers who stomp around preening while the lower classes do dirty jobs like comb through garbage.

They all serve Sentinel Prime, the leader of the subterranean Iacon City, who is not what he seems. He is apparently the last of the Primes and lives in a marble palace, giving the people below spectacles as a diversion, like an epic road race. It gives off ancient Roman Coliseum vibes.

Orion Pax (voiced with puppy-dog sweetness by Chris Hemsworth) is not satisfied by this life. “There’s got to be something more I can do,” he says. “Aren’t you tired of being treated like you’re nothing?” Brian Tyree Henry voices D-16 with skepticism and resignation.

The two friends join with mining manager Elita-1 (Scarlett Johansson, bland) and Keegan-Michael Key’s B-127 (who will later become fan favorite Bumblebee) to journey to the surface of the planet, find the Matrix of Leadership (a sort of necklace that might have been sold in the Sharper Image catalog) and get a hero’s welcome. But they learn some unsavory things about the ruler from the Transformer elder statesman Alpha Trion (the instantly recognizable Laurence Fishburne).

Advertisement

Director Josh Cooley, who co-wrote the screenplay for “Inside Out” and helmed “Toy Story 4,” never lets the action stop — and that’s not a compliment. The camera is constantly swiveling and the violence — assault-weapon lasers, booming cannons, light torture, martial arts crunching moves, beating a rival with their own amputated limb and ceaseless pounding — is nauseating. (“Please stop punching me in the face” is a joke line here.) If Transformers ever bled, this would be an R-rated movie.

The hyper-violence papers over some pretty robotic — sorry! — dialogue. Why do all these movies show the Transformers with cool upgrades like laser knives but they remain speaking in stilted, operatic prose? “I want him to suffer and die in darkness,” “They are to be your undoing” and “Cybertron’s future is in your hands.”

There are some good moments, of course. When our band of misfit bots get an upgrade to Transformer status, they cutely don’t know how to do it seamlessly at first, with limbs awkwardly getting mixed with vehicle parts. Anyone who has played with the toys knows the feeling. And Key never fails to generate a chuckle, proving a masterful comedic voice actor.

Advertisement

The other actors — Jon Hamm and Steve Buscemi, included — hardly register and the movie’s main song — “If I Fall” by Quavo, Ty Dolla $ign and Brian Tyler’s Are We Dreaming — feels like AI wrote both the uninteresting rap-rock beat and soupy lyrics (“I’m the alpha, omega, got lights on me, Vegas.” Vegas?)

The saddest thing about “Transformers One” is the wastefulness of another dull outing in a universe geared toward kids just learning to transform themselves. The lessons here, unfortunately, are that friends can become enemies overnight and you only win if you beat someone hard enough. “We’re better than this,” Orion Pax screams at his sudden rival at one point. No, they’re not.

“Transformers One,” a Paramount release that lands in theaters Friday, is rated PG for “sci-fi violence and animated action throughout, and language.” Running time: 103 minutes. Half a star out of four.

It has become a cliche to say that a horror film is extreme or unlike anything you’ve ever seen. Too often, the degree to which something is gory or out there is exaggerated, resulting in some level of audience disappointment. Well, I’m here to tell you that The Substance warrants those kinds of brash comments. A body horror satire with terrific performances, it’s as out there as it gets. No matter what you’ve heard, you’re not read for this flick, and I mean that as a major compliment, too.

The Substance goes hard. It does so in service of a metaphor that wouldn’t jive with subtlety, that’s for sure. Women in Hollywood, the aging process, sexism, it’s all in here, done in a savagely satirical manner. Plus, again, this is a very graphic body horror epic, at nearly two and a half hours long. Is it going to be for everyone? No. Was it very much up my alley? You better believe it. This is one of the most darkly enjoyable experiences of the year.

Elisabeth Sparkle (Demi Moore) used to be a star. An award-winning actress, Elisabeth was seen as a beauty queen and among the biggest celebrities in the world. Now, as she hits her 50th birthday, she’s the host of a popular aerobics show. It’s been successful, but clearly not fulfilling, though when her boss Harvey (Dennis Quaid) lets her go, in the hopes of finding a younger model, she’s devastated. After an accident, the fading celebrity is told about The Substance, a black-market drug which utilizes a cell-replicating agent that temporarily creates a younger, better version of you. Without much hesitation, she signs up and takes her first dose.

One gory transformation later and a younger version of herself emerges, literally from her body. Dubbed Sue (Margaret Qualley), she immediately auditions and gets the aerobics show. Containing all of Elisabeth’s youthful beauty and star power, she’s an instant icon. The only catch is, both bodies need an equal week out and about, with the other hidden away, naked and being fed through a tube. Failure to abide by that has consequences, which Sue finds out about one night. Thus begins a battle of bodies, with some incredible and shocking body horror to come. The fun is in the surprises, too, as you’ll never see the third act coming.

Demi Moore and Margaret Qualley have never been better. They’re both emotionally and physically naked here, working in concert with each other. While they’re not identical, the way that they evoke each other is wonderful. Moore especially goes all-out in a de-glam type performance that will blow you away. The role calls for someone of her ilk and she absolutely knocks it out of the park. Watching Moore be this free and this bold is exhilarating. As for Qualley, it’s a whole new side of her, which I found very exciting. She’s leaning in to the elements that are preying upon Moore, making for a really interesting dichotomy. Dennis Quaid is having a lot of fun playing a monster of a studio executive. He’s evoking you know who and doing it in a way that brings out the right amount of cringe. Moore and Qualley are the stars, but in addition to Quaid, the supporting cast include Gore Abrams, Hugo Diego Garcia, Oscar Lesage, and a few others. Don’t get it twisted though, this is the Moore and Qualley show, plain and simple.

Filmmaker Coralie Fargeat writes and directs this picture fearlessly. No one else is making feminist body horror, so kudos to her for not just conceiving of the idea, but executing it so well. First and foremost, opting to cast separate actresses is not a welcome old-school move, but exactly what the film needed. The Substance would have missed its own point by not having someone like Moore and someone like Qualley sharing the role. CGI-ing either one of them simply would not have worked. Fargeat hammers the points home without a ton of subtlety, but that’s the point. This is how the world treats Elisabeth, of course. The script never forgets that, while Fargeat’s direction leans in. Plus, she has a wonderful handle on gore, going harder than you’ll ever expect. If you’re not covering your eyes at some point, she’s not doing her job.

Fair warning, The Substance is graphic. Now, it’s a feature, not a bug, but this is going to be too much for some. There’s substantial nudity, which you eventually become numb to, but it’s also incredibly gory. Throw in a wild ending that utilizes some incredibly gnarly makeup (among other things) and this could prove tough for a more demure audience member. The feminist satire take on celebrity and body horror worked for me in a big way, but I’m also very fond of horror. Your mileage may vary.

To that end, this film will be an interesting test of Academy tastes. If this were a simple film about an aging actress, I do think Demi Moore would have a great chance at a Best Actress nomination. The thing is, Oscar doesn’t usually go for body horror. Now, the metaphor and satire on display may well resonate with voters more so than another movie of its ilk. Still, this seems like a big ask for them, though I’d love to see it happen.

The Substance is a rare mix of acting showcase and body horror. Unsurprisingly, I loved it. Moore and Qualley are phenomenal, Fargeat’s filmmaking is first-rate, and the surprises in the back half are just delightfully unhinged. I truly can’t wait for more people to see this one. It shocked folks just last week at the Toronto International Film Festival. Now, as it heads from TIFF to theaters, you all should check this one out. It’s not to be missed!

SCORE: ★★★1/2

Related

Long before she ever took on the now-iconic role of Emily Gilmore in Amy Sherman-Palladino’s beloved comedy-drama “Gilmore Girls,” Kelly Bishop had a stunning résumé. From the mid-1960s and on, Bishop appeared in numerous Broadway shows, earning a Tony Award for her performance as Sheila in the first iteration of “A Chorus Line.” In the ’80s, she appeared as Frances “Baby” Houseman’s mother in “Dirty Dancing” and in subsequent years lit up daytime television on “One Life to Live” and “All My Children.”

For all her career highs, however, Bishop likely will remain best known for her cutting and complex performance as the moneyed New England matriarch in “Gilmore Girls” from 2000 to 2007 — a period she chronicles beautifully in her new memoir, “The Third Gilmore Girl.”

In candid and down-to-earth prose, Bishop, 80, looks back at her early years as a trained ballet dancer, moving to New York and entering the Broadway scene (then under her birth name Carole Bishop), auditioning for Woody Allen’s one-act play “Central Park West,” transitioning to film in Paul Mazursky’s 1978 Oscar-nominated drama “An Unmarried Woman” and meeting Sherman-Palladino, with whom she continued to work on “Bunheads” and “The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel.”

“There was no pretense about [Sherman-Palladino], no slickness, no political glad-handing or equivocating,” Bishop writes in her book. “Just a woman who knew the value of her work and the quality of her project and was crystal clear on how it should be done.”

Here are a few more “Gilmore”-themed revelations from Bishop’s memoir — out now.

Sorry, Jess and Dean fans — Bishop is Team Logan

For as long as “Gilmore Girls” has been a part of the cultural conversation, viewers have been split over which of Rory Gilmore’s (Alexis Bledel) beaus was the best — an argument that extended into Netflix’s 2016 “Gilmore Girls” revival. Typically, the fight boils down to Team Jess (Milo Ventimiglia), an emotionally avoidant but well-read “bad boy” who becomes a self-actualized published author, and Logan Huntzberger (Matt Czuchry), Rory’s classmate at Yale who is being groomed to take over the family publishing empire. Then there’s Dean (Jared Padalecki), Rory’s first boyfriend, who is kind, stable and communicative but periodically acts threatened by Rory’s Ivy League aspirations. Not to mention he cheats on his wife with Rory.

“I was always Team Logan,” Bishop writes in her memoir. “All the young actors on ‘Gilmore Girls’ were terrific, on- and off-screen, but while several of them seemed boyish, Logan took a more manly approach that I thought worked perfectly as a partner for Rory.”

As for Lorelai’s romance arc, Bishop is Team Luke

Fans also have squabbled over the question of which love interest was best for Lorelai Gilmore (Lauren Graham), who started the series dating one of Rory’s prep school teachers, Max Medina (Scott Cohen). Later, she pinballs between Rory’s unreliable yet charming father, Christopher (David Sutcliffe), and Luke (Scott Patterson), the local diner owner with a gruff exterior and unextinguishable torch for Lorelai.

“I was definitely Team Luke,” Bishop says. “It wasn’t just that Luke genuinely loved her. He also understood that he was dealing with a very quirky, specific woman, and he ‘got’ her. I loved watching them together.”

Bishop’s favorite Emily insult was aimed at Logan’s mom

One of Emily’s defining characteristics was her seemingly endless supply of scathing insults. Though the bulk of Emily’s barbs were reserved for her mother-in-law, husband and daughter, in the Season 6 episode “We’ve Got Magic to Do,” she unleashed in grand fashion on Logan’s mother, Shira (Leann Hunley), upon learning that the Huntzbergers told Rory she wasn’t “properly bred” to date Logan.

Bishop writes: “I kept a smile on Emily’s face so that, from a distance, it could have appeared that she was complimenting Shira on her dress and asking who designed it, while she was actually delivering lines like, ‘You were a two-bit gold digger fresh off the bus from Hicksville when you met [Logan’s father] Mitchum at whatever bar you stumbled into. … Now, enjoy the event.’

“It was an absolute masterpiece by Amy and a joy to deliver, not only because it was Emily at her force-of-nature best but also because it was another display of her fierce love for her granddaughter.”

Kelly Bishop as Emily, left, Lauren Graham as Lorelai, Alexis Bledel as Rory and Edward Herrmann as Richard in a scene from the WB’s “Gilmore Girls” in 2002.

(Mitchell Haddad / The WB)

Advertisement

Bishop didn’t like the final season of ‘Gilmore Girls’

Very few “Gilmore Girls” fans think highly of its seventh and final season, which ran from 2006 to 2007. Due to a breakdown in contract negotiations, Amy and husband/co-writer/producer Dan Palladino exited the show after Season 6. Though Warner Bros. brought in a new writing team, Bishop recalls that “Gilmore Girls” “seemed to get kind of sleepy and tired from one week to the next, as if the air was being slowly let out of a big, sparkly balloon, and we could sense that the party might be ending, even though no one wanted to say it out loud.”

Bishop also says, “To the best of my knowledge, Amy still hasn’t watched a single episode of [Season 7].”

She did, however, love Netflix’s divisive ‘A Year in the Life’

When “Gilmore Girls” hit Netflix in 2014, it experienced an extraordinary bump in popularity. “Not only did its original viewers jump right in to enjoy it all over again, but whole new generations were introduced to it and fell in love with it too,” Bishop recalls.

The renewed interest led to a 15-year reunion panel at the ATX TV Festival in 2015 and, one year later, a Netflix revival. Though the four-episode “A Year in the Life” brought the Palladinos back, reception was decidedly mixed. Critics overall favored the miniseries, but fans “were frustrated by the loose ends they felt they were left with,” as Bishop writes.

One of those loose ends was Rory’s infamous “last four words” to Lorelai: “Mom?” “Yeah?” “I’m pregnant.” Cut to black.

“Those mysterious ‘last four words’ … struck me as more interesting than infuriating, since it opened debates among viewers to decide who Rory was pregnant by, and what the repercussions would be. I personally think it was Logan, by the way.”