The Brutalist

The filmic platform would treat basic concepts as mere showcases for possible powerhouses to astound as equal to the thematic heft intentionally delivered, though unfortunately victimized to be awaited upon streaming/rental availability when supposedly does not fulfill the ideal scope worthily projected on the big screen. Then if a film has the spectacle to do such, it only uncovers the unbalanced focus between the visual direction and narrative adherence, dampening the cinematic expectation and further filtering out what to see in the theaters. Nowadays, per mounting observations, certain filmmakers proven themselves as theatrical necessities, as well occasional star power for persuasion – aside from franchises’ accepted momentums. Filmmaker Brady Corbet is defiant to the suggested norms when reviving one of the more definite cinematic experiences from the Golden Age through a compelling, promising presentation affirming the assured description “epic”. In his previous feats, Corbet has shown timely psychological examinations of the human conditions, dimly lit in the watchlist radar besides Natalie Portman’s beneficial caliber heightened “Vox Lux” as a borderline breakthrough across mainstream broadening his directorial tendencies. That film seems to be a disturbing spiritual successor to “Black Swan” by Darren Aronofsky with familiar discomforting traits but remains praiseworthy to the voyaging eyes with appreciation if not full recognition. Corbet soon truly shines when he has gone ambitious in telling an epic story about the immigration experience, fantastically amid a scope of similar housings that suggest an actual intermission due to the length. Technical aspects magnificently verify the experience best seen theatrically, but, upon a second viewing for critically observative pleasure, what does it mean for the screenplay stretched for such narrative foundation? “The Brutalist” is a formatted throwback to become one of the most memorable cinematic experiences under a year’s humane peak. The title describes an architectural style with raw concrete exteriorly exposed in intricately massive geometric forms. The visionary architect in question is László Toth, escaping post-war Europe to rebuild his life in the mid-20th century America. In the process of reclaiming his work for financial stability, he vies to be reunited with his wife Erzsébet after both were forcibly separated during the war’s shifting borders and regimes. The sought hopeful freedom turns into struggle when left on his own in an unfamiliar landscape with an order he must get used to, especially after a finished project received late disapproval. He starts being [formally] recognized when wealthy industrialist Harrison Lee Van Buren respectfully proposed an ambitious vision that would either reward Toth into a more flourishing domesticated life in the US or break him on social perceptions. This film is split into two parts, with an intermission at the exact middle (15 minutes during theatrical release, now one minute digitally). The first part shows Toth’s rough journey building himself up since stepping on American grounds with an unfortunate reality check that does not break his resilience when not once stopped thinking about reuniting with his wife. Given the connections he received from Harrison’s associates, they finally reunite in the second part as the construction for Toth’s biggest project begins, which soon will exhaust him mentally while she remains strong and supportive when providing a shoulder for him to rely on. Due to how the storytelling got structured, it has become one of the most admirable works in recent memory when reviving such cinematic experience consisting of an intermission whilst formatted in VistaVision, lenses that were engineered in the 50s with higher resolution. That became the definitive compel upon its growing theatrical release under a throwback aesthetic – considerably invaluable for cinephiles, magnified by technical aspects buttering the praiseworthy amazement with profound cinematography by the genius Lol Crawley shooting his best frames under Corbet’s direction. But the biggest imprint that themes the hype and expressively defines the picture’s overall scope is the truly majestic score by Daniel Blumberg, who deserves the Academy Award for Best Original Score as no other films that year mounted even close to what he produced from an amplifying tone to gentle weaving with elegant peaks radiating off pondering and tense emotions to perfectly house these moments. However, beneath the mesmerizing production merits, the narrative seems to be problematically stretched too thin when to substantially satisfy such scope as ponderously hinted throughout. Corbet and his frequent writing partner Mona Fastvold really expanded on the overall immigration experience as the humane core’s main discourse with delicacy and passion meticulously conversed, plus deep monologues in connection to performative expectancy when there are unspoken additional story weaving through the characters in certain patterns that are either personal or socially based. There is one climatic moment that came out of nowhere to its depicted extent with purposeful thematic integrity of layered unveiling. The intermission would be deemed unnecessary if reducing certain bloated focuses, but that would rob some of the esteemed cinematography’s reminiscing gaze. Adrien Brody is no stranger with his role, a Hungarian-Jewish architect who survived the Holocaust. He has brought similar gravitas in his outstanding lead performance that spiritually succeeds his “Pianist” endeavor when immigrating to reconstruct the life he lost. What he brings is thoroughly honest and reflectively authentic in showing gripping intricacy towards not only empathetically embodying the film’s societal portrayal but also sympathetically vocalizing it with ideal stress. Guy Pearce adds another memorable peak in his career with secondary exceptionality as he impeccably embodies Harrison’s sharp charisma with uncertain enigma gesturing flawed humanity, not to mention unbalanced desires. Though she only spoken through the first half before physically appearing in the second half, Felicity Jones’ seamless deliverance as Erzsébet musters genuineness in loving capacity and utmost loyalty with strained fragility in the role’s given handicapped limitation of formidable stance that she powerfully owns in culminating form. Albeit the overburdened screenplay, it was rightfully gambled expecting the cast, besides the three most outstanding performances, to grasp their respective layered arcs with attributively shared excellence that buoys the picture just as much as what the technical merits conjured. It is disappointing that this film lost its deserving title of Best Picture to the surprisingly enjoyable though more inappropriately uncomfortable independent hit “Anora”, but it is worthwhile enough to be held in such high regard to debatably being one of the year’s best. “The Brutalist” gives a realized verification of defining that common thread with boosting resonant through past recipients and nominees in honorably awarded such prestigious standard that seems to claim what a Best Picture means for the year’s timely contextual digestion. Magnifies as a technical marvel around an emotionally performed humane core, powering to certify its theatrical must that could argue in re-releasing this agreeably monumental on the big screens for those who have missed it. You could say it is 2024’s “Oppenheimer”, leaving streaming availability for simply absorbing the narrative till it gets potentially enhanced when seeing it on the screen with a worthwhile quality. For now, it remains enjoyable and probably just as resonating, but it will never measure up to the great impression it made on the big screen suiting such profoundness. (A-)

The movie is not always easy to follow but you know you are watching something important.

A very depressing, dystopian take on immigration. So negative, almost horrific, coming down the stretch. The movie paints the most extreme picture of exploitation/degradation of immigrants imaginable, with no possibility of people from different faiths, different walks of life coming together. I subsequently learned that the central characters, Laszlo Toth and Harrison Van Buren, never existed. Toth is an amalgamation of other brutalist architects. I think the writers/director use historical fiction as a wrapper, a patina, to give credibility and unmerited weight to an oversimplified caricature of American immigration after WWII. I can’t understand these storytelling choices. And top critics seem to ignore these issues — critics do a disservice when they fail to adequately inform the reader/moviegoer.

Thats three hours of my life i am never getting back. Yes, i know, i am supposed to be overwhelmed by the visceral beauty of the emotions wrapped up in architecture developed by a prisoner of Germanys wicked regime. But, as much as I wanted to love it, I didn't. I guess i am not that smart or not that emotionally intelligent. For me, although a story of passing interest, it's not enough of a story to last 3 hrs.

Not a true story, so I am completely befuddled as to why someone with a clean slate would choose to tell this story in the manner it was told. It lacks conflict, tension, and consequences as the attempts to elicit an emotional response feel wedged in and are more apt at drawing a dumfounded blank expression than emotion. That leaves the dialogue to carry it, with its niche architect technicalities in heavy accents dominating most of the talk, so....

This movie is trying to make grand statements about artists and their relationships with businessmen, the plight of holocaust survivors and immigrants, modern architecture, among other themes. However, it does so in a fragmented version that makes it difficult to understand or empathize with the characters. I think it should have taken less time to tell its story. For example, long shots of trains on tracks, cars on highways, and the construction of buildings could have been omitted. But the film is more fixated on becoming an epic than on telling the story in a compelling way that makes the characters human. So many people will dislike this movie, as can be seen from the other reviews by viewers, which are less favorable than the reviews from critics.

A strong start, and Adrien Brody plays a fascinating character, but lost its momentum by the third act.

So caught up in it's self-importance that it becomes meaningless and a confusing disappointment. Regardless of the fawning reviews and awards showered on this film, the audience had the final say and it bombed at the box office.

Shot mostly on VistaVision to evoke the esthetics of the mid-20th-century cinema where the story is set, Brady Corbet's three-hour long opus about the lurid migrant experience of a Holocaust survivor and Jewish-Hungarian architect struggling to fulfil the American Dream is a construction of ambitions that inspires visual awe and feels frigid, much akin to the titular architectural style.

They named this film appropriately. It was brutal as hell to sit through. Story line disconnected, characters with no development. Convoluted and bad. Rotten fish.