A One Mann’s Movies review of “The Brutalist” (2025).
“The Brutalist” almost feels like the ‘one to beat’ in the run up to the Oscars. Not only is it impressive to look at… but it was made for a budget of just $10 million which is staggering. In a highly unpredictable year, it feels like the most “Oscar-ry” film on the Best Film list this year. But is the hype deserved?
I’d say “yes”. It’s so finely done, teetering between Oscar greatness and absurb melodrama. With just the slightest of nudges it feels like it could fall over into being a ridiculous, comedic Saturday Night Live parody of an immigrant arriving in post-war America:
- László wailing hystrionically about his misfortune (in the style of Lawrence Olivier in “The Jazz Singer);
- László and Erzsébet wailing histrionically like Mel Brooks and Madeline Kahn at airport security in “High Anxiety”;
- Harrison Lee Van Buren ranting so much that his head explodes like John Cassavetes in “The Fury”;
- Erzsébet giving László such a frantic hand-job in bed that the sheets suddenly spontaneously combust!
I’m sure someone will do this. (If so ©Bob Mann, royalties accepted in all the usual currencies!).
But it is a complex film to take in. I went to see it last Friday…. and I so struggled writing this review that I took The Illustrious Mrs Movie Man to see it again last night (she wanted to see it anyway). I think I set my mind straight enough to come to a final decision on the rating.
Bob the Movie Man Rating:
“The Brutalist” Plot Summary:
László Tóth (Adrien Brody) is a respected Jewish ‘brutalist’ architect, trained at the Bauhaus. But he was incarcerated by the Nazis and separated from his wife Erzsébet (Felicity Jones) who he now believes dead. Newly arrived in New York, he has to try to carve out a new career for himself in a strange and hostile country.
Certification:
UK: 18; US: R. (From the BBFC web site: “Strong sex, drug misuse, brief sexual violence”.)
Talent:
Starring: Adrien Brody, Felicity Jones, Guy Pearce, Joe Alwyn, Raffey Cassidy, Stacy Martin, Isaach De Bankolé, Alessandro Nivola, Ariane Labed, Michael Epp, Emma Laird, Jonathan Hyde.
Directed by: Brady Corbet.
Written by: Brady Corbet & Mona Fastvold.
Running Time: 3h 34m (with a 15 minute intermission after 100 minutes).
“The Brutalist” Summary:
Positives:
- Terrific acting performance by Adrien Brody and Felicity Jones.
- Clever, artistically crafted shots.
- An intelligent script that left you to fill in the blanks in your head in some parts.
Negatives:
- Guy Pearce is Oscar nominated, but felt rather too much that he was “Acting” (with a big “A”).
- Scenes of old-school porn in the film seem completely superfluous.
- Yellow subtitles!
Review of “The Brutalist”:
Atmospheric opening.
Daniel Blumberg’s dramatic orchestral chords ring out in the “Overture” at the start of the film (a bit reminiscent of, but much shorter than, Mica Levi’s opening music in “The Zone of Interest“. (Blumberg is Oscar nominated, and would be my tip to win for this.) We see László (Adrien Brody) arrive at Ellis Island, with a strangely angled view of Lady Liberty. It’s a strong and dramatic opening that sets you in expectation for the arthouse film you are about to experience. We see László engaging in some less than successful coupling with a prostitute before bidding his travelling companion adieu and jumping on a bus to Philadelphia. All of this happens before the (full) opening titles, which come as a bit of a surprise to the senses when they scroll horizontally across the screen in the manner of the trailer.
A story that keeps you on your toes.
This is an intelligent script that jumps from era to era leaving you to fill in some of the gaps in the intervening period. It’s a script that constantly jars you with a surprising twist. For example, his cousin Attila (Alessandro Nivolo) sets László up in a storeroom in the furniture showroom below his apartment where he lives with his beautiful wife Audrey (Emma Laird in gorgeous 40’s pin-up mode). All seems pleasant and cosy (a little too cosy at times). But then for no obvious reason László pees in the bath (Audrey comments “You missed the toilet… better than the carpet I suppose”): he’s drunk, but he’s not THAT drunk. Then when a deal goes spectacularly south, (for no fault of László) Attila turns on him, accuses him of sleeping with Audrey and kicks him out. Attila was previously a Jew but has converted to Catholicism (the religion of Audrey). But his actions still seem more than just personal – they seem hateful and anti-semitic.
This is all part of a disturbing underlying theme of discrimination and anti-semitism that pervade the film like a disease. Most of it is bubbling below the surface but occasionally it erupts into the open. During a dramatic encounter on a hillside Harry Lee van Buren (Joe Alwyn) hisses “We tolerate you”. It’s a powerful moment.
Zsófia
One of the most interesting characters in this is Zsófia (Raffey Cassidy) who starts the film as a mute, almost comotose young lady but who ends the film 33 years later (now as Ariane Labed) as an elegant, well-spoken and confident woman. You see some of this evolution as the film jumps forwards. Zsófia is mute in one scene but suddenly talking in the next. You are never quite sure as the viewer how aware or vulnerable she is. At one point, she is taken off into the woods for a ‘walk’ by Harry Lee (Joe Alwyn): it’s inferred that sex has happened from the way she is coyly adjusting her dress, but you have no idea if it was consensual or not.
The assumption you come to is that Zsófia has the most terrible post traumatic stress disorder from things that happened to her in the camps, including the loss of her mother, and it is taking her years to emerge from her shell.
“Brief sexual violence”.
One significant twist in the film comes from the “brief sexual violence” referred to by the BBFC in their classification comments. As young Harry Lee Van Buren (Joe Alwyn) was sidling up to a mute, vulnerable and swim-suited Zsófia, I was bracing myself for the event. But, no. When it does come in the story, it comes as SUCH a surprise that I was quite taken aback.
Superb acting by the leads.
Adrien Brody as László is just simply superb and I can well see why he would be odds-on favourite to win the Best Actor Oscar. He has many ‘Oscar reel’ moments, but one of the best is when his cousin Attila (Alessandro Nivolo) meets him off the bus in Philadelphia and informs him that his beloved Erzsébet (Felicity Jones) and his young and disturbed niece Zsófia (Raffey Cassidy) are still alive but stranded in Europe. It’s the sort of acting from Brody that makes you go “WOW!”. As the film progresses Brody suffers the affects of his heroin addiction and becomes more erratic and self-centred, (Erzsébet proclaims that he has given up on his religion and is now “worshipping at the alter of himself”). This gives Brody a huge canvas on which to dramatically play the character .
Of course, if he wins the Oscar, it will be his second after winning for “The Pianist” in 2003: a film that could almost be the prequel to this film!
Felicity Jones doesn’t make an appearance until after the interval, but is equally impressive as the bird-like Erzsébet with a steely and determined nature. Looking at the list of other Supporting Actresses nominated (it’s very arguably a Lead Actress role!) I think she would be my pick to win. Her wonderful Oscar moment is in a dramatic confrontation with Van Buren Snr. near the finale which is just superb.
Wonderful cinematography and editing.
Credit should also go to Lol Crawley for the cinematography which is sublime (and also Oscar nominated). The low-level shots of roads and rails during travelling scenes have been done many times before in movies, but somehow here seem so much more exciting and dynamic. Perhaps that’s the effect of the classic 50’s VistaVision cameras used? Also, the magnificent and dramatic shots of ‘The Institute’ under construction; the mines at Carrara in Italy and of the Venice architecture in the eplilogue are all superb.
I will also mention the editing by Dávid Jancsó (also Oscar nominated). I never know how much of the flow of a film is controlled by the editor versus the director sitting on the editor’s shoulder! But the way in which the film cleverly messes with the timeline (László dancing with Aubrey before he gets up to dance) and the way in which it slips in little snippets of ‘B’ roll footage (the elegant jewellery of Van Buren’s guests during a dinner party) is all very classy. Whether this is editorial or directorial verve or both, it is simply superb film-making.
Not a flawless film though.
Unlike some critics, I haven’t dived my for my 5 star rating though. There were a number of aspects of the film that didn’t fully work for me:
- Plain yellow subtitles! (Haven’t you found the ‘text shadow’ function on Final Cut Pro yet guys?) When the titles were shown against a near white background (as in the hilltop photo scene) they are virtually illegible.
- Porn. At one point László goes into a movie theatre which is showing a vintage porn movie. This just seems to be solely for tittilation purposes… “It’s an 18 certificate, so we’ll show some T&A”. László could just have well walked into somewhere showing Daffy Duck for all the relevance it had to the story. (The illustrious Mrs Movie Man also objected to the amount of objectification of the nude form of Felicity Jones (and/or her body-double) during a sex scene: I personally disagreed and thought this was quite artfully done.)
- Guy Pearce has been Oscar nominated in the supporting role of Van Buren Sr. It’s a meaty role for sure. But, unlike Brody, it always felt to me like Pearce was ‘acting’ the role. I really like Pearce as an actor, but this one wouldn’t be my choice to win.
I’m sorry… how much?
What’s extraordinary is that this film was made for just $10 million. Just to put that into perspective, you could make “The Brutalist” sequels 2 through 10 for the cost of “Better Man” and “The Brutalist” sequels 2 through 25 for the cost of “Red One“! Even cutting Dwayne Johnson from that last monstrosity would have funded this film 5 times over!
The thing is, it never looks cheap. When there is something dramatic (such as an appalling train crash) it uses a cheap but highly effective and artistic way of rendering that. (We don’t even need to resort to “The Fabelmans” style models!) I’m not sure if all of the actors took cuts of the returns (a wise decision, I suspect, if so), but this should show the studios that you really don’t need to throw big bucks at a project in order to deliver class: just throw a classy director like Brady Corbet at it!
AI Controversy.
There has in the last week been some controversy about the use of generative AI in the film. Apparantly editor Dávid Jancsó (probably not doing his own personal Oscar chances any good) confessed in an interview that he had used some Ukranian software called ‘Respeecher’ to blend some of his own Hungarian speech (just specific vowels and tricky sounds) into Adrien Brody and Felicity Jones’ Hungarian dialogue to make it sound more authentic to locals.
To me, this just seems to be a storm in a tea-cup: someone using AI tools to speed up something they could manually tweak in the software anyway. My observation is that AI elements are pervading just about every bit of software. But as AI is a VERY dirty word in Hollywood, the usage might not do this film, or indeed Emelia Pérez, which allegedly used the same software, any good in the awards voting. Which feels wrong to me.
Summary Thoughts on “The Brutalist”
Love it or loathe it (and I can see this really being a Marmite movie), you can’t deny that “The Brutalist” is an extremely interesting movie. I can see it being the topic of debate in film studies classes for years to come. Having seen it twice, I really enjoyed it. It’s an epic film with an epic scope and deserves respect.
Where to Watch it (Powered by Justwatch)
Trailer for “The Brutalist”:
The trailer is here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GdRXPAHIEW4.
Subscribe
Don’t forget, you can subscribe to One Mann’s Movies to receive future reviews by email right here. No salesman will call!
It was an odd film in its way. In the end it purports that it’s the destination, not the journey, that’s important, yet most of the movie is about the journey, while the destination is treated treated like a coda. Then there’s the blame games – Lazlo gets hammered by his cousin for the library deal going south, when really anyone in their right mind (particularly a family member) would see that it wasn’t his fault. Then he gets sort of sidelined by Van Buren because of the train accident, which again has nothing to do with him. (Ergo, I… Read more »
Thanks Mark for your considered comment. Yes, I appreciated that the title could refer to Lazlo as the architect or Van Buren as the brutal benefactor. I’m sure the title is designed with that double meaning. I think the “chewings out” are to reflect the discrimination towards him as an outsider Jew… an exhibition of power and domination from people of more perceived status. My wife was also annoyed about the opening sex scenes: I did point out that at that point Lazlo clearly believed his wife and niece to be ‘missing presumed dead’.
Firstly thank you for your review, I enjoyed reading your perspective and insight. I have watched the movie and I still can’t decide if I liked it or loathed it but I can say it gave me weird dreams that night! I suspect a lot of the information we seek is on the cutting room floor. theres a time and place to let the audience make up its mind and or fill in the gaps and for me there were too many gaps which my imagination went down rabbit holes, if that was the reasoning then it worked however it… Read more »
Haha – yes, it’s a film that divides people. Some find it too long and boring and others really like it… there doesn’t seem to be much middle ground! Admission: I’ve never watched Uncut Gems… been on my watch list for years and never made it too the top (your comment hasn’t helped that!). But thanks for commenting Penny… appreciated.