Trigger warning: Rape, Antisemitism
Brady Corbet’s The Brutalist is unarguably an ambitious project. Set against a post-war background with an aesthetic which in parts is reminiscent of the golden age of cinema, it may be thought that The Brutalist is a film which relies on the tried and tested. But when considering the themes of foreign identity and antisemitism alongside the use of AI in creating the final product which ended up on screens, there is a confusing grey area over whether The Brutalist can be a product of tradition or of modernity.
The mammoth picture, lasting over three and a half hours, is certainly a feat of cinema. Through its filming techniques, the piece emulates that of 1950s cinema, appropriate as this period is when the majority of the film is set. A prominent example of this is the use of VistaVision instead of digital film. VistaVision was introduced in 1954 by Paramount Pictures and is a higher resolution version of 35mm film. Major pictures shot on VistaVision include ‘Vertigo’ and ‘High Society’ but by the early 1960s, studios began to opt for Panavision. From a technical standpoint, Corbet chose VistaVision due to its ability to show a wide field of view with the high resolution which traditional 35mm film cannot provide yet it is undeniable that the aesthetic quality of the film also gives the audience a reminder of Old Hollywood cinema. Furthermore, the inclusion of an intermission between the two parts of the film is something relatively unheard of in the 21st century. In the silent film era, intermissions were common as projectionists needed to change film reels, but in the age of digital distribution there is no technological need for an intermission. When The Brutalist inevitably reaches streaming services, many will skip the intermission without seeing why it was included. Aside from the obvious reason of giving attention spans a break, the intermission serves as a reminder of a truly theatrical experience. Whilst I did not appreciate the split narrative and personally felt it disrupted the film’s story too much, The Brutalist places itself into film history by once again relying on traditional film techniques.
However, as much Corbet relies on notions of traditional film making, the film could not have been as heavily praised without its controversial use of artificial intelligence in editing. Editor Dávid Jancsó revealed the Hungarian spoken Adrien Brody’s László and Felicity Jones’ Erzsébet were aided by an AI tool to make their dialogue sound more natural. The use of the AI tool was relatively minimal, as only Hungarian dialect was altered rather than English spoken in a Hungarian accent, yet the increasing use of the technology in film is something which many in the industry feel is a threat to their livelihoods. The industry of today finds itself in an ideological battle over AI. Whilst The Academy does not see issue with the usage of the technology, a fact made clear by it’s praise for both The Brutalist and Emilia Perez which also used AI to help with the voices of characters, the sheer amount of articles and the focus upon AI in film clearly displays that audiences and filmmakers alike are not quite accepting of these advances.
Regardless of when the film is set, it’s content cannot be glossed over as a piece of historical fiction. The prominence of antisemitic ideas and xenophobia in the film are striking responses to issues which plague modern societies globally. Antisemitism in America is alarmingly increasing, with Israeli identity and nationalism becoming a heated topic in the wake of the genocide in Gaza. Although the film does include a news report on the formation of Israel in 1947, this film cannot be regarded as a Zionist one. By simply acknowledging historical facts, the film does not pledge an allegiance to any political entity. It is the experience of being a Jewish immigrant in America which is truly the focus of the piece. The unexpected rape in the second act of the film is the peak of antisemitism in the film. Harrison acting as a rapist engages in this sexual assault as an act of domination towards the intoxicated László. The metaphor here is an extremely obvious one; the white protestant man taking advantage of the Jewish immigrant who he has hired to work for him. The ideologies explored in the film are scarily close to ones which have begun to float around again. The same week which The Brutalist was released in the United Kingdom, the richest man in the world stood up on stage and did two Nazi salutes. This was the same week that the President of the United States attempted to block birthright citizenship and put a freeze on refugee admissions. The film has a theme which is timeless– it can neither be modern or traditional in ideas as the ideas of the past have returned with a screaming vengeance. To leave the cinema after The Brutalist without acknowledging that the lives of people like László and Erzsébet are still plagued with institutional barriers as a result of their non-American identities is a gross misreading of both the film and the global political situation.
