Coming from Brady Corbet, a white American director who smugly touts his film as an exploration of 'otherness' in awards season interviews, it feels painfully self-congratulatory and tone-deaf.
I still haven't been able to sort out my thoughts on this filmbut I love your takes on it. I never one connected with anything in the film and it felt like I was watching it because I had to, like back in certain film classes in college.
This makes me think of Coppola and MEGALOPOLIS a little bit, too. Both from the artist as a self-mythologizing figure, and their blinders-on focus to create their art their way, for whatever the cost, whatever the struggle, whatever the "sacrifice", mythologizing said sacrifice and making it part of the film's story, and being able to only engage philosophically on this level - even though the movie is ostensibly about more than this - because it's all they've ever really cared about.
This may be why older artists lose relevance over time. Not just because they see the world with eyes from a previous era, but because over time they become the embedded, the industry insider who's still trying to play the suffering outsider, and it's THAT inauthenticity that comes through, too. Someone made this exact point about Tim Burton - you can only play the misunderstood goth outcast when you're not part of the fully accepted mainstream. And when you become the latter but keep trying to make the same movies with the same messages? It doesn't really work.
I completely agree. The Brutalist and Megalopolis both reflect the artist as a self-mythologizing figure, where personal struggle is elevated to the level of grand narrative—often at the expense of anything beyond their own creative suffering.
Your point about older artists losing relevance is spot on. It’s not just that their perspective is outdated, but that they cling to an outsider persona long after becoming industry insiders. That inauthenticity is exactly why The Brutalist feels hollow—Corbet isn’t telling an immigrant story, he’s grafting his own artistic struggles onto a narrative that demands more lived experience than he can provide. The Tim Burton comparison nails it, too—when filmmakers refuse to evolve beyond their self-image, their work inevitably loses its edge.
I’m sort of mixed on The Brutalist. It’s supposed to be a Holocaust survivor story, no? Why can’t we talk about that? I feel like the entire discourse around this film (awards season and reviews) has been tiptoeing around his Jewish identity which makes me incredibly uncomfortable and sad. It’s not authentic because the director doesn’t acknowledge this apparently (I haven’t seen it but would like to) and there’s no heart or soul as a result.
I also find it troubling how the awards discourse and reviews have largely ignored this element. It’s almost as if the film wants to use Tóth’s trauma as a broad symbol of artistic struggle rather than acknowledge the specific historical and cultural weight that comes with being a Jewish immigrant and Holocaust survivor. And you’re right—the lack of heart and soul is palpable. Because Corbet doesn’t seem genuinely invested in that part of the story, it ends up feeling hollow, like he’s using the backdrop of Jewish history without meaningfully engaging with it.
I’d love to hear your thoughts if you do end up watching it. I suspect the omissions and evasions you pointed out will stand out even more.
Thanks Enrico. It begs the question if in Corbet’s quest for universal themes he seems to forget every story is rooted in individual experience. You can’t lose the context! How else does empathy happen and understanding made possible?
I’m more encouraged to see it now knowing what I’ve read from you. I’m not expecting the stars or the moon but if anything to bemoan that this feat lacked a vision. I heard Brody’s GG acceptance and was just hoping it was better than that.
I appreciate that! The screenplay definitely has some strong elements, and I’d love to hear your thoughts after you see it. I knew my take was contrarian, but I wasn’t quite prepared for how much it would spark such passionate (and sometimes heated) conversations. That said, it’s been great engaging with so many different perspectives—I think that’s when film discussions are at their best!
This is a great review! I think I was a bit gentler in my own review - and I have to admit I enjoyed some parts of the film, mainly the cinematography and Guy Pearce - but your thoughts seem generally very aligned with mine. There is no doubt the film is overly self-indulgent which is the main problem in my opinion. Had Corbet stepped back, put his ego aside, really focused in on one big issue to thoroughly address with his story, I think this film would have read much differently. As is, you can really tell he cared very little about the story itself and was more concerned with making a grand epic, something to be seen and profound and intellectual. And I ultimately found that insufferable.
Thank you! I didn’t know or was prepared for the Pandora’s box I opened by writing this but I’m glad you see where I’m coming from. A good friend and fellow creative who LOVED this film asked me—after I calm down—to give it another chance. I might. Maybe in the summer. We’ll see.
Listening to the podcast now and I’m so thrilled they’re reiterating the elements I found so infuriating and learning a lot as well! I RARELY call a film terrible or rarely do they piss me off (last time I can remember was The Green Book) so I’m glad my vitriol is shared.
I wrote more extended thoughts on this last month, but I don't know if I can go as far as to say The Brutalist is terrible as there were plenty of moments that struck me greatly. However, I do think Corbet is out of his element charting a story that really isn't personal to him with perceptions of grandeur and importance that are all too forced.
That’s a fair take, and I appreciate that parts of the film resonated with you. I rarely call a film terrible, but as an immigrant, The Brutalist felt offensive in how detached and self-important it was in depicting an experience that should feel deeply personal. It’s not just that Corbet is telling a story that isn’t his—it’s that he does so with a forced sense of grandeur, making it feel more like an artistic statement than a lived reality.
That’s what makes the film so frustrating for me. There’s a version of this story that could have been genuinely affecting, but instead, it leans into self-importance rather than real insight. When a film positions itself as profound without truly engaging with the complexities of its subject, it starts to feel hollow.
It's certainly an empty experience and I don't disagree with you on it too much. But, as a 1st Gen American, I wouldn't say the film ever offended me but it definitely didn't connect on that level either.
I still haven't been able to sort out my thoughts on this filmbut I love your takes on it. I never one connected with anything in the film and it felt like I was watching it because I had to, like back in certain film classes in college.
This makes me think of Coppola and MEGALOPOLIS a little bit, too. Both from the artist as a self-mythologizing figure, and their blinders-on focus to create their art their way, for whatever the cost, whatever the struggle, whatever the "sacrifice", mythologizing said sacrifice and making it part of the film's story, and being able to only engage philosophically on this level - even though the movie is ostensibly about more than this - because it's all they've ever really cared about.
This may be why older artists lose relevance over time. Not just because they see the world with eyes from a previous era, but because over time they become the embedded, the industry insider who's still trying to play the suffering outsider, and it's THAT inauthenticity that comes through, too. Someone made this exact point about Tim Burton - you can only play the misunderstood goth outcast when you're not part of the fully accepted mainstream. And when you become the latter but keep trying to make the same movies with the same messages? It doesn't really work.
I completely agree. The Brutalist and Megalopolis both reflect the artist as a self-mythologizing figure, where personal struggle is elevated to the level of grand narrative—often at the expense of anything beyond their own creative suffering.
Your point about older artists losing relevance is spot on. It’s not just that their perspective is outdated, but that they cling to an outsider persona long after becoming industry insiders. That inauthenticity is exactly why The Brutalist feels hollow—Corbet isn’t telling an immigrant story, he’s grafting his own artistic struggles onto a narrative that demands more lived experience than he can provide. The Tim Burton comparison nails it, too—when filmmakers refuse to evolve beyond their self-image, their work inevitably loses its edge.
I’m sort of mixed on The Brutalist. It’s supposed to be a Holocaust survivor story, no? Why can’t we talk about that? I feel like the entire discourse around this film (awards season and reviews) has been tiptoeing around his Jewish identity which makes me incredibly uncomfortable and sad. It’s not authentic because the director doesn’t acknowledge this apparently (I haven’t seen it but would like to) and there’s no heart or soul as a result.
I also find it troubling how the awards discourse and reviews have largely ignored this element. It’s almost as if the film wants to use Tóth’s trauma as a broad symbol of artistic struggle rather than acknowledge the specific historical and cultural weight that comes with being a Jewish immigrant and Holocaust survivor. And you’re right—the lack of heart and soul is palpable. Because Corbet doesn’t seem genuinely invested in that part of the story, it ends up feeling hollow, like he’s using the backdrop of Jewish history without meaningfully engaging with it.
I’d love to hear your thoughts if you do end up watching it. I suspect the omissions and evasions you pointed out will stand out even more.
Thanks Enrico. It begs the question if in Corbet’s quest for universal themes he seems to forget every story is rooted in individual experience. You can’t lose the context! How else does empathy happen and understanding made possible?
I’m more encouraged to see it now knowing what I’ve read from you. I’m not expecting the stars or the moon but if anything to bemoan that this feat lacked a vision. I heard Brody’s GG acceptance and was just hoping it was better than that.
I appreciate the thorough points you make here. The screenplay has a lot of strengths. I look forward to seeing the film this weekend.
I appreciate that! The screenplay definitely has some strong elements, and I’d love to hear your thoughts after you see it. I knew my take was contrarian, but I wasn’t quite prepared for how much it would spark such passionate (and sometimes heated) conversations. That said, it’s been great engaging with so many different perspectives—I think that’s when film discussions are at their best!
Right on. Art is subjective. I love hearing everyone's opinion. Especially well thought out ones. Keep being you.
This is a great review! I think I was a bit gentler in my own review - and I have to admit I enjoyed some parts of the film, mainly the cinematography and Guy Pearce - but your thoughts seem generally very aligned with mine. There is no doubt the film is overly self-indulgent which is the main problem in my opinion. Had Corbet stepped back, put his ego aside, really focused in on one big issue to thoroughly address with his story, I think this film would have read much differently. As is, you can really tell he cared very little about the story itself and was more concerned with making a grand epic, something to be seen and profound and intellectual. And I ultimately found that insufferable.
Thank you! I didn’t know or was prepared for the Pandora’s box I opened by writing this but I’m glad you see where I’m coming from. A good friend and fellow creative who LOVED this film asked me—after I calm down—to give it another chance. I might. Maybe in the summer. We’ll see.
You might appreciate this podcast which made me cackle because of how angry they were about the portrayal of architecture in the movie (I also learned a lot) https://open.spotify.com/episode/0DPNT9tDBDEQbfbDvjTCoc
Listening to the podcast now and I’m so thrilled they’re reiterating the elements I found so infuriating and learning a lot as well! I RARELY call a film terrible or rarely do they piss me off (last time I can remember was The Green Book) so I’m glad my vitriol is shared.
The anger is so funny right? But it was very illuminating and now I can pretend to talk about Bauhaus architecture like an expert lol
Ooh I’m going to listen right now!
In fairness, Armond White says that same thing about like five movies every year, and Jeffrey Wells sucks.
Fromtheyardtothearthouse.substack.com
This is very true. I have to admit it was hard to find dissent from the realm of the critics.
I wrote more extended thoughts on this last month, but I don't know if I can go as far as to say The Brutalist is terrible as there were plenty of moments that struck me greatly. However, I do think Corbet is out of his element charting a story that really isn't personal to him with perceptions of grandeur and importance that are all too forced.
That’s a fair take, and I appreciate that parts of the film resonated with you. I rarely call a film terrible, but as an immigrant, The Brutalist felt offensive in how detached and self-important it was in depicting an experience that should feel deeply personal. It’s not just that Corbet is telling a story that isn’t his—it’s that he does so with a forced sense of grandeur, making it feel more like an artistic statement than a lived reality.
That’s what makes the film so frustrating for me. There’s a version of this story that could have been genuinely affecting, but instead, it leans into self-importance rather than real insight. When a film positions itself as profound without truly engaging with the complexities of its subject, it starts to feel hollow.
It's certainly an empty experience and I don't disagree with you on it too much. But, as a 1st Gen American, I wouldn't say the film ever offended me but it definitely didn't connect on that level either.
Spot on review. Hated this movie for all the reasons you perfectly articulate