Ah yeah, or the stock accent used for films set in the past. Sigh.
Film The Redcafe Movie review thread
- Thread starter golden_blunder
- Start date
So, saw The Brutalist on Friday.
For a film that had a lot about that I really liked, and came frustratingly close to exploring some genuinely interesting themes, I was left with an unpleasant aftertaste that only worsens over time.
I don't want to spoil anything, but I struggle to interpret the epilogue, which felt tacked on and contrived, in any way so as to not view this postscript as anything other than a particularly ill timed and, ironically, brutal and clumsy advocation of the ends justifying the means applied to Zionism delivered, literally, straight to camera. This is especially strange, as the body of the film was far more nuanced in this respect.
For a film that had a lot about that I really liked, and came frustratingly close to exploring some genuinely interesting themes, I was left with an unpleasant aftertaste that only worsens over time.
I don't want to spoil anything, but I struggle to interpret the epilogue, which felt tacked on and contrived, in any way so as to not view this postscript as anything other than a particularly ill timed and, ironically, brutal and clumsy advocation of the ends justifying the means applied to Zionism delivered, literally, straight to camera. This is especially strange, as the body of the film was far more nuanced in this respect.
Yeah you are probably right. Althought out of Anora and The Substance I'd probably vote the later.
This is the first time in many years that I haven't seen all the nominees by this point. Most of them look like homework.
While I certainly agree that 2024 wasn't a great year for film, The Brutalist absolutely is the second most likely nominee to win. The globe win togther will the fact that both Corbet and Brody have won their categories at the Baftas makes it a a decent contender for BP. But with Anora winning the PGA and DGA it seems like the major favorite. Nickel Boys winning would be the biggest surprise ever.
Moonlight says hello!
I can't speak to the quality of a lot of these cuz I haven't seen them. I don't want Brutalist to win because it then gives license to every director to make bloated movies.
I finally watched The Green Knight. Gorgeously weird film and Patel is excellent.
I don’t want brutalist to win because…adrian brody
Moonlight was nominated for 8 Oscars including director and multiple acting. Even though it was an upset, it's not like Nickel Boys winning with one other nomination. The closest would be CODA a few years back, winning with just three nominations overall (taking all of them).
Last edited:
How so? I can't stand him.
I can’t stand him either.
Soul brother!
I did like him in The Darjeeling Limited, but not much else. His season-long guest appearance on Peaky Blinders was execrable.
I read the ending as anti Zionist. “No matter what the others try and sell you, it is the destination, not the journey.” are not Laszlo words but that of Zsófia.
It’s another moment where Laszlo art is taken away from him and used by someone else for other means.
Also the ending song One for You, One for Me by La Bionda could only be referring to the current American and Israel relationship.
It’s another moment where Laszlo art is taken away from him and used by someone else for other means.
Also the ending song One for You, One for Me by La Bionda could only be referring to the current American and Israel relationship.
Last edited:
Pete Bradshaw thinks it should win. I haven’t seen it yet but the book is great. And it ticks a lot of boxes for an Oscar winner.
I've been trying to find time to properly respond to you the past week!
I should probably read more about the film, listen to a couple of podcasts maybe, but I haven't really felt the urge. It's weird, cos I actually enjoyed the film for the most part (I didn't think it was a masterpiece or anything, it's quite close but it's lacking something that brings it all together in a more grandiose manner. It didn't provoke the same desire to talk about it, to think about it much more, like Queer did for example, and 10 days after seeing it, there are some scenes playing in the back of my mind, but it hasn't made a massively marking impression.
I think I'm quite content leaving it at that, in terms of my impressions, and rewatching it in a few years and seeing how I feel about it then. There are some truly excellent scenes along the way which will make a rewatch enjoyable, away from all the Oscar buzz and hype, but let's see.
With regards to the Zionism, it's obviously problematic in the current context but I saw it more as a manifestation of this "broken dreams" theme running throughout the film. Maybe too naive of me, religion as part of their identity is in fact part of the plot, but I guess I saw it more as having being broken by life, and even after having initially refused to go there, they see it as their only recourse. I'd like to know if there was clear political messaging by Corbet (one way or another, I saw you and @Fingeredmouse had different interpretations of it, but I read it more as just (once again naively, probably) the conclusion of the life story of these people that were trying to start anew in the US, buying into its lies and false promises, and ultimately realise it's not meant to be. It's probably too easy of me to just "ignore" the fact it's Israel they're going to, but I think in the context of that era, it's less loaded.
I think I'm quite content leaving it at that, in terms of my impressions, and rewatching it in a few years and seeing how I feel about it then. There are some truly excellent scenes along the way which will make a rewatch enjoyable, away from all the Oscar buzz and hype, but let's see.
With regards to the Zionism, it's obviously problematic in the current context but I saw it more as a manifestation of this "broken dreams" theme running throughout the film. Maybe too naive of me, religion as part of their identity is in fact part of the plot, but I guess I saw it more as having being broken by life, and even after having initially refused to go there, they see it as their only recourse. I'd like to know if there was clear political messaging by Corbet (one way or another, I saw you and @Fingeredmouse had different interpretations of it, but I read it more as just (once again naively, probably) the conclusion of the life story of these people that were trying to start anew in the US, buying into its lies and false promises, and ultimately realise it's not meant to be. It's probably too easy of me to just "ignore" the fact it's Israel they're going to, but I think in the context of that era, it's less loaded.
The first half of Anora was pretty pants. Switched it off due to indifference but should probably finish it at some point. Very underwhelming, though.
I'm not saying it shouldn't win (haven't seen it, might be the best of the bunch). I'm saying that historically it's incredibly unlikely that a film that only has one other nomination wins Best Picture. Also, there's something off with a movie winning Best Picture which has only been deemed to be among the five best in one out of 15 additional categories.
I get what you're saying, and I've been trying to interpret the movie in that way, as for much of the movie I very much saw it that way.
I think the issue is that, Laszlo eventually ending up in Israel because he was exploited and rejected and abused elsewhere else, coupled with the very direct delivery of Zsófia in the epilogue,which I can only interpret as "the ends justify the means" makes me struggle to see that the directorial voice isn't stating that the reality is that Laszlo was wrong to resist for so long but got there in the end.
The film seems to be saying that there is no place for him or the Jews anywhere else in the World other than Israel, and that's just reality. I've been trying to reconcile that with the epilogue being seen as further exploitation of Laszlo, but I can't help but feel that the narrative flow at the end of the film and the epilogue undermine that interpretation.
I think the issue is that, Laszlo eventually ending up in Israel because he was exploited and rejected and abused elsewhere else, coupled with the very direct delivery of Zsófia in the epilogue,which I can only interpret as "the ends justify the means" makes me struggle to see that the directorial voice isn't stating that the reality is that Laszlo was wrong to resist for so long but got there in the end.
The film seems to be saying that there is no place for him or the Jews anywhere else in the World other than Israel, and that's just reality. I've been trying to reconcile that with the epilogue being seen as further exploitation of Laszlo, but I can't help but feel that the narrative flow at the end of the film and the epilogue undermine that interpretation.
Last edited:
Your interpretation of it does make sense in the context of the film, though I'd rather it didn't. Is there any background of Corbet talking about zionism, or his views on it?
oh yeah for sure. I would have a hard time committing to an entire season of his acting. have you seen succession? he’s good in it and he’s only there for one episode. which is perfect. he’s fine in darjeeling limited but then it’s a wes anderson film and his casting is very….him. I remember liking owen wilson in that movie.
what a time. I remember reading somewhere he got banned from snl after this?
In my head, society only really allowed openly wildly inappropriate stuff in the 1980s, 1990s at a push.
Last night I sat down to watch Always Sunny in Philadelphia with my 13 year old daughter. The first episode was in 2005. And ooh boy…
Last edited:
Also how can anyone hate Adrien Brody! He's somewhat miscast in PB, sure, but he's a wonderful actor.
Possibly real life shenanigans make me feel less inclined to be charitable to his acting stylings. Cf: Polanski, Roman; Weinstein, Harvey (wife of).
oh boy. that must've been..something. I actually don't mind that show at all tbh.
Wait what? Say more
Sent you a dm.
I really liked him in that. Right up there with Tom Hardy in the show's top villains for me
Don't get excited guys, he just sent me a dick pic
No worries.
I would recommend this podcast as they talk about that lacking something feeling and how The Brutalist fits into current film culture
I think you’re right that is what Corbet is doing as he has mentioned his interest in post WW2 psychological but the context of the era is only really used when it comes to Zionism. Which imo reflex poorly on the film.
From interviews Corbet does the both sides schtick of saying it’s important everyone has a voice. Overall he is very scatterbrained with one minute talking about how we struggle to imagine a world outside of capitalism and then how great it would be if his film made loads of money.
From interviews Corbet does the both sides schtick of saying it’s important everyone has a voice. Overall he is very scatterbrained with one minute talking about how we struggle to imagine a world outside of capitalism and then how great it would be if his film made loads of money.
Yeah I would say you’re probably right and that’s potentially the film designed message.
My only counter argument is if the film wanted to put forward the ends justify the means then why have Zsófia say the speech rather than Laszlo ? Which at least leaves the possibility that just like in America Laszlo is still being exploited in the “homeland”.
The ending imo isn’t played as something positive and people left my screening pretty confused. As if to say there’s no escape from this exploitation and especially with the needle drop which felt very Kubrick.
The epilogue does feel likes it’s from a different film. A very strange ending.
My only counter argument is if the film wanted to put forward the ends justify the means then why have Zsófia say the speech rather than Laszlo ? Which at least leaves the possibility that just like in America Laszlo is still being exploited in the “homeland”.
The ending imo isn’t played as something positive and people left my screening pretty confused. As if to say there’s no escape from this exploitation and especially with the needle drop which felt very Kubrick.
The epilogue does feel likes it’s from a different film. A very strange ending.
Oh I didn’t know he got banned. They must still hate him as SNL recently did a recap of their past racist sketches and most of the people shown had blurred out faces except for Brody.
Yeah. The ending spoiled it for me and changed what had previously seemed like nuance to something that felt confused.
Takes it from a 6/7 from 10 down to a 3/4.
In short, the ending is fecking terrible, at best, clumsy (and I'm pretty sure it's worse than that but it's so strangely incongruous against the rest of the film that the intent isn't clear) and I genuinely feel ruins the film.
Oddly,I'm not seeing reviews pick up on any of this and the Guardian's weird "this fictional character isn't identical to this real person and it's not a pure representation of architectural ideologies" waffle is even more bizarre in that context.
Takes it from a 6/7 from 10 down to a 3/4.
In short, the ending is fecking terrible, at best, clumsy (and I'm pretty sure it's worse than that but it's so strangely incongruous against the rest of the film that the intent isn't clear) and I genuinely feel ruins the film.
Oddly,I'm not seeing reviews pick up on any of this and the Guardian's weird "this fictional character isn't identical to this real person and it's not a pure representation of architectural ideologies" waffle is even more bizarre in that context.
Last edited:
This review sums up the ending imo -
It’s an interesting debate which is at least something.
It’s an interesting debate which is at least something.
This year especially I felt like a lot mainstream reviews has been pretty poor on all the Oscar nominated films.
A real lack of questioning what these films are saying and far too much overhyping what are mostly ok movies.
Arcadian (2024), part of the ongoing @Dirty Schwein 's Film School Master Class on Nicolas Cage.
To start, the poster art is fecking dumb. I don't know what movie this poster is hinting at, but it's not the one you get to watch. The movie is much better than this terrible poster would have you think. It looks like it's some kinda werewolf action flick with Nic brandishing a Louisville Slugger to whoop some monster ass.*
It's not.
Horror films kinda need their own grading system, as many are super low budget labors of love. This one is low budget, but the monsters look great. I have never seen monsters do what these creatures do (no spoilers), but it's actually pretty amazing. Overall it's a captivating monster movie that achieves and surpasses expectations.
Nic Cage is, as Dirty Schwein would tell you, hard to pin down because his genius just can't be measured by normal instruments. He is very understated in this one. No Mandy / Wicker Man stuff. He's the father of two teenaged boys in some kind of post-apocalypse. Unspecified monsters coming from an unspecified place and doing an unspecified series of things, resulted in there being pockets of humans left alive. This is one of those be home before dark when the monsters come out stories. There's the local girl tempting the older boy out... you get the picture.
Unlike oh so many films, this one actually ended a little too soon. I feel they could have used one more story beat, like another 15 minutes. The only fly in the ointment is when they show Nicolas Cage in flashback to where he's holding two babies, and he looks exactly like the Nicolas Cage we see in the rest of the film (ie., no effort made to age him up or make him look younger). So when he first does it, I'm thinking, where'd he get a pair of babies in all this madness?
The boys are around 17, I guess, when the story starts, and maybe they are twins (who look nothing alike), or maybe Nic stole two babies a long time ago? No one uses cash, so he could have bartered for them with the sheep farmers (ranchers?) down the road with a hot daughter. Story is not super important here. Kids are in jeopardy, monsters aren't fecking around this time, and it's going to take all 3 of these dudes (Nic & sons) plus an assist from the hot daughter, to win the day.
*some monsters do in fact get their asses whooped.
8/10
To start, the poster art is fecking dumb. I don't know what movie this poster is hinting at, but it's not the one you get to watch. The movie is much better than this terrible poster would have you think. It looks like it's some kinda werewolf action flick with Nic brandishing a Louisville Slugger to whoop some monster ass.*
It's not.
Horror films kinda need their own grading system, as many are super low budget labors of love. This one is low budget, but the monsters look great. I have never seen monsters do what these creatures do (no spoilers), but it's actually pretty amazing. Overall it's a captivating monster movie that achieves and surpasses expectations.
Nic Cage is, as Dirty Schwein would tell you, hard to pin down because his genius just can't be measured by normal instruments. He is very understated in this one. No Mandy / Wicker Man stuff. He's the father of two teenaged boys in some kind of post-apocalypse. Unspecified monsters coming from an unspecified place and doing an unspecified series of things, resulted in there being pockets of humans left alive. This is one of those be home before dark when the monsters come out stories. There's the local girl tempting the older boy out... you get the picture.
Unlike oh so many films, this one actually ended a little too soon. I feel they could have used one more story beat, like another 15 minutes. The only fly in the ointment is when they show Nicolas Cage in flashback to where he's holding two babies, and he looks exactly like the Nicolas Cage we see in the rest of the film (ie., no effort made to age him up or make him look younger). So when he first does it, I'm thinking, where'd he get a pair of babies in all this madness?
The boys are around 17, I guess, when the story starts, and maybe they are twins (who look nothing alike), or maybe Nic stole two babies a long time ago? No one uses cash, so he could have bartered for them with the sheep farmers (ranchers?) down the road with a hot daughter. Story is not super important here. Kids are in jeopardy, monsters aren't fecking around this time, and it's going to take all 3 of these dudes (Nic & sons) plus an assist from the hot daughter, to win the day.
*some monsters do in fact get their asses whooped.
8/10
Last edited:
Heretic
I thought this was excellent, maybe Grants best film.
Excellent start and middle, the ending was a tad disappointing
7/10
I thought this was excellent, maybe Grants best film.
Excellent start and middle, the ending was a tad disappointing
7/10
The Ceremony Is About to Begin
Madness, mayhem, and mummification rites ensue when a documentary filmmaker visits the rural commune of an ancient Egyptian inspired cult to interview its enigmatic leader.WTF have I just watched ! it has 3 reviews on imdb 1/10 a 7/10 and 10/10, the 1/10 was being generous, the other 2 must be from crew members or family, it is laterally on of the worst films I have even seen.
An hour of yapping to only be given 10 minutes of the absolute worse horror I have seen in years.
There is nothing good about it.
0/10
Sounds like a revamp of the Last Exorcism. In that one, a documentary crew goes to visit a cult whose leader performs exorcisms and wants to come clean that they were all faked. Except this time it’s not. Same, yapping with 10 minutes of stupid action at the end.