Tag Archives: Holocaust

Cinema Review: The Brutalist (2024) – There will be Concrete!

CINEMA REVIEW: THE BRUTALIST (2024)

Directed by Brady Corbet

Written by: Brady Corbet & Mona Fastvold

Produced by Trevor Matthews, Nick Gordon, Brian Young, Andrew Morrison, Andrew Lauren, D.J. Gugenheim and Brady Corbet
.

Cast: Adrien Brody, Felicity Jones, Guy Pearce, Joe Alwyn, Raffey Cassidy, Stacy Martin, Emma Laird, Isaach de Bankolé and Alessandro Nivola.

Cinematography Lol Crawley

Edited by Dávid Jancsó

*** MAY CONTAIN SPOILERS ***



A new wave of American filmmakers—directors like Todd Field, Robert Eggers, and Brady Corbet—have emerged as some of the most technically proficient and ambitious voices in contemporary cinema. Their work is marked by rigorous formal control, deep thematic ambition, and an almost obsessive dedication to craft. These filmmakers, arguably influenced by auteurs like Sofia Coppola and Paul Thomas Anderson, demonstrate an understanding of film language that is both deeply referential and boldly experimental. Whether it’s Eggers’ meticulous historical recreations, Field’s austere and cerebral storytelling, or Corbet’s overtly intellectualized narratives, they all exhibit an undeniable mastery of their medium. Their films, often dense with literary and philosophical allusions, cater to cinephiles who relish formal precision and narrative audacity.

Yet, for all their brilliance, there’s an argument to be made that their work veers into self-indulgence, if not outright pretension. Their films sometimes feel like exercises in artistic superiority, catering to an audience that appreciates the challenge but perhaps not the emotional accessibility that cinema can offer at its best. Whether it’s the cold remove of TÁR (2022), the self-serious mythologizing of The Lighthouse (2019), or the arch, affect-laden approach of Vox Lux (2018), these works often feel encased in a layer of knowing detachment. There’s a fine line between intellectual rigor and a kind of smug, insular artistry, and some critics argue that these filmmakers, however talented, sometimes tip too far in the latter direction—prioritizing aesthetic and conceptual ambition over genuine human connection. I mean, I love a lot of these filmmakers’ work, but I was raised on the American films of Coppola, Scorsese, DePalma, Spielberg, Lucas and Friedkin; auteurs who knew their art, but also how to entertain the audience too.



In Corbet’s, and film partner’s Mona Fastvold’s, phenomenally designed and constructed film, The Brutalist (2024), Adrien Brody portrays fictional László Tóth, a Hungarian-Jewish architect and Holocaust survivor. Brody’s is an incredibly memorable piece of work, acting as a spiritual performance sequel to his Oscar-winning role in The Pianist (2002). But rather than focus on an individual attempting to escape the Nazis during the war, the narrative concentrates on Tóth, who arrives in post-war America with nothing but his talent and ambition, only to find himself trapped in a system that celebrates his work while rejecting him as a person. In America, racism is delivered with a smile, and generosity is a means of control. High society rewards Tóth but also suffocates him with subtle condescension, as he is paraded around as an artistic trophy but never fully embraced as an equal.

As an epic character study of the life of an immigrant and exploitation of the financially stricken Jew in America, The Brutalist (2024), is a powerful work. Such themes compel us to think of today and the fact that America continues to struggle with the integration of people travelling there, even though it was built with the hands of migrant families. Here the screenplay exerts true power in critiquing the United States’ treatment of those travelling to America with hope. As the narrative unfolds across the decades, Corbet, Fastfold and Brody illustrate the slow erosion of Laslo’s dreams in an America that welcomes his work but not his humanity. As the key antagonist, Harrison Lee Van Buren, Guy Pearce delivers another chilling and precise character study. Van Buren is a spoilt, rich and brattish man whose charm and refinement mask a deeply exploitative nature.

Photographically, The Brutalist (2024) is indeed a work of art. Lol Crawley and the production team immerse viewers in a stark, architectural visual language—monolithic structures, rigid compositions, and a muted, desaturated color palette mirroring the emotional and physical isolation Tóth experiences. Yet, for for all its incredible craftsmanship and bold cinematic ambition, the film is a test of endurance—an unrelenting, patience-draining experience that stretches well beyond three hours. Even the inclusion of chapters, and a self-consciously “prestigious” intermission only serve to amplify the film’s pretensions, prolonging the agony of watching layer upon layer of misery unfold like a slow-moving roller-coaster that induces motion sickness with no escape. It’s a brilliant film that demands submission rather than engagement, wielding its bleakness like a weapon against the audience’s stamina. It will probably win the Academy Award for Best Film. That or Wicked (2024).

Mark: 8 out of 11


CINEMA REVIEW: THE ZONE OF INTEREST (2023)

CINEMA REVIEW: THE ZONE OF INTEREST (2023)

Directed by Jonathan Glazer

Written by Jonathan Glazer – based on The Zone of Interest by Martin Amis

Produced by James Wilson, Ewa Puszczyńska

Main cast: Christian Friedel, Sandra Hüller, Imogen Kogge, etc.

Cinematography by Łukasz Żal

Sound Designer: Johnnie Burns

Music by Mica Levi



Jonathan Glazer is not the most prolific of directors, so when he releases a film it provides powerful cinematic coffee to wake up the cultural senses. His last film, the mesmeric Under The Skin (2013), is one of the most original of the century for me and once again with, The Zone of Interest (2023), Glazer has determined to take a provocative approach to cinematic form, style and themes.

I usually advise near the top of my reviews that the piece may contain spoilers. However, there is so little plot in The Zone of Interest (2023), that is difficult to give anything away. The depth of the story comes from the intellectual approach to cinematic form and the wartime setting, with a narrative based on Martin Amis’ novel about the Holocaust and specifically, the concentration camp, Auschwitz. But Glazer only hints at such Nazi barbarism as the point of view of the film is presented solely from the commandant Rudolf Hoss’ (Christian Friedel) and his family’s perspective. Glazer and his outstanding production team deny us sight of the death and torture from within the Hoss house and garden.



Glazer and his sound designer, Johnnie Burns, employ powerful aural style to incredible effect as screams, tools smashing, gun shots and shouting pierce the screen throughout. Mica Levi’s minimalist score also punches through to startle too. Further, as the Hoss family, notably his spoilt children and privileged wife (Sandra Huller) go about their everyday business puffs of smoke billow over their garden as they remain unimpacted by what is occurring outside. Glazer also uses negative film processing, gliding tracking shots and metronomic editing from multi-camera set-ups to stylistic devices to break the fourth wall and to reinforce the everyday routine where all is not what it seems.

One may argue Glazer’s film is experimental and anti-narrative. I rarely cared about the Hoss family and not enough of the Auschwitz inmates is seen to raise one’s emotions. Thus, The Zone of Interest (2023) is a cold and intellectual film to absorb. Yet, I would argue that it is not experimental because Glazer is so in control of the filmmaking process. His creative choices and results are delivered in an extremely confident way. Certainly I felt that the film was more anti-drama than anti-narrative or experimental. For those looking for a more conventional addition to the war film genre could be disappointed.

Ultimately, The Zone of Interest (2023) is a horror film with the barbarism hidden. As the murder and genocide are occurring, the Hoss family unit remain unmoved by such atrocities. From a safe distance the audience watch them attend parties, tend their vegetables, feed their children, eat their dinner, play games and sunbathe. Is Glazer asking if we as humanity are complicit in our privileged comfortable homes while horrors go on around us in the world? Is this Nazi version of the Garden of Eden a metaphor for the world as a whole now? Does a lack of action or inaction to known crimes make one complicit? There are no easy answers, but it gets you thinking. Just like this highly intellectual and expertly constructed work of cinema.

Mark: 9 out of 11