The Ghost in the Machinations: AI’s Role in The Brutalist and Its Impact on the 2025 Oscar Race
In the ever-evolving landscape of cinema, the intersection of technology and creativity often sparks both innovation and controversy. This dynamic is vividly illustrated in the recent uproar surrounding Brady Corbet’s film, The Brutalist. The film’s use of artificial intelligence (AI) has ignited a heated debate, reminiscent of the reactions to Peter Jackson’s 2021 Beatles documentary, Get Back. While Jackson’s use of AI to enhance audio was met with mild curiosity, the revelations about The Brutalist have provoked a far more intense response.
When Get Back premiered, Jackson’s application of AI to clean up previously unusable audio was a technical marvel that went largely unnoticed by the general public. Fast forward to 2025, and the landscape has shifted dramatically. The news that The Brutalist employed AI behind the scenes has sparked a firestorm on social media, with reactions ranging from outright disdain to moral outrage. The film’s editor, Dávid Jancsó, revealed in an interview with RedShark News that AI voice-cloning technology, Respeecher, was used to refine the Hungarian dialogue of actors Adrien Brody and Felicity Jones. This revelation, coupled with the use of generative AI for architectural drawings in the film’s epilogue, has fueled the controversy.
The AI Controversy: A Broader Context
To grasp the full scope of the controversy, it’s essential to understand the broader cultural shift regarding AI. Since Get Back, public sentiment towards AI has soured significantly. AI, once a niche interest, has become a contentious topic, with many viewing it as a threat to human creativity and employment. The term “AI” now encompasses a wide range of technologies, including machine learning and generative AI, which have flooded the internet with what critics derisively call “AI slop.”
Generative AI, in particular, has been criticized for its potential to spread misinformation and its environmental impact. The data centers powering these technologies consume vast amounts of water and electricity, raising concerns about their sustainability. In this climate, any association with AI can be damaging, especially for a film like The Brutalist, which positions itself as a celebration of human creativity.
Misunderstandings and Misinterpretations
The backlash against The Brutalist was exacerbated by misunderstandings and misinterpretations of Jancsó’s interview. Some critics mistakenly believed that all of Brody’s dialogue was AI-generated and that AI had created his character’s entire body of work. These misconceptions spread rapidly online, fueled by journalists concerned about AI’s impact on their industry. The resulting social media outrage was then used as fodder for further articles, creating a feedback loop of controversy.
Complicating matters, The Brutalist was not the only film to use Respeecher. Other contenders, such as Emilia Pérez and Maria, also employed the tool to enhance their actors’ performances. While Respeecher does utilize generative AI, its application in The Brutalist was limited to minor adjustments, with the actors’ consent. The Hungarian accent synthesized with their voices was Jancsó’s own, ensuring that the performances remained authentic.
The Architectural Drawings Debate
The controversy surrounding the architectural drawings in The Brutalist is more complex. An interview with production designer Judy Becker revealed that Midjourney, a generative AI tool, was used to create initial sketches of Brutalist buildings. However, Corbet clarified that these AI-generated images were not used in the final film. Instead, they served as inspiration for hand-drawn designs by human artists. This distinction highlights the nuanced role AI can play in the creative process, serving as a tool rather than a replacement for human artistry.
AI’s Role in the Film Industry
The use of AI in The Brutalist raises important questions about the role of technology in filmmaking. While AI can streamline certain aspects of production, it also challenges traditional notions of authorship and creativity. In this case, AI did not displace human artists but rather complemented their work. This approach is not unlike the use of mood boards or reference images, which filmmakers have long employed to convey their vision.
- AI was used to refine dialogue, not replace it.
- Generative AI provided inspiration for architectural designs, but human artists executed the final renderings.
- The film’s use of AI did not result in job losses for human artists.
The Oscar Race and Industry Implications
Despite the controversy, The Brutalist remains a strong contender in the 2025 Oscar race. Some speculate that the AI story was strategically leaked by a rival campaign, though A24, the film’s distributor, attributes the uproar to the chaotic nature of online news cycles. Historically, Oscar voters have been unfazed by social media backlash, as seen with past nominees like La La Land and Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri.
As the film industry grapples with the implications of AI, it faces a broader existential question: how to balance technological innovation with the preservation of human creativity. While some view AI as a threat, others see it as an opportunity to enhance the creative process. Ultimately, the industry’s response to AI will shape the future of filmmaking, influencing everything from production techniques to storytelling.
In conclusion, the controversy surrounding The Brutalist underscores the complex relationship between technology and art. As AI continues to evolve, it will undoubtedly play an increasingly prominent role in the film industry. Whether this is a boon or a bane remains to be seen, but one thing is certain: the conversation about AI and creativity is far from over.
Originally Written by: Nate Jones