The Brutalist AI Controversy Explained

Like Rome, no architectural marvel has ever been built in a day… but it only took hours for an AI controversy currently engulfing social media to jeopardize one of the world’s greatest Oscar favorites of the year. “The Brutalist” is undoubtedly one of the best films of 2024, as Chris Evangelista of /Film commented for us. Directed by Brady Corbet from a screenplay by himself and Mona Fastvold, the 215-minute epic (don’t worry, there’s a brief intermission built into the film) tells the story of the Jewish architect fictional László Tóth as he subsequently emigrates from Hungary. of the Holocaust in the United States. Desperately separated from his wife Erzsébet (Felicity Jones) and left almost entirely alone in a strange and hostile land, he embarks on a grueling odyssey to earn his living as one of the most brilliant architects of his time… he can. just find someone (Guy Pearce’s opportunistic boss, Harrison Lee Van Buren, Sr.) who recognizes his talents and plucks him from obscurity.

“The Brutalist” is nothing short of an imposing and essential work that speaks directly to the events of today – but all that does is make this AI-related development even more disappointing.

Unless you’ve been living under a rock for the past few years, Hollywood’s AI arms race hasn’t taken anyone by surprise, and “The Brutalist” has become the latest title to fall short of its target. Those of us who are vehemently opposed to sophisticated technology remain so because of its exploitation of artists and creatives, concerns about widespread plagiarism, its impact on the environment, and much more. In this case, various users on social networks drew attention to the studio’s official press notes and an interview revealing that the 2024 film used generative AI for a few specific purposes: depicting architectural plans and drawings at a key moment in the final act, and more broadly to improve the work with Brody’s Hungarian accent. . Here’s why the revelation caused excitement among many moviegoers.

Who doesn’t love good old Oscar drama? Well, for my part, fans of “The Brutalist” probably could have done without this recent bombshell – especially since the entire film is about the painstaking, back-breaking and completely all-consuming effort it takes for artists to create a legacy of their own. The idea that those behind This the story in particular took such blatant creative shortcuts is almost too ironic for words.

However, these reports raise some question marks that deserve further investigation. It’s all about knowing where exactly this information comes from. Early posts on RedShark News. Considering that the current copy of this article contains several robotic-sounding and nonsensical sentences (such as a sentence referring to “The Brutalist” as, and I quote, “one of the films of the year”), this did not It didn’t take long for many users to suspect that the article itself was “written” with the use of AI. However, the outlet goes on to claim to have interviewed “The Brutalist” editor-in-chief Dávid Jancsó about the decision to use AI on the overall production, which involved the program known as Respeecher in order to to “improve” Brody’s pronunciation of the notoriously difficult Hungarian language. and accent.

It should also be emphasized that, as noted by The Ringer writer and podcaster Joanna Robinsonthe timing of this information certainly seems curious. Awards campaigns often have a lot to do with financial resources and political politics, as opposed to the actual quality of a given film. As mentioned in Robinson’s post, disgraced industry mogul Harvey Weinstein was infamous for swaying Oscar season in favor of his own films at Miramax (via BBC). With the Academy Awards set to take place in March 2025 and “The Brutalist” seen as leading the pack in several important categories (namely Best Picture and Best Actor), it’s worth wondering which studios would benefit the most of a last minute film. controversy could hurt a favorite’s chances.

If there’s a main “bad guy” in “The Brutalist,” it comes in the form of Guy Pearce’s infinitely wealthy Harrison Lee Van Buren, Sr., a man who complaints being a patron of the arts even if he possesses very few creative instincts. When he hires László Tóth to design and build a gaudy community center that will serve as a monument to his legacy, his promises of financial support quickly turn into outright manipulation and abuse. Again, if the metaphor at the heart of this AI controversy wasn’t already obvious enough, the movie gods have certainly found the most direct way possible to drive home the point.

The biggest concern about “The Brutalist” and its use of AI is how it influences — and downright changes — Adrien Brody’s performance. The source article alleges that Brody and director Brady Corbet were “fully on board” with using Respeecher to polish his voice work, meaning the all-important question of artist consent was entirely resolved by the creative team (as highlighted in provisions taken from the SAG-AFTRA strike) from a legal perspective. That said, this in no way affects the ethics of using machine learning algorithms to modify something as fundamental to filmmaking as dialogue and speech. If Brody were to win Best Actor (an honor he’s already won among various critic groups, mind you), then we’ll have to wonder how much of his performance was artificially inflated… much like the athletes who use performance-enhancing drugs to improve their performance. enter the record books. Or does the use of AI amount to something much more familiar, like the prosthetics and makeup used to enhance Sebastian Stan’s work in “A Different Man,” as a recent example?

While this specific example of AI hasn’t replaced the work of any actual artist, one has to wonder if the profession of accent coach and similar positions might end up being abandoned in favor of a quick and good solution walk. Corbet, for his part, attempted to allay these concerns in his statement on the situation (via Deadline):

“Adrien and Felicity’s performances are completely their own. They worked for months with dialect coach Tanera Marshall to perfect their accents. Innovative Respeecher technology was used solely in editing the Hungarian language dialogues , specifically to refine certain vowels and letters for accuracy No modified English language was used. This was a manual process, done by our sound team and Respecer in post-production. goal was to preserve the authenticity of Adrien and Felicity’s performances in another language, not to replace or alter them and carried out with the greatest respect for the profession.

As for other uses of generative AI in the film, Corbet said:

“Judy Becker and her team did not use AI to create or render any of the buildings. All images were hand-drawn by artists. To clarify, in the commemorative video featured in the background of a shooting, our editorial team created images intentionally designed to look like bad digital renderings from the 1980s.

What adds even more chaos to the mix is ​​the fact that, incredibly enough, “The Brutalist” isn’t the only film at the heart of the Oscar race to make use of AI. Users on social networks (as critic Isaac Feldberg) were quick to point out that rival awards darling “Emilia Pérez” was also using AI tools like Respeecher in order to enhance star Karla Sofia Gascón’s vocal performances and allow her to sing various songs. outside of his vocal range. If someone wants to point the finger at a major film for its controversial reliance on AI, then it’s only fair to apply these same standards across the board. (For all it’s worth and in the interest of full disclosure, I rated “Emilia Pérez” for /Film rather negatively here.)

Of course, we’ve seen more and more films in recent years integrating AI into production. Similar controversies have plagued various titles such as the HBO series “True Detective: Night Country” and especially the horror film “Late Night with the Devil”. But more and more big-name directors, from David Fincher to James Cameron, are admitting to using the technology to some extent in their own films. For better or worse, AI has already spread across the industry and all signs point to this genie staying out of the bottle.

Does this suggest that we should sweep this “brutalist” discourse under the rug? It is, as always, in the eye of the beholder. Supporters of the project say it is not a big enough case or enough of a violation of artists’ rights to merit as much controversy as it already has. The dissidents, for their part, appear to have enough evidence to indicate that this is another step down a slippery slope that could have greater ramifications down the road. Either way, the noise surrounding AI won’t die down anytime soon.

“The Brutalist” is currently playing in theaters.