How institutions, architecture, social groups and the government interact and
cater to human emotion is at the core of most entertainment, media, and sadly
politics. Some rare movies and TV shows are experts in bringing out the
substance and clarity deemed from emotions while others fall short or make it
worse with broad sweeping declarations that act like benchmarks that distort
reality. I’ve recently seen three great examples that contrast these 3 pillars
well.
Going in to see the Oscar-nominated film “The Brutalist”, I was really
hoping to have my mind changed about brutalist architecture, yet the opposite
occurred which in an ironic way would make this a great film but sadly this was
not the intent of the filmmakers. The extremely well directed film highlights
the gut-wrenching power of one of America’s greatest actors, Adrian Brodie.
Brodie conveys such subtle depth and insight, like Meryl Streep he makes every
scene he is in a true introspective experience. We all relate and learn from his
depiction of pain and anguish, yet the writer director Brady Corbet and
co-writer Mona Fastvold not only failed to resolve or even properly explore his
dilemma, they presented it in an erroneous presentation catering to beautiful
cinematography and minimalist expression lazily mirroring and championing a
dangerous societal precedence, brutalist architecture. Brutalist architecture is
a post WWII minimalist design structure that exposes construction elements in
favor of inexpensive assembly attempting to find beauty in simple stream like
lines and bold abstract idealism. Brody’s fictional main character László Tóth,
based on several real-life brutalist architects, finds beauty using light and
grandiose size, like 50 foot ceilings in small rooms making impractical purely
aesthetic spaces meant of reflection or spectacle. His greatest work, an
enormous community center uses light to shine a massive cross in a giant empty
chapel over concrete and a small marvelous marble altar. While the attempt at
minimalist beauty is admirable its steeped in rejectionist symbolism of
do-nothing defiance. During the last scene at an honorary event Toth’s niece
gives a speech praising her uncle’s work depicting how the rooms and tunnels
within his massive community center echoes triumphantly prison rooms and Nazi
death camps. The idea being that the soul and spirit of Jewish survivors like
Toth are defiant in the face of oppression and tyranny in the timeless work like
a memorial to the victims. At the end of her speech and the film she says his
work, which we mostly saw only in photos on walls during sweeping pan or over
the shoulder shots, is defiantly “about the destination not the journey” as, she
quips, authors tell us. This final statement, spoken just feet away from a mute
old Toth sitting in a wheelchair is perhaps the greatest argument against
brutalist architecture but again this was likely the opposite of Corbet’s
intention, yet it’s hard to say given the uninformative last half hour of the
film. There are so many unresolved issues regarding Toth including a climatic
traumatic event that his wife, adequately played by Felicity Jones, defends him
over despite the complete lack of any dialogue between him and the culprit on
what occurred. This neglect, like brutalist architecture, ignores human need and
comfort, failing to confront the issues at hand. Perhaps this was Cobert’s
intention, leave it up to the viewer to decide and assign how things should sit
and actualize reality but its this type of thinking that’s giving us the current
downfall of American democracy we are watching in real time now with President
Trump and his sadistic MAGA project 2025 movement. The United States of America
is incidentally burning from cheap wooden homes I digress, ignoring climate
change and our responsibility to human need. I don’t dislike the essence
minimalist beauty of post brutalist structures like that of Frank Loyd Wrights’
which find harmony with nature or contrasts within the New York rat race like
the spiraling Guggenheim art museum on the upper west side of Manhattan, but I
would prefer a welcoming statuesque building with beautiful angels, foliage or
sculptures of knights pointing to the modern art inside. Perhaps lounges
throughout it hosting cafes or comfy classrooms all elevating the human
experience as a cozy interactive welcoming art case with a purpose to solve
problems like isolation or disassociation which can lead subsequently to the
acceptance of disinformation. Why depersonalize art making embracing the
aesthetic of shapes as opposed to careful details that long for achievement and
the excellence of the human condition. An elegant plush comfortable couch is not
in itself inaccessible, but a massive rectangle of concrete is to everyone
always. In “The Brutalist”, Toth creates a Zen-like library with a unique beach
chair in an empty rotunda. No couches, no tables, no place for people to
convene, share, and admire books or even relax in splendorous velvet or lush and
plush comfort that most would want for a timeless experience. Instead, you have
a cold thought-provoking epitaph which stops time much like the disinformation
that coats dangerous political rhetoric. Trust Elon Musk with our records
because he’s looking for waste, blame immigrants for crime as we see them lining
up at the border, or blame our lack of spirituality on trans youth and abortion.
All just dog whistles without any intention of working together with people in a
common space to work out all the nuances of our issues and differences, as if a
gigantic concreate box is more inviting than an indoor stadium filled with
recliners. While on the topic of stadiums; ever notice how almost no seats at
ball parks allow the viewer to easily see the pitching at homeplate; they are
all upside-down giant C shaped cones although the opposite would help everyone
see what’s a strike or ball much clearer. Architecture like political movements
need to cater to specific needs and demands in order to be fruitful; creating an
inspirational stage to solve problems.
We need to take the time to care about each other in our spaces and hearts. What are the origins of our pains? While
“The Brutalist” fails to even attempt to resolve pain (although you can make the
case that Brody’s expressions in the end do, which is partly why I would
recommend the film for its acting and sheer artistry) the film “A Real Pain”
desperately tries to solve them but comes up short.
The film currently in theaters and on Hulu written directed and starring Jesse
Eisenberg alongside Kieran Culkin who play two cousins on a Jewish heritage tour
through Poland is a compellingly earnest look at what defines the human
character and how our interactions affect us. The scope and effort here,
together with ultra realistic heartfelt performances, especially from Culkin who
embodies his annoyingly emotionally needy character with a profound intensity
that truly pierces into your psyche becoming an emotional terrorist pinning away
at norms and introspection with grand aplomb. The seemingly unfinished script is
worth the price of admission and makes this film a must see despite its
adequate, albeit, pedestrian direction and weak cinematography, but we are left
in the end, like “The Brutalist, unresolved. I truly feel for all the characters
in the film. The tour group and the two main characters come together and
exchange extremely important takes on how to interpret and examine meaningful
interaction. It is an Oscar worthy portrayal of our reality as social creatures
dependent on each other to understand social constructs and it does lay
important groundwork for communal resolutions, but the main supporting actor is
left quite literally staring at the randomness of life’s mundane stage albeit at
a place of reflection and good intent. Much like gangster rap that’s missing one
line to be helpfully cathartic so to does this film leave us on the edge. Of
course this was Eisenberg’s intent, like the majority of his work as an actor,
he loves to react humbly leaving actions to our superfluous emotions to work out
much. There is a great charm in this. His vulnerability is admirable and his
honesty likeable and we do see his characters resolve issues but more so for
comedic affect and existentialist drama. I think therefore I am but that’s not
how I can change. One can see and appreciate the extreme realism here but damn
it man, give me one line telling me he will be ok. Tell me one thing I need to
know to change and grow or reach a place where I can feel something divine, not
just an extra long hug, symbolizing loss or a view of Poland that looks like
Paterson New Jersey looking west.
Give me great minds that find solutions, even if they veer from the harsh
reality of empty incompetence or dreaded inaction. Give me a show like the Apple
TV series, “Shrinking” about therapists working out issues using our most sacred
power; human potential. The writer creators Brett Goldstein and Neil Goldman
together with “Ted Lasso” executive producer Bill Lawrence are all about
resolution and comfort, whatever the space or depth of need. They take
everything they can get and blend it into something tangible that moves us all
into an acceptance and deep understanding of our humanity. This is how to be,
how to think and how to feel and we are getting this from flawed characters we
all love because we are all flawed characters that we should all love.
Shrinking into the abyss of mental health, Jason Segal presents a mythical wizard like
chosen child portraying his lines with refreshing clarity and Harrison Ford
astounds, after dozens of years as a technical actor he is finally finding his
method in a performance that redefines the iconic cowboy, or the triumphant
warrior king into a relatable mountain of steer actualization. This is perhaps
Ford’s greatest acting ever. Where was this unwavering approachable reflection
on that bridge with Kylo Ren? We all need method acting to transform emotion
into something we can tangibly relate but while he fails to do this in Star Wars
he redefines it in Shrinking, a show that should be shown to kids in school to
teach them how to be human and how to deal with our shortcomings.
This comedy is one of the greatest written masterpieces of human thought and progression, a
celebration of divinity in all its subsequent travails. Quite the opposite of a
country enraptured into a new administration, squandering for whatever humility
can be drawn, the news ignoring Trump’s pronouncements and blatant grift because
it’s a show we are all unwittingly playing parts in. Pundits and reporters may
hint at the smoke screen distractions, but the headlines aren’t flashing the
disinformation. The facts are subdued by the disinformation so much that we are
caught off guard and in awe of the spectacle.
Trump fears Wall Street and trailer parks taking up pitch forks and tanking his ratings that would cut off
his republican support but where is the common ground, where is the resolution
of his failings? Why are they all ignoring the largest stumbling blocks and
injuries, like the tens of thousands or God knows how many people that will die
because almost all USAID has been cut or what occurred on July 1st 2024 when the
Supreme Court through its immunity ruling made the office and their own court
illegitimate. Why is congress and the people not demanding a vote to reverse
these simple acts that harm?
Everyone knows absolute power corrupts, well its time for news and entertainment to start “Jimmying”, like Jason Segel’s
character in “Shrinking”, Jimmy Laird, going inordinately out of his way to help
his clients while barely holding on but with a determination to solve the
underlying problem of rhetoric versus reality and better still how our thoughts
can manifest resolution. Congress like the therapists on “Shrinking” needs to go
back to the origin of our problems like the immunity of the President’s actions
or the eroding of our constitution and democratic process. Let us not just
describe the pain or simply march like monuments of defiance that do not even
resonate with small minded ignorance. Let us embrace and solve our needs not
merely flaunt our wants and aspirations keeping them unattainably abstract.
