The amount of misinformation about Respeecher is insane to me. Y’all realize this is essentially just the application of auto-tune for language sounds, and they tweaked some tricky vowels? It’s used in one seen so the scene was also poignant for Hungarian viewers-who would be impacted by the imperfectly pronounced vowels. The editor was going to do this anyways he said, but Respeecher made it faster, and he fed his own Hungarian dialect into the software. No voices were replaced, a few vowels were tuned. The draft creation using AI was in consult with an architect, and common in modern architectural workflows. No one lost a job, these are tools used carefully and sparingly on a very small-budget film (9.6 million is considered very very tiny). Please note, Emilia Perez is full of both Respeecher and auto-tune and Wicked is auto-tuned (you can even hear the click of the automative pitch correction not being smoothed over by the sound mixer in Popular)….
well it didn't work that well if so- before the AI discussion came out Hungarian speakers talked about how odd they both sounded. I'd personally prefer a slightly flawed attempt over a digital recreation that spews carbon into the atmosphere
My hunch is that that the AI controversy is manufactured oscar politics. That discussion needs to happen but the target is way of if you are slandering The Brutalist
The misinfo has really gotten out of hand. It’s clearly an Oscar campaign smear that people are actually falling for thinking they’re on the right side.
Okay seriously y'all are overreacting about this whole AI thing, they used a TINY bit of it, and yet people like you are acting like they used it for the entire film.
i have "war & peace" and "in the realm of the senses" on dvd (that need to be upgraded to blu-ray). the only film they mentioned i haven't seen is "vengeance is mine".
I swear people are seriously overreacting about the whole AI thing, like they used a TINY bit, yet people are acting like they used it for the entire film, people need to chill out.
i don't care about the use of AI, as im sure many don't, but i do care about the very much needed transparency with the viewer when it comes to this particular topic. if you use it, be honest about it. ai or not, the film itself is objectively visually stunning. the real problem with the brutalist is not the ai usage, it's the way it handled the plot. in regards to its substance the brutalist was more of an exorcism of a certain traumatic experience that the author himself (herself?? both of them??) went through, not a story about the horrors of the immigrant experience. throughout the film the immigrant "experience" was somehow kept on the outskirts of the main narrative, mentioned many times, but never explored. it's very clear to me that the topic of "immigrant experience" wasn't central to the plot, unlike the topics of sexual abuse and violence. when it comes to relationships - the relationship between the Artist and his Sponsor is also very clearly takes the leading role. you don't even have to look too close, the real theme of the movie is right there, you just have to see past the decorations. felt like i was watching something very personal, something that isn't really meant for the public eye, and it startled me. you don't thrust your viewer into such heavy, personal topics without preparing them or at least giving them a heads up first. i also felt slightly cheated, because, as i said, this film is NOT about the immigrant experience. it's a very personal confession that lures you in, then, ironically, shocks you rather brutally. ai?? couldn't care less. what kind of brutalism was the film really about? now that's the question
1.) The only constant in nature is change. The AI’s we have now are the baby AI’s, and on our way to the super-AGI cinema will, to some degree, meld with AI. It is inevitable (much like Thanos). I don’t believe using AI should automatically disqualify you from any merit as a film IF (and only if) the AI is used in Post Production; by extreme example, you can’t use ai to write your story or your characters, you can’t use AI while shooting (this includes virtual screens) but you CAN use it for Editing, or color correction, filters etc. Here most of the creative process occurs in how the Ai is used by the filmmaker, who of course -above all- gets Final Cut. 2.) The conversation about sex and violence in movies is in fact very old but will make a comeback soon due to generational changes; think about how trigger warnings, streaming and ads have changed cinema already. But there is no problem in the movie industry that can’t be solved by better movies, here the only option here is to keep putting sex and violence in movies in hope that the cultural pendulum will shift towards free artistic expression.
Ps. Of course it’s all a matter of balance (cinema is subjective after all) if too many movies are made with graphic sex and violence then people will feel alienated and will never leave their homes for a movie they can just watch in private. it’s up to the filmmaker to create the right balance. This also applies to AI btw
This pair made nothing but a self indulgent boring piece of crap that no one had the guts to stand up to them and say cut this film in half and take 20 minutes off it again. These aren’t filmmakers. They’ve missed the story completely and ended up with the garbage of Brutalist. And to say it’s popular with the sycophantic critics of Hollywood is no surprise.
so what about CGI or other visual effects that are in 90% of films before the talk of AI in the brutalist? There are countless techniques used in post-production that have the same effect of the tiny amount of AI used in the brutalist that is just simply enhancing the viewing experience.
@ivanbenisscott The difference is CGI and other techniques are still made by hand by an actual person. AI is a machine trained on stolen works of actual artists, to mimic something a real person could have done.
@danielaou AND wholly create a montage of images of fictitious buildings, that actual designers could have created. AI replaced artists. You're wrong. Stop defending it.
If we tolerate the use of AI in creating a whole sequence of sketches and in altering actors' accents (as in this film) on such a high level, we will soon start tolerating fully AI-produced works. It's dangerous, and the only solution is to completely boycott this film.
@@nms7872 It's like complaining about animators using software now. They should be hand drawing and splicing together film otherwise it's not real art lol. Some of these takes are truly braindead.
The Director, Producers have done interviews saying the used AI to make Adrian Brody and Felicity Jones accent sound more authentic and they used Deep Fake AI to visually match mouth movements @CelineLawson-u1y
The irony of this discussion being letterboxed on four sides and filmed in 720p digital
The amount of misinformation about Respeecher is insane to me. Y’all realize this is essentially just the application of auto-tune for language sounds, and they tweaked some tricky vowels? It’s used in one seen so the scene was also poignant for Hungarian viewers-who would be impacted by the imperfectly pronounced vowels. The editor was going to do this anyways he said, but Respeecher made it faster, and he fed his own Hungarian dialect into the software. No voices were replaced, a few vowels were tuned. The draft creation using AI was in consult with an architect, and common in modern architectural workflows. No one lost a job, these are tools used carefully and sparingly on a very small-budget film (9.6 million is considered very very tiny). Please note, Emilia Perez is full of both Respeecher and auto-tune and Wicked is auto-tuned (you can even hear the click of the automative pitch correction not being smoothed over by the sound mixer in Popular)….
well it didn't work that well if so- before the AI discussion came out Hungarian speakers talked about how odd they both sounded.
I'd personally prefer a slightly flawed attempt over a digital recreation that spews carbon into the atmosphere
My hunch is that that the AI controversy is manufactured oscar politics. That discussion needs to happen but the target is way of if you are slandering The Brutalist
This 100%. Notice how Emilia Perez used the same vocal software and there’s no campaign against it.
why are yall yapping and spreading exaggerated misinformation about the AI use in this film? Read the proper facts first.
The misinfo has really gotten out of hand. It’s clearly an Oscar campaign smear that people are actually falling for thinking they’re on the right side.
I can't handle these mf any longer 😂
Because we live in an age of reaction activism and virtue signaling, not genuine activism.
And why are we pretending as though the wave of AI can be stopped? What's wrong with someone using it?
Okay seriously y'all are overreacting about this whole AI thing, they used a TINY bit of it, and yet people like you are acting like they used it for the entire film.
Beautiful collaboration between these too. I’m so excited for what comes next from them, particularly Ann Lee ❤
Love how they get on about the sex and violence debate in here, they work well together.
Still waiting for this to release in India 😭
I didn’t know Oshima shot in Vista. Not to promote violence or anything, but his ‘Violence at Noon’ is worth your time.
‘Death by Hanging’ was also Vista. ‘Violence’ probably has some of the strangest widescreen compositions you’ll ever see!
People who get all riled up over a mild sex scene but have zero problem watching John Wick are freaking weird.
i have "war & peace" and "in the realm of the senses" on dvd (that need to be upgraded to blu-ray). the only film they mentioned i haven't seen is "vengeance is mine".
Really curious about this Vengeance Is Mine that they brought up.
It's great like many of Imamura's films
don't know if this video needed bed music
I swear people are seriously overreacting about the whole AI thing, like they used a TINY bit, yet people are acting like they used it for the entire film, people need to chill out.
i don't care about the use of AI, as im sure many don't, but i do care about the very much needed transparency with the viewer when it comes to this particular topic. if you use it, be honest about it.
ai or not, the film itself is objectively visually stunning. the real problem with the brutalist is not the ai usage, it's the way it handled the plot. in regards to its substance the brutalist was more of an exorcism of a certain traumatic experience that the author himself (herself?? both of them??) went through, not a story about the horrors of the immigrant experience. throughout the film the immigrant "experience" was somehow kept on the outskirts of the main narrative, mentioned many times, but never explored. it's very clear to me that the topic of "immigrant experience" wasn't central to the plot, unlike the topics of sexual abuse and violence. when it comes to relationships - the relationship between the Artist and his Sponsor is also very clearly takes the leading role. you don't even have to look too close, the real theme of the movie is right there, you just have to see past the decorations.
felt like i was watching something very personal, something that isn't really meant for the public eye, and it startled me. you don't thrust your viewer into such heavy, personal topics without preparing them or at least giving them a heads up first. i also felt slightly cheated, because, as i said, this film is NOT about the immigrant experience. it's a very personal confession that lures you in, then, ironically, shocks you rather brutally. ai?? couldn't care less. what kind of brutalism was the film really about? now that's the question
Nice thoughts, particular in relation this “big” film’s focus on intimacy and the hidden traumas of human life - a point made in the final scene.
Where are you getting this "immigrant experience" business? Did someone tell you that's what the movie was going to be about?
1.) The only constant in nature is change. The AI’s we have now are the baby AI’s, and on our way to the super-AGI cinema will, to some degree, meld with AI. It is inevitable (much like Thanos). I don’t believe using AI should automatically disqualify you from any merit as a film IF (and only if) the AI is used in Post Production; by extreme example, you can’t use ai to write your story or your characters, you can’t use AI while shooting (this includes virtual screens) but you CAN use it for Editing, or color correction, filters etc. Here most of the creative process occurs in how the Ai is used by the filmmaker, who of course -above all- gets Final Cut.
2.) The conversation about sex and violence in movies is in fact very old but will make a comeback soon due to generational changes; think about how trigger warnings, streaming and ads have changed cinema already. But there is no problem in the movie industry that can’t be solved by better movies, here the only option here is to keep putting sex and violence in movies in hope that the cultural pendulum will shift towards free artistic expression.
Ps. Of course it’s all a matter of balance (cinema is subjective after all) if too many movies are made with graphic sex and violence then people will feel alienated and will never leave their homes for a movie they can just watch in private. it’s up to the filmmaker to create the right balance. This also applies to AI btw
That editor must reeeeeeally be regretting talking about AI in that interview lol
This pair made nothing but a self indulgent boring piece of crap that no one had the guts to stand up to them and say cut this film in half and take 20 minutes off it again. These aren’t filmmakers. They’ve missed the story completely and ended up with the garbage of Brutalist. And to say it’s popular with the sycophantic critics of Hollywood is no surprise.
The Brutalist was made with AI. Both to make visuals, and to replace the voices of the actors.
so what about CGI or other visual effects that are in 90% of films before the talk of AI in the brutalist? There are countless techniques used in post-production that have the same effect of the tiny amount of AI used in the brutalist that is just simply enhancing the viewing experience.
@ivanbenisscott The difference is CGI and other techniques are still made by hand by an actual person.
AI is a machine trained on stolen works of actual artists, to mimic something a real person could have done.
Listen it didn’t replace anyone. It was used only for a two minute scene where they spoke Hungarian to enhance PRONUNCIATION of letters.
@danielaou AND wholly create a montage of images of fictitious buildings, that actual designers could have created.
AI replaced artists. You're wrong. Stop defending it.
@danielaou bruh 😂
If we tolerate the use of AI in creating a whole sequence of sketches and in altering actors' accents (as in this film) on such a high level, we will soon start tolerating fully AI-produced works. It's dangerous, and the only solution is to completely boycott this film.
these anti AI takes somehow find a way to be more and more ignorant
@@thundercheeks1989 well, since I can't punish Hitler, the next best thing is to punish Leni Riefenstahl for spreading his message.
@@nms7872 It's like complaining about animators using software now. They should be hand drawing and splicing together film otherwise it's not real art lol. Some of these takes are truly braindead.
I don’t consider The Brutalist a real movie. And just hearing him talk about it affirms it more.
What are you yapping about 😭
@ I wish it was the cinema.
The Director, Producers have done interviews saying the used AI to make Adrian Brody and Felicity Jones accent sound more authentic and they used Deep Fake AI to visually match mouth movements @CelineLawson-u1y
Is this interview AI?
😂