Why The Brutalist’s Final Scene Has Caused So Much Debate

Includes SPOILERS for The Brutalist's ending!

The 2024 Best Picture-nominated film, The Brutalist, has seen debates centered around its final scene, and there are a few reasons why. The Brutalist's cast is led by veteran movie star Adrien Brody, who's been nominated for Best Actor at the 2025 Oscars for playing László Tóth, a Hungarian-Jewish architect who was separated from his wife during World War II. He immigrates to America following the war and finds some success due to a wealthy benefactor, Harisson Lee Van Buren (Guy Pearce), who takes an interest in his work.

Like many movies that are nominated for Best Picture, The Brutalist has been the subject of some of the film world's hottest debates. Aside from The Brutalist's AI controversy, the film has received relative critical acclaim and praise from movie fans. However, the movie's ending is a source of divisiveness, with the director, Brady Corbet, even commenting on how viewers might perceive his film and its meaning. There's a lot to break down regarding The Brutalist's closing scenes, with broader questions about art and filmmaking.

What Happens In The Brutalist's Final Scene

The Movie Ends With Two Confusing Scenes

The Brutalist's ending is undoubtedly a cause for confusion, as the final two scenes offer an unanswered mystery proceeded by a distant epilogue. Erzsébet Tóth (Felicity Jones) travels to Pennsylvania to publicly accuse Harrison Lee Van Buren of sexually assaulting her husband. Van Buren leaves the room, and it's revealed that he's disappeared. After this moment, which is arguably the most dramatic scene in the film with the highest stakes, the film cuts away from Van Buren's mansion, never explaining what happened to him.

Next, The Brutalist's epilogue depicts Zsófia giving a speech at a Biennale for László Tóth, exhibiting his architectural work from the past two decades and celebrating his life. Given how dire things were looking when viewers last saw László, to have the final scene depict him being honored at a high-profile ceremony suggests an enormous change in fortune for him. Zsófia shares some exposition about László's career and offers some insight into his artistic philosophy, yet it's all disconnected from the previous scene, with so many questions left unanswered.

The Ambiguous Nature Of The Brutalist's Final Scene Has Stirred Debate With Viewers

Some Moviegoers Were Left With Confusion Following The Movie's Ending

Ambiguity is always going to stir debate among film viewers, as it can create confusion and frustration about unresolved narrative elements. When a film is centered around a person's life, in this case, László Tóth, it makes sense that audiences would want some resolution to his story. That said, The Brutalist isn't just about one man's life; László Tóth is the representative of countless artists and immigrants who might have shared similarly grim experiences, and in that sense, the details of his career aren't vital to the story.

The frustration about the film's intentionally confusing final scenes is fair, but the purpose of ambiguity isn't to stump viewers; it's to allow them to engage with their own creativity. Ultimately, it doesn't matter what happened to Tóth or Van Buren after the film; what matters is the events that transpired between them and the process of constructing the community center. The tangible gaps left behind can be filled in by the viewer, allowing each person's experience with The Brutalist to be unique and thought-provoking.

What Director Brady Corbet Has Said About The Brutalist's Ending

Brady Corbet Doesn't Want To Demystify His Film's Ending

Brady Corbet spoke with EW about the ambiguous ending to his movie. Zsófia's monologue is the best insight viewers have into Tóth's career and his psychology toward the community center project, but it's not clear how much of it is performative or just simply her perspective. On the matter, Corbet said, "So there's themes that I have always been happy to unpack for people to the best of my ability, but I never ever undressed them completely because for me, then the film's sort of magic in the conversation around them ceases to exist."

To Brady Corbet, the discussion surrounding his movie's ending is important. By shedding too much light on the final scenes and their meaning, he'd be ridding audiences of the possibility of having that conversation and offering their own thoughts and theories. One of the primary purposes of great art is to ask questions, prompting the viewer to think introspectively or about external aspects of the world they aren't familiar with. If Brady Corbet told everyone what The Brutalist was about, he wouldn't be asking questions, he'd be answering them. The film speaks for itself.