Imposible Brilliant

You shouldn't use chess.com's game review, it's ridiculously shallow and bad. No, it's not "stronger than the normal analysis function" - this is another claim by you that is utterly bizarre and weird.

Real Stockfish prefers other moves. The top choice is Bd7, threatening e4, and the following complications are really insane, not something that a human could calculate just by looking at the position for a couple of minutes.

Generous of you.

Stockfish says that Bd7 is almost+5 for black (completely winning), while Qd7 is just +2.

Bd7 is actually an attacking move, but you wouldn't guess it from appearances.

I told you this exactly. This is not something a human can calculate in a couple of minutes. You still don't believe it, and you still insist that your move is the best. Very typical of you. Whatever.

I believe you guys misunderstand what a brilliant move is.
A brilliant move is not just "the best move" Many times brilliant moves aren't the best moves according to the engine. A brilliant move is simply classified as a sacrifice/under promotion that plays a huge role in the outcome of the game
Not just outcome but if the move allows the player to have a great advantage or not be completely losing (as opposed to other moves just losing the game on the spot) then yeah

The first half is right, the last half is wrong.

A "brilliant move" on chess.com is a sacrifice that is good. End of story. All the talk about "a huge role in the outcome of the game" is just an urban myth.

What I meant was that it wouldn't necessarily be a brilliant move sometimes if you are already completely winning the game

That is true.

Oh man