Quote:
Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague
[/B]
At some point it's trust the tale not the teller; different people can get different things out of a piece of art and none of them have to be "right" or "wrong". But I seriously don't understand how people got such a triumphant note out of the ending of this. Deceptive cadence?
... I'll show myself out.
|
I can see where people would find the end depressing, particularly with the comment from the filmmaker. Art is how you interpret it. Even the artist (the filmmaker) can have a totally different idea of what their art is supposed to be getting across, but in the end it's how it makes the audience feel.
I saw the whole final performance to be Andrew's middle finger to Fletcher and anyone who ever doubted him. Put all his pain, rage and emotion into one drum solo. When he was about to leave, I got disappointed that he wasn't going to get his due. Don't know if this would hold true, but maybe being a musician I find more triumph in those final moments than despair. The director sees him dying of an OD at 30, I saw him whipping a stick at Fletcher once he was done and overshadowing him for the rest of his life. If anyone is to be haunted, it's Fletcher for having a hand in the suicide of a former student. AND if Andrew is driven to OD at 30, is it because of emotional trauma from Fletcher, or because he couldn't live up to his own expectations? "The greatest musician of the 20th century" is a lofty goal.
But, to me, the fact that the film prompts discussion about how characters would live out their lives and how that affects how you look at the story, tells me it's a damn good movie.