Location: A simple man leading a complicated life....
Exp:
I agree about the plausibility but that wasn't what attracted me to the movie. I had heard the acting of Miles Teller and especially J.K. Simmons was awesome and that was made the movie so great for me. The final drum scene solo made for a perfect ending.
__________________
The Following User Says Thank You to Dion For This Useful Post:
When I went to school we spent weeks interpreting books and movies looking for the deeper meanings rooted in reality.
The taming of the shrew was a protest of the economic treatment of woman at the time.
Or the apprenticeship of Duddy Kravitz was actually a subtle story about the realities of the world dominated by blah blah blah.
At some point after spending years doing this, because it made us so smart that there was one underlying truth
Most books and movies are written for entertainment purposes only and because of that fictional nature they are a whole written on a platform of implausibility and based in a fictions universe where the laws of reality, and human behavior have been altered to suit the storyline.
Seriously if you're looking for a plausible story for the most part they are rare and hard to find because every book and movie has a underlying exaggeration or unrealistic behavior that serves the story and keeps it moving.
Even documentaries for the most part have a line of exaggeration or implausible framing which serves the creators point of view and makes it palatable to the target audience.
A book is a book, a movie is a movie, and as Freud said, sometimes a banana is just a banana.
Now have movies become even more implausible over the year? Absolutely because they can't build up to anything anymore because of today's sort attention span consumer base, instead of building up subtly, the writers and directors have this fear that if they don't alter the reality of the movie and the situation every 10 minutes that the audience will lose interest.
I watched Whiplash, but I didn't expect to see if as this great story based in reality that would follow one mans journey to become a perfect drummer in a perfect band lead by a obsessive compulsive perfectionist director, to me that movie sounds about 2 hours 2 long and really would only be interesting to a extremely small segment of the movie going audience.
To me the movie was in a way too obvious and too hamfisted in its approach.
The only thing missing was a mind shifting alien jazz fan controlling J Johah Jameson.
__________________
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;
Look on my Works, ye Mighty, and despair!
The Following User Says Thank You to CaptainCrunch For This Useful Post:
Location: A simple man leading a complicated life....
Exp:
Quote:
Originally Posted by V
So did the guy that killed himself. The ending was crazy depressing.
I disagree. The focus of the movie was about the battle between Naymen and Fletcher and who would win. Fletcher earlier in the movie said a "good job" was the worst thing you could say to a person and yet he gives that nod of approval to Maymen in the end.
I disagree. The focus of the movie was about the battle between Naymen and Fletcher and who would win. Fletcher earlier in the movie said a "good job" was the worst thing you could say to a person and yet he gives that approval to Maymen in the end.
You just disproved your own point.
The Following User Says Thank You to MrMastodonFarm For This Useful Post:
It turned out to be an over-the-top sports movie, which expects the audience to suspend disbelief and cheer the outrageously contrived obstacles put in the way of the hero before the inevitable triumph.
Wait, what? You think that was a triumph for him at the end? That was a profoundly sad moment. He's dragged himself back in because he can't go on without that approval. Teller's character is basically doomed to misery. The dude is emotionally damaged, deluded obsessed to the point of self-destruction. Pretty sure the director suggested at one point that he expects Neyman to kill himself in his early 30's. This is not a film with a happy ending.
Quote:
I like to think I can discern and appreciate human drama without the narrative sledgehammers of AGONY, HATE, and REVENGE slamming me in the face every 10 minutes. And that's what to me is the bigger problem. By the end of Whiplash, I wouldn't have been surprised if the bandleader broke into the drummer's apartment, murdered his father, and attempted to rape his girlfriend at knife-point. That's how over-the-top it becomes trying to ramp up the conflict.
I can't believe you don't see the disconnect here between Simmons's character's central motivation and just destroying his former pupil. He returns multiple times to a story about Charlie Parker that is actually apocryphal as a justification for his actions.
__________________ "The great promise of the Internet was that more information would automatically yield better decisions. The great disappointment is that more information actually yields more possibilities to confirm what you already believed anyway." - Brian Eno
Andrew Naymen was seeking approval from Terence Fletcher and he finally gets it.
As I said in an earlier post, I think the movie was about two people driven to the point of destruction to achieve a goal - Andrew, to be the next genius drummer, even if it destroyed his body and life outside of drumming, and Fletcher, to mold the next genius jazz musician(s), even if he has to destroy scores of young people who don't have genius in them.
And in the end, I think the only way to take the last scene is as a vindication for both of them - Andrew gives a genius performance, but I don't think you can deny that he only got because Fletcher drove him to it.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Mike F For This Useful Post:
__________________ I am in love with Montana. For other states I have admiration, respect, recognition, even some affection, but with Montana it is love." - John Steinbeck
Yeah, it probably would. I saw a movie last night that I quite enjoyed - Locke. It's criminal that Simmons won an Oscar while Tom Hardy wasn't even nominated. And I just read an excellent novel - Lustrum by Robert Harris. In both cases my appreciation for drama was satisfied without the need to be shut off the rational and discerning part of my brain.
Anyway, I wasn't the only person to notice the implausibility of Whiplash, and the resort to heat rather than light.
The reason it gets jazz wrong is the same as the reason it gets everything else wrong. Both spring from a deep underlying malaise.
That malaise is the determination of director Damien Chazelle to generate a blistering emotional heat, at the cost of any emotional or musical truth. Intensity of effect is all that matters to him, and he certainly achieves it. The scenes where J K Simmons as Terence Fletcher screams racial abuse into the face of his gifted student Andrew (played by Miles Teller) are savage enough to make one squirm.
In that respect, Whiplash (as the title might suggest) is a telling example of the ‘pornification’ of culture, i.e. the idea that ‘going to extremes’ and aiming always for maximum shock effect are the only ways to make a valid artistic statement.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by fotze
If this day gets you riled up, you obviously aren't numb to the disappointment yet to be a real fan.
Last edited by CliffFletcher; 08-03-2015 at 10:05 PM.
Yeah, it probably would. I saw a movie last night that I quite enjoyed - Locke. It's criminal that Simmons won an Oscar while Tom Hardy wasn't even nominated. And I just read an excellent novel - Lustrum by Robert Harris. In both cases my appreciation for drama was satisfied without the need to be shut off the rational and discerning part of my brain.
Anyway, I wasn't the only person to notice the implausibility of Whiplash, and the resort to heat rather than light.
Comparing Hardy to Simmons is apples to oranges. Hardy was great in that role but he would have been lumped into the leading role category so they would never be head to head. Simmons was worth the price of admission alone in Whiplash as a supporting actor which is why he received a lot of acclaim. Not everyone has the same tastes in movies so I don't have any problem with you not liking Whiplash but I'm not on board with your reasoning as it was a great flick and this is coming from someone that has no interest in Jazz. I know some people that didn't like Locke specially the ending but I think it was a pretty good movie as well. Not as good as Whiplash but good in its own right.
Location: A simple man leading a complicated life....
Exp:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike F
As I said in an earlier post, I think the movie was about two people driven to the point of destruction to achieve a goal - Andrew, to be the next genius drummer, even if it destroyed his body and life outside of drumming, and Fletcher, to mold the next genius jazz musician(s), even if he has to destroy scores of young people who don't have genius in them.
And in the end, I think the only way to take the last scene is as a vindication for both of them -Andrew gives a genius performance, but I don't think you can deny that he only got because Fletcher drove him to it.
I never looked at it that way but I can see the point your making. Fletcher in his twisted way did get the best out of Andrew.
And in the end, I think the only way to take the last scene is as a vindication for both of them - Andrew gives a genius performance, but I don't think you can deny that he only got because Fletcher drove him to it.
From the director:
Quote:
there’s a certain amount of damage that will always have been done. Fletcher will always think he won and Andrew will be a sad, empty shell of a person and will die in his 30s of a drug overdose. I have a very dark view of where it goes.
This is how I saw the movie. There is no vindication for Andrew. Only for Fletcher, and he will use it to keep his thumb on Andrew. To me the ending is dark and depressing, which mixes interestingly with the exhiliration of the drum solo.
Speaking as a totally novice drummer, if I play for a few hours in a row I will start to get a blister or two. Usually doesnt lead to blood and it's fine in a day or two, but it happens. I only play a few times a week though.
Location: A simple man leading a complicated life....
Exp:
Quote:
Originally Posted by V
From the director:
This is how I saw the movie. There is no vindication for Andrew. Only for Fletcher, and he will use it to keep his thumb on Andrew. To me the ending is dark and depressing, which mixes interestingly with the exhiliration of the drum solo.
And that is where we differ. I didn't see it as dark and depressing.
This is how I saw the movie. There is no vindication for Andrew. Only for Fletcher, and he will use it to keep his thumb on Andrew. To me the ending is dark and depressing, which mixes interestingly with the exhiliration of the drum solo.
I didn't see it that way at all -- I saw it as they both finally found what they were looking for and, even if their careers did not continue, that moment on stage was the pinnacle for both of them and they'd earned a mutual respect for each other. Finally Andrew understood what he was trying to do, and Fletcher finally got the genius performance he was looking for his entire life. The most powerful moment in the movie is when Fletcher fixes his cymbal for him -- earlier in the film had that happened he would have just yelled at him and kicked him off the stage. But at the end he knows he has finally accomplished his goal and is witnessing genius.
The Following User Says Thank You to OutOfTheCube For This Useful Post:
