Anybody Seen Whiplash?

I've been in some insipid online debates about this movie. I've seen it twice. Today I got into a little debate in person with a famous musician/film composer and I decided to hold my tongue out of respect. I didn't want to hurt his feelings for being so dense. I'm cool like that.

I posted an interview with Peter Erskine about the film and he read it and agreed with him. They basically shot it to pieces in terms of realism, historic details, and the kind of technical details that only a professional jazz drummer would know about.

http://www.kcet.org/arts/artbound/counties/los-angeles/drummer-peter-erskine-on-whiplash-film.html

What they're missing is that the movie isn't about jazz, jazz drumming, the history of jazz, or the joy of music. It's about someone being caring and passionate enough to push you beyond where you thought you could go to achieve greatness. This movie could have been about track, football, or a spelling bee, and the fudged details that allowed them to get this film finished don't matter. Also, it's a fucking movie.

For some reason we're living in some kind of weird vortex in hell where every movie that comes out has to be put through some kind of reality screener as if it was a documentary.

It's a Hollywood movie. Nothing about it is real.
 
Last edited:
Yeah.

It does a shitty job of representing jazz music, jazz musicians, music education, etc., but that's totally irrelavent. It's like saying that Point Break does a shitty job of representing surfers. That's because being representational just isn't the job, plain and simple. It's a psychological thriller.

I have some criticisms - mainly that it's underdeveloped - but I enjoyed it and respect its craftsmanship. My heart was racing for the last 10 minutes or so. I think that writer/director Damien Chazelle is very talented, given his age. His previous film Grand Piano took musicianship as a springboard, also; very Hitchcockian. It shares a lot of the same strengths and weaknesses as Whiplash, and I think that many of you would enjoy it. It's on Netflix, I think.

If you want to watch a great new jazz documentary, focusing on student/teacher relationships, then watch Keep On Keepin On. It's excellent, and it's about the great teacher Clark Terry, who died last week.
 
James Franciscus said:
I posted an interview with Peter Erskine about the film and he read it and agreed with him. They basically shot it to pieces in terms of realism, historic details, and the kind of technical details that only a professional jazz drummer would know about.

http://www.kcet.org/arts/artbound/counties/los-angeles/drummer-peter-erskine-on-whiplash-film.html

What they're missing is that the movie isn't about jazz, jazz drumming, the history of jazz, or the joy of music.
Click to expand...

Which kind of makes Peter Erskine literally the worst possible person to ask about it. I basically refuse to watch any movies that are skinned to cosplay out in my line of work, because I am not a professional enough movie watcher to rise above the inevitable cringeage they will inflict on it to make it fit their procrustean dramatisations.
 
My thoughts:

JK Simmons was fantastic. Fletcher is one of the best acted/written malignant narcissists on screen in a long time. He is more extreme than anyone I've encountered in that world, but that mindset of the "builder of men" that makes almost no distinction between education and abuse, where one's value as a person is determined entirely by their execution on the bandstand, is right on. The eyes-down hostage mentality of the band members and head games felt pretty real to me too.

Miles Teller played Andrew with just the right amount of Aspbergery self involvement and pulled off the drumming pretty well. I've worked on films with lots of on-camera music, and it's not easy - especially with as little time as they had. 21 days is REALLY fast to shoot something like this. Peter Erskine's critiques are certainly valid, but when training an actor for something like this, it's drama first, musical verisimilitude second. As for his critique of the rather mundane soloing, it had to be something Teller could pull off on camera - and maybe he's not supposed to be that good. At its core, I think this film is really just about two egomaniacs who deserve each other. Their codependent Sith Lord - Apprentice dynamic would play itself out over the coming years. A fitting coda would be Andrew 15 years later, after asshole-ing his way out of a couple big breaks, abusing his own band at a slightly less prestigious conservatory. If you want to be a great artist, reject all who would weigh you down by loving you unconditionally and be a dick. People don't still talk about Charlie Parker because he was a great guy, right?

Sadly the thing that stood out the most to me as unrealistic was the ethnic diversity of the band. No way would there be more than one or two people of color in a band like that. The complete lack of females, however was dead on. I can't blame the director for not wanting to open that can of worms, but it's usually the case. As far as competitive big band jazz goes, the history of time begins with Maynard Fergison. This world is primarily a place for white men to assert their dominance over each other. Where the height of artistry is flawless execution of notes on the page. Any mistake is a failure of character. Individuality and ego are suppressed in service to the unit until the last note rings out. Then the man in front who holds no instrument turns and bows. Just as Charlie Parker intended.
 
Looks like I'll be seeing this one soon, I heard my wife on the phone last night being talked into it by her friend. :tongue:

The movie sounds stressful to me, but I'll sack up and do it.
 
I will want to see it soon. The comments on this page 2 are noted and I will watch with those in mind. I had already thought the movie would be more about what James F. was saying it was, rather than a jazz docu. But it will be interesting to see how things are portrayed. I will want to watch Grand Piano and Keep on Keepin On too.

I will be interested in how I react to the main character. Though I get the thought that a guy that pushes you to go beyond where you thought you could cares, I have always had trouble with a bootcamp or Knute Rockne style of motivation. Doesn't work for all of us. But maybe that approach is necessary at times. Not sure if that is what this guy did, but sounds a bit like it. In any case, it will be interesting from the sound of this thread.
 
El Borrachito said:
My thoughts:

JK Simmons was fantastic. Fletcher is one of the best acted/written malignant narcissists on screen in a long time. He is more extreme than anyone I've encountered in that world, but that mindset of the "builder of men" that makes almost no distinction between education and abuse, where one's value as a person is determined entirely by their execution on the bandstand, is right on. The eyes-down hostage mentality of the band members and head games felt pretty real to me too.

Miles Teller played Andrew with just the right amount of Aspbergery self involvement and pulled off the drumming pretty well. I've worked on films with lots of on-camera music, and it's not easy - especially with as little time as they had. 21 days is REALLY fast to shoot something like this. Peter Erskine's critiques are certainly valid, but when training an actor for something like this, it's drama first, musical verisimilitude second. As for his critique of the rather mundane soloing, it had to be something Teller could pull off on camera - and maybe he's not supposed to be that good. At its core, I think this film is really just about two egomaniacs who deserve each other. Their codependent Sith Lord - Apprentice dynamic would play itself out over the coming years. A fitting coda would be Andrew 15 years later, after asshole-ing his way out of a couple big breaks, abusing his own band at a slightly less prestigious conservatory. If you want to be a great artist, reject all who would weigh you down by loving you unconditionally and be a dick. People don't still talk about Charlie Parker because he was a great guy, right?

Sadly the thing that stood out the most to me as unrealistic was the ethnic diversity of the band. No way would there be more than one or two people of color in a band like that. The complete lack of females, however was dead on. I can't blame the director for not wanting to open that can of worms, but it's usually the case. As far as competitive big band jazz goes, the history of time begins with Maynard Fergison. This world is primarily a place for white men to assert their dominance over each other. Where the height of artistry is flawless execution of notes on the page. Any mistake is a failure of character. Individuality and ego are suppressed in service to the unit until the last note rings out. Then the man in front who holds no instrument turns and bows. Just as Charlie Parker intended.
Click to expand...
I still need to see the movie but as far as real life college big band experiences go your post is giving me PTSD.

I'm actually remembering a rant right now about "if you're going to comp like its fucking country music I'll get you a big fucking hat, a big fucking belt buckle and throw horse shit on the floor so you can feel at home". Not sure if you were in that particular band at that point.
 
The snobbery of jazz musicians is one of the aspects it hits pretty well. And I get the work they put in to becoming real musicians as they see it, just as I do with classical/"legit" musicians. That said, I've never appreciated categorizing any one type of music over another, especially by musicians. Just because something is harder to play or takes more work to be able to play at all (let alone well) does not make it better/superior to other forms/genres of music. It's different and that difference is one of the best things about music.
 
Dogsinotpalc said:
The snobbery of jazz musicians is one of the aspects it hits pretty well. And I get the work they put in to becoming real musicians as they see it, just as I do with classical/"legit" musicians. That said, I've never appreciated categorizing any one type of music over another, especially by musicians. Just because something is harder to play or takes more work to be able to play at all (let alone well) does not make it better/superior to other forms/genres of music. It's different and that difference is one of the best things about music.
Click to expand...

I didn't see any snobbery what so ever. I think you brought that into the theater with you. At no point in the film is there a conversation about jazz being superior to any other form of music. Like I said, the movie isn't really about jazz. It's about the pursuit of greatness. Jazz is simply a macguffin to make the screenwriter's point. The film could have used golf as a macguffin to make the exact same point.
 
Finally saw the movie and damn was it intense. Talk about about assholes and wanting to better oneself...

Glad I saw it and will see it again!!!
 
good movie. right over pete erskins head lol what a dumbass.

reminded me of marines bootcamp but we had 5 Fletchers and they were never nice like he was at times.
 
i didnt like that the movie so so dumbed down. they hit you over the head with the premise repeatedly.
theres a scene where he tells the bird story about throwing a cymbal at the dudes head and the very next scene he throws a chair at the dudes head.
and why after he shows up to play after the accident "your through" wtf? thats what he wanted...to at all costs show up
to not be able to understand this movie is just amazing to me...theres nothing to understand-dude acts like a dick to push people into being a Bird
-finally finds one at the end. thats the entire movie.
him being kind of sucky at piano is consistant with his character. i didnt expect him to go all art tatum on the piano lol
and there was some jazz snobbery by the kid at the dinner table with his brothers talking about how they just play level 3 ball and also he breaks up with his girlfriend
because hes gonna be a famous jazz guy and shes just some chick without direction...wtf kid was more an asshole than the teacher. but again thats what the movie was about-asshole teacher pushes kid to be an asshole and he becomes one-roll credits
 
Great movie, I loved it. But yeah -- the music school stuff was pretty ridiculous. I know a few guys who hate the movie because it's not accurate. It's a movie -- please suspend disbelief and be glad there's a movie about good music fer crissakes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top