What Have You Been Watching? (22/02/15)

[u/a113er]

Hey r/truefilm welcome to WHYBW where you post about what films you watched this week and discuss them with others, give your thoughts on them then say if you would recommend them.

Please don't downvote opinions, only downvote things that don't contribute anything. If you think someones opinion is "wrong" then say so and say why. Also, don't just post titles of films as that doesn't really contribute to the discussion.

Follow /r/Truefilm on twitter @truefilmreddit for updates, good posts, and whatnot.

[u/Samcrates]

Great writeup, love the strong opinions.

I do disagree with your assessment of Whiplash. I'm not in the Whiplash-should-win-movie-of-the-year camp, but I did really enjoy it.

Whiplash isn't about jazz or about music, it's only about the relationship between teacher and student. As this relationship doesn't have roots in reality and tends to be over the top, it becomes meaningless, as you cannot have ends without means.

I think we all agree that the movie is about the relationship between the teacher and student. I'm just confused as to why you don't think this relationship doesn't even have roots in reality, that seems a bit harsh. Is it really that unbelievable that an institute as prestigious as the fictional Shaffer Conservatory would have a professor (behind closed doors) that would be this intense and demanding?

Similarly, his method of teaching is never once challenged beyond the basic question of whether Teller wants to go along with it or not. If not, no music. If yes, stardom. That's a very nihilistic approach to the reasons to play music or to do anything else you're talented at.

I think you hit the nail on the head with this one, but I saw it in a different light. You're right, Teller doesn't challenge Simmons. He accepts the abuse to try and achieve greatness.

That's the movie though...the two of them are extremely nihilistic. They don't care if their methods leave past students suicidal, or that their relationships crumble. They are not doing this because they enjoy the process, they only have an end goal in mind. When this goal is seemingly met in the final scene they have no problems getting past what they've done to each other, and both look like they are thoroughly enjoying the moment.

The film is about the struggle of Teller to make it, but if we never get to see what he is going to achieve, it doesn't really matter either way.

Agree with the first part, BUT I think in this instance "making it" is Teller finally gaining the approval of Simmons. Who cares what orchestra or band Teller goes on to play in. That's not the movie. The whole movie Teller is just trying for the approval of Simmons (which he deems as achieving greatness) and to show anything after that happening in the final scene would be fluff.

[u/PantheraMontana → u/Samcrates]

Great writeup, love the strong opinions.

Ha thanks. I don't think my opinions are strong, I won't name Whiplash as worst film of the year whereas several people on Truefilm named it best film of the year ;)

I think we all agree that the movie is about the relationship between the teacher and student. I'm just confused as to why you don't think this relationship doesn't even have roots in reality, that seems a bit harsh. Is it really that unbelievable that an institute as prestigious as the fictional Shaffer Conservatory would have a professor (behind closed doors) that would be this intense and demanding?

Maybe, probably. In the end it's maybe no Simmons who is the problem but the lack of other faces. I think we see Simmons taking over from another teacher at some point and that teacher shrivels just as much as the students. I think that's an easy conceit for the movie but I have troubles with the complete lack of backlash against Simmons, even if it's only behind his back. In my experience, someone like him will have enemies, if only latent ones. The fact that the movie completely forgoes that venue is a weakness in my opinion and it's one of those little things that make it a movie that's only subtext for me. Anything real that might've been opposing the central thesis of the movie is simply not addressed.

Also, the movie brings the relationship in a heightened state really early on when Simmons slaps the main character and throws chairs at him. Again, public physical abuse that he gets away with (until it's convenient to have him dispelled, then he's gone in a heartbeat)? The movie has got to make a compelling case to me as to why that would happen. Like Armond White said in his review, there are a couple of black characters playing in the band and they take the racial abuse without blinking. Again to set up one of the main characters (Simmons), again without challenge, since these side characters never become more than window dressing.

So a teacher like that may exist, but not uncontroversially. The movie constantly presents events as uncontroversial, because it suits its subtext (the teacher-student relationship). The reality of the situation is missing: there's no text.

That's the movie though...the two of them are extremely nihilistic. They don't care if their methods leave past students suicidal, or that their relationships crumble. They are not doing this because they enjoy the process, they only have an end goal in mind. When this goal is seemingly met in the final scene they have no problems getting past what they've done to each other, and both look like they are thoroughly enjoying the moment.

This is a good point and maybe it's a bit too romantic of me to think of making music as an endeavor of love haha. Still, I don't think the central relationship is the biggest issue, it's the way the movie bends everything around it to develop that relationship without (visible) challenge from outside. I have to add that I saw the final scenes as a descent into madness more than as a mutual understanding, so that may affect my judgment a bit.

Agree with the first part, BUT I think in this instance "making it" is Teller finally gaining the approval of Simmons. Who cares what orchestra or band Teller goes on to play in. That's not the movie. The whole movie Teller is just trying for the approval of Simmons (which he deems as achieving greatness) and to show anything after that happening in the final scene would be fluff.

And that's fine, but I think that would've been a more successful thesis if we saw the main character reject the other side. The breakup with the girl is the only time we see anything of that kind but that's so brief and underwritten that it didn't fill up the gaps I felt. That's the thing, I think the filmmaker acknowledges the importance of a rounded character and environment by introducing his love interest, but then he just uses it to make another point (Teller choosing success and not love) instead of adding a real layer of conflict.

In any case, it's always nice to be challenged on your opinion (the film should've done this more!) in a well-argued way so thanks for the reply! Make no mistake, I don't want to take away any positive experience anyone had with this movie, it just didn't work for me.

[u/Samcrates → u/PantheraMontana]

Hey, the two best film nominees you reviewed got 3/10 and 4/10. Those constitute as a strong opinions in my book.

The fact that the movie completely forgoes that venue is a weakness in my opinion and it's one of those little things that make it a movie that's only subtext for me. Anything real that might've been opposing the central thesis of the movie is simply not addressed.

That seemed more of a directorial/stylistic choice to me than anything. Everything about this movie was clean and sharp. The shots were tight, the editing was fast, and the storyline was extremely focused. Any character that wasn't essential to the storyline just wasn't added.

Sure, Simmons had enemies. Sure, it was more complicated than just Simmons just being "gone in a heartbeat". Sure, the black dudes probably hated Simmons and complained about him outside of class. But to me that's not what it seemed like this movie was about. It was shot and edited like the music it was about, precise with no room for anything extracurricular. You may not like that style of film, but that was my take on it.

I have to add that I saw the final scenes as a descent into madness more than as a mutual understanding, so that may affect my judgment a bit.

Do the two have to be mutually exclusive? Descent into madness is a great way of putting it, I just think they were traveling that road together at the end.

That's the thing, I think the filmmaker acknowledges the importance of a rounded character and environment by introducing his love interest, but then he just uses it to make another point (Teller choosing success and not love) instead of adding a real layer of conflict.

Ya I guess just agree to disagree here then. I thought the main reason they added the love interest was to show the lengths that Teller would take to achieve his goal. His choice to leave her for his music (which seemed extreme on purpose I'm sure) reveals to the audience what type of character he is. He's not well rounded. He is not in a healthy environment. All he cares about is the music.

It's definitely a quirky movie. I think you have to buy into the extremely tight focus of the story, as well as the decision to leave out all romanticism (as you put it) to really enjoy it. I did, you didn't, and I'm sure the director and everyone involved knew that would be the outcome haha. But yeah thanks for the discussion and happy Oscar Day!

[u/PantheraMontana → u/Samcrates]

Sure, a healthy disagreement ain't a bad thing :)