Im going to dismantle your entire argument in several parts.
Firstly, you can't judge the merits of a film based on reality. That's not how movie premises work. This is a fictional story, you have to work within the confines of what the movie is setting up. For example, there is no way half the stuff in Shawshank Redemption would fly, but we accept it because that is the universe the movie sets up for us. It doesn't matter how many rope lights you give a Delorean in real life, its not going to travel to 1955 when you go 88. Maverick would've been kicked out of the Navy 70 times over before ever fighting in a real fight. Everything about Indiana Jones' character doesn't make any sense in reality. NONE OF THAT MATTERS.
Secondly, yes in reality, there are LOTS of examples of teachers, professors, authority figures, public figures getting away with straight up physical, mental, and sexual abuse before getting caught. For years and years and years. We're only privy to a snapshot of Fletcher's life, where he is an important and powerful guy at a prestigious school who abuses hungry, desperate, young talent who think this may be their best shot at success. There are WELL DOCUMENTED cases of people coming forward with this abuse YEARS after it happens...not necessarily the day or week of because they were afraid of how it would hurt their potential futures (cough Weinstein cough).
And if you recall....FLETCHER GOT FIRED (did you pay attention?)
Thirdly, the movie is NOT about getting artistic merits from abuse. Its about one mans obsessive search for extracting what he perceives as "greatness" from a student, who then forms his own unhealthy obsession with achieving said greatness while pushing away and withdrawing everything and everyone else in his life. Neither one comes out looking great by the end. They do to each other, perhaps. But as confirmed by the director himself, the look on the father's face at the end was not that of 'awe.' It was in horror.
reply
share
JasonMovieGuy88 (51)
4 months ago
The look on the father’s face is horror because he knows his son is a genius!! A fucking genius! He plays those drums better then anything I’ve seen on film, and that includes The Doors. And you’re telling me that you think Andrew deserved his abuse ? You must come from an abusive household.
I don’t care how many fucking people you name drop that have assaulted their artists and been bullies. That doesn’t make it right! And it certainly doesn’t give you the right to come at me with hostility and dismissing my review. Andrew was a genius, and instead of celebrating his great abilities - the film wants to shit on them instead. He was so good his fingers were bleeding.
But I guess you like that Fight Club mentality. You’re so tough. Newsflash - it’s EASY to be a jerk in real life. It’s harder to be KIND.
reply
share
blindfolded (1540)
4 months ago
1. It's a look of horror because he realizes the extent of this obsession and it harken back to the dinner conversation where Andrew is okay with being broke and dead as long as he is considered great and famous. We're not meant to accept his fate is good.
2. Nobody is saying abuse is right. Not the film. Not the director. Not the audience. Not me. It's just a story about unhealthy obsession and a guy's abuse he took along the way. Just because abuse is wrong doesnt mean it's not a story worth telling. That's such a bad reason to critique this movie. That's like saying "any crime thriller is bad because murder is wrong." 🤦♂️
3. The hostility came from you first so don't give me that crap. Re-read your first reply.
reply
share
JasonMovieGuy88 (51)
4 months ago
I hear what you’re saying and sorry if I came off harsh.
I should not have done that. You make valid points and now I will rewatch the film and hopefully see it from a different perception.
I got hostile because this movie made me angry. I can’t believe a character like JK Simmons can even exist in the America we live in. He was a monster. He didn’t even apologise to Andrew - even after the kid got into a car crash at almost killed Jim. All Simmons wanted to do was talk about jazz music dying, and Bird, and drink.
Also Andrew’s band mates were also really cruel. Quiet, introverted and not very team friendly. I was shocked Andrew didn’t make any friends, considering how good he was on the drums. Everyone in the band either glares him down or downright ignored him. I saw them as cowards.
reply
share
blindfolded (1540)
4 months ago
And by the way, you posting on a public message board forum ABSOLUTELY gives me the right to reply as I see fit. That's the entire point of a message board.
So fuck off with that "doesn't give you the right" bullshit.
reply
share
JasonMovieGuy88 (51)
4 months ago
You’re absolutely right - I am sorry I came off that way to you. I should have listened more instead of letting my emotions get the best of me.
reply
share
blindfolded (1540)
4 months ago
Ok.
I apologize too.
I defend this movie because I think it's a brilliant movie. From the direction and acting to the tension and stress...And I think the "well, in real life..." criticism is unfair because then you need to apply that criticism to every fiction you see, and we don't.
That's my point of view.
reply
share
JasonMovieGuy88 (51)
4 months ago
I watched the finale again. I loved it. Do you think his teacher accepted him/ was happy with the way he played the drums with so much passion and soul? Or do you think their relationship would continue to be back and forth? I always wondered what happened after that concert.
My only issue with Simmons other then his temper was that Andrew was able to help the band WIN his first big night on stage, earlier in the movie. I would have thought his colleagues would have respected him and that the teacher would have been nicer. But I do recall Simmons saying something like “nothing is worse then someone telling you Good job.”
Anyways it was a fascinating story for sure.
reply
share
blindfolded (1540)
4 months ago
Yes, fantastic ending.
My interpretation is that during the performance, Fletcher went from livid with him to proud as he realizes feels that Andrew has lived up to his potential. By the end of the performance, they've developed a mutual respect.
In my opinion, it wasn't merely just a temper, but Fletcher was intentionally breaking his students down, as he believes the ones who rise above DESPITE his discouragement are the ones worthy of achieving greatness. You and I agree his approach is abusive and wrong, but when he explains his methods to Andrew later, I do see his point of view. He believes people in general (not just in music) are now conditioned to think they are doing great when they are actually not living up to their potential. He has a point, but I would never condone his behavior.
I can also see where his classmates would still resent Andrew after that competition. He already is "the new guy" and there is always the typical "you need to earn your stripes" with anyone new in something competitive. The first core drummer especially was resentful that Fletcher brought someone in to potentially take his spot. The folder incident didn't help matters from the band's point of view towards Andrew.
reply
share