"Black Swan" on Steroids

Rating: 8/10 (30 June 2017)

I kept putting off watching "Whiplash" as part of my effort to watch all of IMDb's top 250 despite its current placement at an impressive 45th ranking and an 8.5 rating. I must admit I did feel before watching this film that I would find it overrated (and I do hold that opinion just now but to a much smaller extent) and that the subject matter wouldn't be highly engaging. I guess I was wrong to make those assumptions in hindsight for the most part.
The film is basically about a talented young drummer Andrew (played by Miles Teller) who is taken to his limits by his tormenting and brutal mentor Fletcher (played by JK Simmons). Andrew has to cope with this harassment and must weigh up his life and the difficulties of pursuing his dream and whether it is worth it or not.
The whole premise of a talented individual seeking greatness or who's entire existence seems devoted to success is a well-trodden one. However, this film sees the footprints that other films have made and chooses to walk in a different direction instead of stepping in the impressions already made. Most films of the like seem to think ambition and obsession of this nature as a bad thing that corrupts the soul but in "Whiplash" that is clearly not the message. It shows us that the strive for greatness is always painful, arduous and poisonous and leaves us wondering if it's worth it. However, at the same time it also shows the benefits of overcoming this adversity and the sense of satisfaction and meaning it can give to you.
Great art is often born out of great pain and "Whiplash" shows this in the bluntest fashion possible. It is terrifying but it is also incredibly inspirational.
I kept drawing comparisons to "Black Swan" when watching this film and, although I feel that "Black Swan" is still a good film, I feel that "Whiplash" achieves a deeper, broader and greater meaning than this albeit similar film. "Black Swan" is often melodramatic, basic in aspects of its story, its themes and its imagery and I'd say pretentious in many ways. It thinks it's smarter or deeper than it really is. "Whiplash" is a really grounded story, it delivers perfect tension consistently throughout the film. I thought there would be large lulls in between important scenes but it proves to be an uncomfortable (in a good way!) watch from start to finish. "Whiplash" explores the relationship of the mentor and the protagonist expertly and manages to expose positives and negatives in each character that gives you a rather confused and unsettled opinion on both (again in a good way!). It manages to avoid tired clichés like the "suffocating family figure who plants their failed dreams into their children" ("Black Swan" etc). In "Whiplash" it seems like Andrew is seeking attention and recognition from his family who have little to do with his life as a performer which is an entirely different situation. It doesn't touch the idea that "despite my success I don't find satisfaction" ("Raging Bull" etc) instead it revels in the moments were Andrew is able to achieve a victory which inches him closer to his goal.
A major commendation has to go to the direction which is able to capture the frantic scenes unfold deftly. It is incredibly difficult to capture such frantic movements on that drum set in a way that is digestible and enthralling to the audience. Tension is hard to capture and Chazelle manages to relish bottling it up. The music is great of course as you'd expect.
Where I will criticise, this film is to justify my view that it is overrated in its high ranking on the top 250. The lead performance by Miles Teller is good, very good, but it's not an exceptional performance that's incredibly memorable. It's what I'd call a generically good performance (which is not a bad thing) but just that he doesn't stand out against the leads of the films around "Whiplash". You'd think of Marty McFly or Maximus Decimus Meridius before Andrew I'm sure. I actually found Natalie Portman's Oscar winning role in "Black Swan" to be superior if I am being honest (which may be surprising to the reader of this review). JK Simmons is the star of the film in my eyes and is indeed a very memorable and nuanced performance. I am not surprised in the slightest to learn of his Oscar win that year. However, this is a typical Simmons role that is playing to his strengths and isn't what I'd call transformative although this is by far his best (and one of the best) portrayals of this "type" of character which is certainly due to the great script.
Quite simply I will say this is a great film in every aspect. People might say that my criticism in my previous paragraph is unfair and perhaps that is true. You could describe this film as a band itself- you could have one very talented musician/actor who steals the show but if all the others in the band/production don't play their part then it's worth nought. Whilst no individual aspect of this film is truly exceptional the way that everything comes together to make a great film is perhaps the best compliment anyone can really give a film truth be told. This is a really short, exciting and easy film to watch and will excite film buffs and general audiences easily.