Overblown Melodrama: Offensive to Art and the Artistic Process

Rating: 4/10 (20 March 2015)

"Whiplash" on the surface is a tense, complex study of artistic struggle, obsession, and megalomania. I hated it. Not because it wasn't well constructed; not because it wasn't well acted; not because it wasn't well directed, it was all these things and more. No, I hated it for it's heart, its misguided insight into what art and beauty are truly about. It is not lost on me that any discussion or criticism about art could be argued to be completely subjective; I would argue that this movie does not reflect the Truth of art or do credit to the struggle of the artist. Thats not just my opinion either, to me that is a fact. I am not trying to argue an opinion here, I am actually commenting on something that I truly believe. It has been said that "Beauty is Truth and Truth Beauty". I believe in Truth and Truth can not be an opinion. "Whiplash" takes a swing at what it believes is necessary to reach that truth and fails completely at capturing what it means to be an artist. This movie would have one believe that suffering, obsession, sacrifice and ugliness are the building blocks that great art/artist are founded on. I couldn't disagree more. As an artist myself I understand how all these "negative" motivators can drive an artist to produce art, even to produce great art, yet I feel this movie celebrates them as a necessary right of passage. That in order to be great one has to work harder no matter the cost; it implies that those who are successful are those who have suffered and sacrificed the most, and those who aren't just didn't try hard enough or suffer enough. (How many of histories great artist were ignored only later to to be appreciated?) Perhaps most disturbingly It implies that one's self worth or the "value" of art is dependent upon its reception by an audience or external factors. Enter the "evil" music/art instructor who's job it is (by this movies logic) to push someone past what they think is possible to open up new untapped potentials hidden away by psychological blocks of complacency and self-pity by employing the tools of cruelty, manipulation and terror. All this hidden behind some BS ideal that their is a great nobility inherent in "not depriving the world of a great artist" no matter what the cost. GAG!! What grandiose melodramatic tripe. I don't argue that we all couldn't use a swift kick in the pants occasionally in order to rise to our potential, or that honest criticism can be crucial to progressing as an artist but to ruthlessly and manipulatively bully and torture someone in the hopes of achieving said effect is where i take offense. Who the hell gave him that cross to bare anyway!? There is a line. This movie even mentions this "line" at one point and comes really close to reaching a redemptive conclusion....then misses the mark entirely and descends into the abyss. At this point the movie could have had some valid commentary on the consequence of tyranny and obsession and lifted itself to having a message worth sitting through. I had a glimmer of hope that the movie"s heart was true and had been enact all along. Unfortunately this was not to be. The scene that twists the knife comes when; after being set up and sabotaged by Fletcher, Andrew rises to the occasion against all odds and puts on the performance of a lifetime. Had he done this despite the villainy of Fletcher and the movie just ended, then one could have left the movie with a certain ambiguity, open to contemplating the various themes and questions the movie raises about art and the artistic process. However the damning evidence of the movie's actual message comes during Andrew's fevered solo when despite everything Fletcher has done to Andrew (including trying to completely ruin him) there is a nod of acknowledgment from Fletcher that conveys the approval that Andrew has been so desperately seeking and the movie ends as if something triumphant and beautiful has been brought into the world, as if the "Master" has finally found a worthy pupil. Uunnghhh! Never mind that Andrew is an obsessive with no sense of self (or self worth), never mind that Fletcher is a maniacal, narcissistic power drunk bigot (who may have even played a hand in pushing a young mind to suicide), never mind that there seems to be no consequences for any of these characters in their pursuit of greatness. Never mind that neither character have hardly any redeeming qualities. No at this point the movie decided to celebrate this twisted moment as if it were a triumph of art and truth. As if tormenting a person is how great art is born. No I don't think it is cool to celebrate this message nor do i think it is healthy to celebrate Fletcher's and Andrew's relationship as justified and productive. As an artist it offends me with its clichés, it lacks insight, responsibility and any awareness as to the very purpose of art. Art doesn't have to be beautiful, art can be ugly. It is both and it is neither. The only thing that is required of art is that it reflects Truth. "Whiplash" explored beauty and it explored ugliness and I am fine with that, but in the final act when it tried to explore the impetus of what makes great art in rang FALSE. Instead of enlightenment we got pandering, melodrama and a self indulgent study in cruelty that pretentiously masquerades as if it knows what it means to be an artist. -Sizer