one is to live a life of genius, you will be surrounded by the huge fame, wealth, status and wealth brought by your talents, but you will die at a young age. The other is to live a normal, ordinary life, with children from get off work and family, you will end in health and health.
How would you choose? I think everyone’s answer will be different.
How hard does a genius need to be matched to fully shine? How to define the degree of forcing yourself to work hard to be called "excessive"? What is the role of the teacher?
I think what this movie wants to express is exactly a gray between inspirational and anti-inspirational, no, it should be said that it is a black zone. I was very excited and excited in the process of seeing it, but after the blood boiled, I also realized something almost self-destructive.
I remember listening to an interview with Lang Lang. His father’s attitude towards his piano practice is Fletcher’s almost brutal and dehumanizing pressure. Lang Lang has run away several times and even tried to self-mutilate himself to force his father to give up and force him to practice piano. . Now Lang Lang has become a world-renowned pianist. When asked about his feelings about the past years, he himself said that it was a cruel period, but to be honest, if there is no such persecution from his father, he may not be able to achieve it. Today's self. I was looking forward to the host’s question: If you could come back, would you still choose this cruel path of pianist? It's a pity that she didn't ask.
Whether it is Lang Lang or Andrew, the drummer in the film, they are both the beneficiaries and victims of this cruel education method. To be honest, how much do we know about the hearts of those geniuses in the world? If we can do it again, do we hope that there will be one less genius in the world who died young, or one more ordinary drummer.
Of course, there are still very few people in the world. They are talented and eventually endured this kind of high-pressure education, reaching a height that most humans can't reach. In our opinion, they may be "struggling." . But the story of the student who committed suicide in the film also tells us that this method is not suitable for everyone, or even for most people. Few people can survive from desperation after you beat him to death. Most people are either interrupted or in normal self-defense—run away—away from danger.
In the movie, Fletcher himself, the teacher, educates students with the extremely paranoid idea of "A genius is not a genius if you give up". In his view, this self-defense is a manifestation of a coward, which of course is It is very one-sided. Although his childhood is not described in the film, I think he must have experienced some extreme events in his childhood, so he will regard this kind of crazy control and obsession with fame and fortune as an encouragement to students in education. , Uphold the violence pedagogy that would rather torture 99% of the students than let go of a genius. He doesn't care about the students' mood, feelings, and only longs for results. What's interesting is that gifted students themselves are often extreme and have unusual temperaments. Under his inducement and persecution, Andrew finally came to the gate of genius by sacrificing love, interpersonal relationship, integrity until his life safety, and all the things he might not know was sacrificed. His genius ability was finally stimulated, but in my opinion, his complete or healthy personality has begun to burst.
The Chinese "persistence" seems to be a commendatory word, but I think that to describe Andrew in the later stage of the film, especially Fletcher, his dedication to music and the cultivation of talented students can be said to have reached the point of obsess (obsessive and extreme paranoia). . Anyone who doesn't feel according to his rhythm, even if the drumming is correct, is extremely incorrect for him. But music can not be privately owned. Different musicians' different performances of the same work have created the diversity of jazz today. Without personal understanding and personal performance, there would be no later bebop, free jazz and Fusion jazz. Fletcher’s genius advancement model, in my opinion, can only create a genius in playing skills. I don’t know whether such geniuses are also creative in the future. He kept using Charlie Parker as an example, which was rather ironic.
Many parents in modern times try to push their gifted children onto the path of genius. I think this behavior is very dangerous. And this film is precisely showing the two extreme results of this educational method of high-pressure training of geniuses before our eyes. Everyone is different. As teachers and parents, we want to desperately expect our own students/ Can a child endure such high pressure and eventually become a genius, or should he choose to encourage and gradually push the gifted child to a certain height, and then look at his own destiny?
I have always believed that a person of sound mind and body cannot have only one thing in his heart. This pursuit of a single thing-the peak of drum skills, will inevitably destroy other things in his heart at the same time. What is not important to him now does not mean that it will not be important in the future.
I was disgusted when I saw him breaking up with his girlfriend on the grounds that "you will be my stumbling block". But when I saw him practicing hard, I was filled with admiration and compassion. I even couldn't completely deny what my teacher Fletcher did. Before the last minute, my feelings about a character changed every minute. Isn't this the kind of amazing multi-level experience that a good movie can present? A good movie does not necessarily make people feel comfortable after watching it. Human nature is so complicated. So when I feel that I have a new experience of human nature after watching a movie, it just means that this is a movie. A good film that inspires people.
It's a pity that many people are simply commenting on the morality of the characters in the movie, and forget that this is a movie! There are many other elements that make up a good movie, such as scripting, editing, music, art, etc. In general, I think this is a good movie with at least 4 stars and a unique style! Just like commenting on the quality of a building, you can’t completely ignore other elements just because the floor color of this house doesn’t suit your tastes, and perhaps even more shouldn’t be adjusted because the morality of a character is very different from the universal values. All parts of the movie were scored low. I think this is a very one-sided and unprofessional way of evaluating a movie.
Finally, this film reminded me of the black hole caused by the explosion of a supernova in astronomy. I have never understood what is meant by "self-collapse of huge mass produced by the violent burning of stars". After watching this film, I suddenly had a new understanding of the birth of genius. When a splendid supernova explosion occurs in the universe, sometimes a black hole is created in the center of the supernova itself due to the huge gravitational force. Nothing can escape the gravitational force of the black hole, not even the supernova itself. At the same time that genius was born, destruction was also born.
View more about Whiplash reviews
