Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why “Whiplash” Won an Oscar for Best Editing

williamdickersonfilmmaker.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 69 posts

Re: Why “Whiplash” Won an Oscar for Best Editing

#31

Post by sofal »

deadlysyntax wrote: post #30
dreamcompiler wrote: post #29

I thoroughly despised this movie. To me it felt like a celebration of a sadistic abuser mind-raping a kid, and never being punished for it. No music teacher I know would have gotten away with what Fletcher did without going to jail. This is not how you teach jazz. This is not how you teach anything.

A film about sadistic behaviour isn't necessarily a celebration of it.

It set up a false dichotomy between being abusive to students in order to achieve excellence and softballing them with praise so they'll never work hard. Most people I've talked to bought into this dichotomy after watching this movie, thinking that there is some kind of tradeoff between greatness and abusiveness. The movie legitimizes this false dichotomy, not by condoning the abuse, but by implying that it is the unfortunate price of greatness. Whether or not this was the intended message, it seems to have been the message that most people I've talked to have internalized from it.

Re: Why “Whiplash” Won an Oscar for Best Editing

#32

Post by __P »

sofal wrote: post #31
deadlysyntax wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A film about sadistic behaviour isn't necessarily a celebration of it.

It set up a false dichotomy between being abusive to students in order to achieve excellence and softballing them with praise so they'll never work hard. Most people I've talked to bought into this dichotomy after watching this movie, thinking that there is some kind of tradeoff between greatness and abusiveness. The movie legitimizes this false dichotomy, not by condoning the abuse, but by implying that it is the un…

While you are right it is a false dichotomy. It isn't completely made up either. Greatness can (often) be achieved through abusively pushing someone to their limits... Like most elite sports athletes...

Am I way off base thinking this?

Re: Why “Whiplash” Won an Oscar for Best Editing

#33

Post by AceJohnny2 »

__P wrote: post #32
sofal wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It set up a false dichotomy between being abusive to students in order to achieve excellence and softballing them with praise so they'll never work hard. Most people I've talked to bought into this dichotomy after watching this movie, thinking that there is some kind of tradeoff between greatness and abusiveness. The movie legitimizes this false dichotomy, not by condoning the abuse, but by implying that it is the un…

While you are right it is a false dichotomy. It isn't completely made up either. Greatness can (often) be achieved through abusively pushing someone to their limits... Like most elite sports athletes... Am I way off base thinking this?

You would like Frank Herbert's books: Dune, Dosadi... It's weird how most of his books have as a common element exactly that: suffering leads to greatness (the Fremen, Sardaukar in Dune, as well as the introductory Gom Jabar, the Dosadi people in Dosadi, etc...)

And for what it's worth, I personally think you are way off. Most of the time, abuse/suffering leads to stunted growth and/or trauma. Very few transcend that. I think you've got confirmation bias (as I once had).

Re: Why “Whiplash” Won an Oscar for Best Editing

#34

Post by kubiiii »

__P wrote: post #32
sofal wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It set up a false dichotomy between being abusive to students in order to achieve excellence and softballing them with praise so they'll never work hard. Most people I've talked to bought into this dichotomy after watching this movie, thinking that there is some kind of tradeoff between greatness and abusiveness. The movie legitimizes this false dichotomy, not by condoning the abuse, but by implying that it is the un…

While you are right it is a false dichotomy. It isn't completely made up either. Greatness can (often) be achieved through abusively pushing someone to their limits... Like most elite sports athletes... Am I way off base thinking this?

Many examples would prove you right, but I can't help thinking it would be better to fuel someone's desire for excellence instead of abusively pushing him.

Counter example would be Marion Bartoli who won wimbledon against all odds and her own limits, pushed by her father, then immediately stopped being a professional tennis player. Too many sacrifices. Pretty common in women pro tennis.

Re: Why “Whiplash” Won an Oscar for Best Editing

#35

Post by KVFinn »

sofal wrote: post #31
deadlysyntax wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A film about sadistic behaviour isn't necessarily a celebration of it.

It set up a false dichotomy between being abusive to students in order to achieve excellence and softballing them with praise so they'll never work hard. Most people I've talked to bought into this dichotomy after watching this movie, thinking that there is some kind of tradeoff between greatness and abusiveness. The movie legitimizes this false dichotomy, not by condoning the abuse, but by implying that it is the un…

>It set up a false dichotomy between being abusive to students in order to achieve excellence and softballing them with praise so they'll never work hard. Most people I've talked to bought into this dichotomy after watching this movie, thinking that there is some kind of tradeoff between greatness and abusiveness.

It seems especially egregious in creative fields. It might be good for muscle memory, I suppose, so perhaps it applies to drumming. But horrible for the hard creative problems which would include many aspects of music.

I do think the movie is ambiguous though. Watching it again, I started to wonder if the ending isn't just a fantasy of Andrew as he stares up at Carnegie Hall.

Re: Why “Whiplash” Won an Oscar for Best Editing

#36

Post by [deleted] »

sofal wrote: post #31
deadlysyntax wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A film about sadistic behaviour isn't necessarily a celebration of it.

It set up a false dichotomy between being abusive to students in order to achieve excellence and softballing them with praise so they'll never work hard. Most people I've talked to bought into this dichotomy after watching this movie, thinking that there is some kind of tradeoff between greatness and abusiveness. The movie legitimizes this false dichotomy, not by condoning the abuse, but by implying that it is the un…

[deleted]

Re: Why “Whiplash” Won an Oscar for Best Editing

#38

Post by estefan »

dreamcompiler wrote: post #29

I thoroughly despised this movie. To me it felt like a celebration of a sadistic abuser mind-raping a kid, and never being punished for it. No music teacher I know would have gotten away with what Fletcher did without going to jail. This is not how you teach jazz. This is not how you teach anything.

> I thoroughly despised this movie.

You don't have to like movies for them to have been good! You could despise a character while still thinking the movie was good for making you despise the character. That's an art.

If they have a strong emotional impact on you, they've "worked" (other than if they're just crap) because you talk about them, digest them and question their messages. A ton of great movies explore the darker side of humanity by using despicable characters; that's the beauty of story.

Re: Why “Whiplash” Won an Oscar for Best Editing

#39

Post by mirimir »

bedhead wrote: post #26
ectoplasm wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cool, agree on the first two, will have to rewatch Sneakers, haven't seen Primer. Here are some of my favorites: Kramer vs. Kramer, High Noon, Groundhog Day, Leon: The Professional. High Noon in particular is told in real time so it has this intense feeling like Whiplash.

Sneakers is wildly entertaining on many levels. Plus it was an early hacker movie which was cool. Primer is trippy, one of those rare movies where you will instantly watch it again after the first viewing. Then you'll google the plot and read for an hour and watch it a third time in the same day. It works though.

Primer is the best film featuring time travel that I've ever seen. And yes, the plot is highly convoluted, and there is virtually no explanation. Also, it was filmed on a very low budget, and some of the key dialog is hard to understand.

Re: Why “Whiplash” Won an Oscar for Best Editing

#40

Post by slowmotiony »

dreamcompiler wrote: post #29

I thoroughly despised this movie. To me it felt like a celebration of a sadistic abuser mind-raping a kid, and never being punished for it. No music teacher I know would have gotten away with what Fletcher did without going to jail. This is not how you teach jazz. This is not how you teach anything.

You didn't like the movie because it showed something bad?
Post reply on HN