A person who came from a single-parent family and was quite unwelcome in the original band would not be so easy to lose his bones by common sense. If he is really so light, it means: 1. As Chen Danqing said, Americans have not been bullied much. 2. This person is in the second state of "I am really different". 3. It deserves to be drawn.
There is a saying that it is normal for genius to be incomprehensible with the world. But in this story, there is no genius at all. The real genius is not forced by people. I think Fletcher knew this well, so he just asked if he was from a musical family. If Andrew replied "yes", the play would be difficult to perform. What this play wants is this kind of "one-to-one" relationship. There is no other reference to Andrew, and Fletcher's evaluation is for him authority, judgment and the only ruler.
So "core drummer" became a key word, representing the "position" and recognition that Fletcher gave him. Struggling and fighting all the way until there was a car accident. When I saw this passage, I expected that the following plot was about his loss of his left hand in this car accident, his lifelong crippling...Well, I am always more evil than the screenwriter.
But that is entirely possible. In reality, such anxiety, irritability, and emotional out-of-control are more likely to ruin a talented person in vain than to make him. Andrew's defense and runaway of the "core drummer" reminds me of Savieri in "God's Beloved": Because I endured great pain and struggled in loneliness to the point of flying in flesh and blood, even God could not take away. Go with my gains; even if there are geniuses who are indeed higher than me, you have to get out of the way.
This is a kind of "ruthless" logic. The reason why Andrew gave his mind to Fletcher to control was in exchange for this "God (or Devil)" to mold him into a "genius". The latter seems to be obsessed with claiming himself as a "master", even though he has never created a Charlie Parker. His final design shows that on the issue of "defending position", he, like the "ruthless man" he created, has a heart like a needle and cannot tolerate any touch or doubt.
Is "ruthless" great? Maybe. However, people who are paranoid about art may not be "cruel" to the state of contempt for all beings. Beethoven is withdrawn and irritable, unmarried for life, but still has to spend money for mediocre relatives, and spoils his nephew who can't do anything for no reason. When Van Gogh was only one step away from the mental hospital, he still painted ordinary postmen, doctors and peasant women around him, still struggling to "desire for life". It’s okay to use “ruthless” to become great, but it’s horrible to want to write "Ode to Joy" while fighting a lawsuit while being deaf. Moreover, paranoia towards art itself, and second-degree disease or even paranoia towards a certain devil teacher are two different things. Later, Fletcher attributed the mediocrity of the students to too many "good jobs", which reminded me of a passage written by Van Loon in "The Art of Humanity":
"The greatness of Michelangelo lies in his profound Dissatisfaction. Not dissatisfaction with others, but with himself. Like all the great people on our planet, such as Beethoven, Rembrandt, Goya, and Johann Sebastian Bach, such profound art Like a master, he knows the meaning of the word'perfect'...this promised blessed land will not be given to anyone in the world in vain. We will never want to reach a place where we cannot reach. Therefore, everything Wisdom comes from this deep dissatisfaction; all great art also comes from this deep dissatisfaction."
Yes, a true genius does not need people to force him, because he will force himself. Flowers and applause will not satisfy him, "good job" will only make him politely say thank you, and then nothing is equal. Sir Lawrence Oliver listened to the cheers of the audience in the backstage and said, "I am afraid I won’t perform so well tomorrow." I overhauled his own manuscript before; Gogol changed it over and over until his deathbed, and finally burned the second part of "Dead Souls"; Cézanne hid in Aix, repainting the same stone mountain endlessly...they What they pursue is higher than the praise of any people in the world, and they themselves are the most severe devil teachers, who spurs them to death.
At the end, it is not so much that Andrew has surpassed the limit, it is better that he finally surpassed the second illness, knowing that waiting for others to enjoy the meal is unreliable, and he has to take the initiative to force himself. But his future? This can't be delved into. Because only the real God can make Mozart, the imposter "God" can only teach people to be Savieri at best. If everything goes well, he can become the court music chief in the future. In the future, whether you bring down other people or bring down yourself, it's up to you.
View more about Whiplash reviews
