An exhilarating study of obsession and perfectionism. Both J.K. Simmons and Miles Teller give phenomenal performances as a toxic mentor and his driven student. I return to this film time and again, and each time it gives a new layer to analyze. The movie never explicitly declares whether what Fletcher did to Andrew was right or wrong. I think it leaves us to decide for ourselves. The ending too can be interpreted in many ways.
In my first watching, I completely sided with Simmons’ character, Fletcher. I thought pushing someone to be their best, even if it involves temporary hardship, is justified. I thought it was the intention that mattered, and didn’t need to come from a coach or a mentor and it can come from within. Another thought was that however far you push, if that person was really capable of greatness then they would not be discouraged. They would instead be motivated to push further. The following dialogue sums it up well:
Andrew: But is there a line? You know, maybe you go too far, and you discourage the next Charlie Parker from ever becoming Charlie Parker?
Terence Fletcher: No, man, no. Because the next Charlie Parker would never be discouraged.
The later rewatches made me realize that it is more nuanced than that. Fletcher is indeed an abuser, a narcissist and is manipulative. Andrew’s self-destructive pursuit of greatness is also not something to be admired. Andrew’s idea of success, even before meeting Fletcher, was to be remembered for something great even if it costs him his life.
Uncle: You got any friends, Andy?
Andrew: No.
Uncle: Oh, why’s that?
Andrew: I don’t know, I just never really saw the use.
Uncle: Well, who are you going to play with otherwise? Lennon and McCartney, they were school buddies, am I right?
Andrew: Charlie Parker didn’t know anybody ‘til Jo Jones threw a cymbal at his head.
Uncle: So that’s your idea of success, huh?
Andrew: I think being the greatest musician of the 20th century is anybody’s idea of success.
Jim: Dying broke and drunk and full of heroin at the age of 34 is not exactly my idea of success.
Andrew: I’d rather die drunk, broke at 34 and have people at a dinner table talk about me than live to be rich and sober at 90 and nobody remembered who I was.
Uncle: Ah, but your friends will remember you, that’s the point.
Andrew: None of us were friends with Charlie Parker. That’s the point.
The overaching question then becomes whether to achieve ‘greatness’ require a level of fanaticism that borders pure madness, lack of empathy and disregard for one’s own well-being. With every rewatch the more I lean towards no. Some reviews I’ve seen online criticizes the movie for romanticizing abuse and glorifying Andrew’s actions. However, I don’t think the movie takes a clear stance on this. The ending is particularly ambiguous.