The Misleading Finale of Whiplash

I’ve never felt that the ending condoned the methods

i love how every single video on whiplash has the exact same ending scene to end their video

Being "good" is easy. Every player at the conservatory is "good." Being "great" is HARD. It requires so much more than just practice or woodshedding. It requires pushing through the artificial obstacle of "doing my best" into a place you think you CAN'T go; to be better than you thought you could be.

That's not for everybody. It's not for every basketball player or every musician. There are few things sadder than seeing someone with the potential for true greatness settle for their "best."

Sometimes it requires getting a cymbal thrown at your head; sometimes it requires a major embarrassment. When those things happen the person will either quit, move somewhere where their "best" is acceptable, or they will rise to greatness.

The ending of "Whiplash" is happy not because Nieman earned Fletcher's respect, but because Nieman said "Fudge this guy; I'll show him," and TAKES OVER FLETCHER'S concert. Nieman stepped into his greatness... and Fletcher was there to see it.

Fletcher will continue being a respected band leader OF SCHOOL KIDS. I'm not disrespecting music educators; I AM one. But I know how many musicians and, especially, higher ups in the industry view those folks. Nieman will go on and be a famous and well-respected musician who stepped into his greatness with a GREAT story to tell for the rest of his life about the time he took over a concert where the band leader tried to sabotage him. Fletcher's happy ending is that he was there to see it.

I guess you could say the ending gave you…whiplash

That's not the message I got.

I got: "after all of this abuse, this physical damage and threat, I congratulate you on achieving the pinnacle!" ...which is what, exactly.

Nieman sacrificed all of that to be an amateur jazz drummer, and if he makes any money at all will probably remain in the bottom of the tax brackets, if you know what I mean, for the rest of his life.

And before you come at me with Miles Davis etc, #1 Nieman isn't a Miles Davis #2 moreover, Niemen is not a trumpet #3 finally, jazz doesn't make that kind of money anymore. Case in point: name the drummer that originally played Whiplash for the soundtrack. You can't, can you.

Even if you value art over wealth, in today's music world, even if Nieman is the best modern jazz drummer in the world, he's not going to be known outside of High Fidelity types, and his best gig will be to work on a late night show doing rim shots when the host makes a pun.

I guess my point is that if you're going to make that kind of sacrifice, make sure that it's worth it.

I understood this conflicted ending on my first watch, so that ending sequence was unfogettable! What a finale for an amazing movie!

One could say,
This finale gave you whiplash.

I think that's the central theme I see in all of Damien Chazelle's movies. Great art must be preceded by great suffering. I like his movies but it's an annoying idea to me when I've seen and met many great artists who weren't insufferable *ssholes.

This movie is Revenge of the Sith for jazz. The finale is Andrew embracing his role at the side of the Emperor despite knowing that the Emperor is the one who orchestrated his fall to darkness

what amazed me is how the name of the movie 'Whiplash', and the final scene didn't even match up since Neiman knew by heart to play 'Caravan,' which to me means that even though Neiman succeeded, he shouldn't have and his ultimate goal was never achieved, someone elses was: fletcher's

It's an endless cycle of abuse. I am an artist and I understand how hard it is so love your job and also having it to live a normal daily life. It can be so hard to love your passio, but feeling forced to do it every single day and I feel like its Andrew's situation. The moment he stepped into fletchers studio, I felt that love and passion died inside him cause of the pressure of "being one of the greats." You can't do your passion everyday you will get tired of pushing yourself everyday its exhausting. Art is something made for the artist, not other people, and Neiman was doing his passion for fletcher, which I would say is not a fun way to pursue band (thanks for reading this btw)

I think the ending is Andrew becoming the next Charlie Parker. That destines him for greatness but also for a sad lonely life filled with substance abuse. Charlie and Andrew’s story align really well too.

The director, even if he doesn't endorse Fletcher, is saying that the teaching style is effective and is the cause of the greatness. It's not, and saying it's effective is an endorsement. People post-hawk justify abuse IF it gets results, not WHEN it gets results.

Great video.

as Eckhart Tolle once said:
"You are hearing what you want to hear, seeing what you want to see, and then misinterpreting it."

There is no indication from the ending that Andrew Nieman goes on to anything other than phenomenal success because of what he has overcome. I suspect that you are seeing this ending through a postmodernist lens that resents the adversity necessary to create and refine true courage....

Are you sure you are not cherry picking examples of complaints from former players under harsh coaches? How did the former players under 1980 Olympics hockey coach Herb Brooks feel about him in retrospect?


Nearly every one of those players after the Olympics went on to success.

fletcher is like a drill sargent

Before they go onstage, Fletcher gives a speech about the clout of the people who will be listening and says something to the effect of "If you mess up, they will never forget." The concert was an opportunity. Fletcher used it as an opportunity to retaliate by humiliating Andrew and destroying any chance of the career he wanted. When Andrew walked back on stage, he used it as an opportunity to show his true ability and take back the future Fletcher had tried to deny him. I would not say that Fletcher "created" Andrew's next level. I believe that we see Andrew do throughout the film is what he would have done anyway. Had Fletcher not yelled at and cursed him out, he would have cursed himself out for messing up and practiced until he bled. I have known people like this, and it didn't take a psychotic band director to make them practice until they bled. In the concert, we see Fletcher go from being enraged to having to recognize the talent that is in front of him (and being "forced" to enjoy Andrew's performance), to finally participating in his greatness. My feeling during the 2nd half of the solo was "This is the way it could have always been if he had just WORKED with Andrew instead of abusing him." They could have made magic without the torture and abuse. Fletcher never TAUGHT Andrew anything musically. I also know and have known many directors who yell and intimidate their way to 1st place trophies. They have merely abused students who would have given them their best anyway. Fletcher mistakenly saw abuse as an effective means to an end based off of one infamous story about a jazz legend. Andrew and Fletcher were both obsessed to the point of madness. Andrew to be the best, and Fletcher to mold the best. Earlier in his career, Fletcher was probably repeatedly made to feel that he had nothing significant to contribute to music/jazz, so he focused on a quest to find and mold the next "great" by any means necessary. I read the ending as being on Andrew's terms. In the "5 minutes that we didn't see", I'd like to say that after Andrew bowed to an extended, roaring standing ovation, he walked off stage and out the side door with Fletcher calling after him. At that point, Andrew had his future secured. He could either leave Fletcher in the dust or Fletcher could come with him on his terms.

What a nest of crybabies. Fletcher is evil and abusive - I'll grant you that. But this isn't Fletcher's story; it's Neiman's. The ending is not tragic; it's triumphant, not because Fletcher gets what he wants but because Neiman succeeds. There's a shared moment of exuberance as each man has gotten what he yearned for; Fletcher has produced a truly great performer and Neiman has won Fletcher's respect - but those who focus on this detail are missing the point of the film.  

This is not a film about the scandal of abusive teachers and coaches. It's not a film about winning the respect of your hero. It's a film about a journey, about one man's gauntlet. It's not a justification of that gauntlet. Is there really a viable debate over whether someone like Fletcher should be teaching? He's a sadistic, egomaniacal creep, another evil daddy figure using his students to make himself feel successful. He doesn't care about his students, just what they can do for him.

Nor does his justification for his behavior make any sense. He rationalizes his abuse by claiming he's doing it to make his students better. He thinks the alternative is indifference, the "good job" of a parent figure who doesn't want to get more involved than to extend a glib congratulatory gesture, one that comfortably hugs and high-fives a young person's ambition to anything beyond mediocrity.

But is hurling a chair at someone the only alternative to "Good job"? Fletcher alternately criticizes the new guy for rushing and dragging - then Chris Rocks him for losing track of which failure he's getting humiliated over. This is the same teacher who screamed at a musician, then kicked him out of the band for playing off tune, when he knew he wasn't the offending musician. He merely dismissed the kid because he confessed when the offending player was someone else. His justification was that it's more wrong to be wrong than it is to duck responsibility and let someone else take the heat.

When we first met him, Neiman is practicing alone, trying to become "one of the greats." He's so keen on getting there that he breaks up with his girlfriend, rejecting her not because she has little in common with him and his interests but because she might distract him from being someone. He's at Shaffer Conservatory, "the top music school for jazz," because he thinks great jazz musicians are the product of the best schools. He wants to get into Studio because it's the top group at Shaffer, one that works directly with Fletcher.

Neiman thinks the best drumming is pounding the batter head faster and faster till his hands bleed. Real drummers will tell you that their blisters come from long hours of practice, that no matter how you hold your sticks, it's the accumulation of these hits - not the wind-up-monkey routine - that bangs up your hands. Early on, he naively thinks he's made it by getting in, by taking a seat because he lost somebody else's music.

Fletcher is walking proof that success isn't about satisfying someone else. At best, winning Fletcher's approval is impossibly hard. For most of the band, success is defined by not becoming the target of Fletcher's tirades. If Neiman is a better man, by the end of the flick, it's not because the Fletcher Method is so amazing. It's because Neiman has survived a kind of boot camp. This is a jazzy Full Metal Jacket, or An Officer and a Gentleman.

That big grin on Neiman's face is not irrational nor is it based on the idea that he was doing all this for Fletcher. Neiman's goal was to be great. Everything he did was a naive consumer's set of choices, based on his fear of not using every advantage to make it to the top. It's not healthy or realistic. It's not actually how any of the greats "made it." Fletcher manipulated and abused him but he was up for it from the beginning.

The idea that being a great artist has anything to do with going to the right school, getting into the top band and working under the right teacher is mythological. Neiman's victory is that he believes in himself enough not to quit and that he shows everybody his chops as an artist. The solo at the end is about defying Fletcher and believing in himself with a task that has him sticking his neck way out because he no longer fears failure. He says, "I'll cue you in." That's a ballsy approach. He's in the driver's seat. He's conducting the conductor.

That shared smile at the end isn't tragedy. It's fantasy wish fulfillment. Did you guys forget you were watching a movie? This film is not an expose of music-conductor abuse. It's not the sad plight of the competitive musician. It's Swan Lake. It's Fight Club. It's Bruce Wayne facing his fears in the Bat Cave. Realistic or not, Neiman has - at least on this night - survived his ordeal. Regardless of whether he ever becomes "one of the greats," he has pushed back and let the world know he was pretty effing great. As the saying goes, "Every dog has his day." This was Neiman's moment. It's the end of a journey that began with Whiplash, the jazz number.

As for the other student, who was great but who killed himself, he and/or Neiman might have done as much - with or without the sadistic Fletcher - because the entire system, and the need to succeed, produces suicides on its own. The point of playing is to have fun, and while winning and success add to that fun, when they become all-consuming, especially if it's about pleasing someone who's standing on a pedestal, it ceases to be fun. It becomes more of an exercise in masochism. This is a film that tells us what we, the audience, want to hear - that perseverance pays off, that believing in yourself is necessary to happiness and mental/emotional survival. It's a Hollywood ending but that's what we're paying to see. If this is your Taxi Driver, you can let me out here.

Thanks for pointing this out. I think a lot of people misunderstood what was being conveyed.

GOOD JOB!

To me the ending was beautiful. Everyone is worried about fletchers abuse. But anyone here who’s attempted or done anything in the upper 8th percentile will tell you that you abuse yourself to achieve things more than any instructor ever will.

Nieman could’ve always quit. He didn’t. Nieman played his hands and drums bloody. Fletcher never made him. Truth is everyone else in the band had their own form of self harm that got them there which you never saw. You only saw Niemans. Look up what happens to wind instrument players. It’s called embouchure collapse .

To me, The ending was about Nieman finally accepting what he needs to put himself through in order to achieve what HE wants. Fletcher is a physical embodiment of that. And in the end Nieman realizes no one can push himself like him. Not even fletcher. Fletcher smiles because he realizes the kid has finally surrendered himself to the entire process. Which most people refuse to do.

The ending makes no sense to me, because first of all, it posits that this jazz band would take the stage for a major performance with a drummer playing with the band for the first time ever - not even a single rehearsal beforehand. I can't believe that that is ever actually done in the real world.

I think the confusion is that a talented filmmaker failed to communicate effectively through film. Of course, I'm not advocating for anything as dull as a voiceover monologue explaining who is right and wrong. But clearly there's a middle ground between either only telling or only showing.
And while I think the ending is clear enough by proving time and again that the main character is in a bad situation with a mentor -- abusive mentor who has no incentive to ease up -- the fact is that it's not clear enough to a general audience. Which has seemingly added to its appeal because messed-up people think this is a feel-good story and they may actually be inspired to stay in bad situations. Because yes, some people are irrational enough that at difficult times in their life, they'll rely on movies for inspiration, especially intense, well-made films such as Whiplash. Ending your film with too much cognitive dissonance is definitely a film major's move.

Fletcher owned him again at the end

I don't agree with the whole abuse argument. It implies that someone is a victim and in this particular scenario, a victim by choice. If people didn't like how Fletcher taught, they simple could have skipped his class or dropped him as a teacher altogether. No one forced anyone into anything, thus I fail to see any victims of abuse. Fletcher aspires, regardless of whether or not you agree with his methods, and that's why his approval is paramount to every student.
If you want to succeed in life, whatever success may mean for everyone, you need to be pushed by someone who's able to do the pushing. If you can't handle it and it pushes you back instead, find another way, settle or remain unfulfilled.

Not that I entirely agree with you, but people calling this man and "this generation" as soft and needs to grow a pair is the funniest thing ever lmao.

They act like being slapped and shouted around like a girl is the mannliest thing ever lol.
They act like dying of overdose at 35 with no friends and family is "great". Its probably the most cucked way to live.

The point of the movie differs depending on your world view. Some people hate it, others love it. For me, i enjoyed the ending because it was seeing two men who were two sides of the same coin destroy all of what was expected and put aside the hate they had for one another to truly make something great in that moment, even at the cost of everything. But for others, it was frustrating to see the abuser win and stomach twisting to see what Neiman let go. At the end of the day though, neither interpretation is totally right or totally wrong, and this showcases the true meaning of the movie in my mind. Its not a movie about music, its about people. Crude, messy, awful people, selfish people who say horrible things, but who also have huge dreams and incredible work ethic and a desire to truly be great, and who in the end, make something great in that moment together. This showcases the truth of humanity which is that all people exist in a moral gray, and no one is truly light or truly dark in their morality. Fletcher and Neiman aren't really good or evil, just people shown in the scope of the extreme pursuit for greatness. Its messy, raw, and human.

This video just oozes beta

I was in the USMC (2003-2007). I went to tank school, and some of the instructors were crazy like this. When we were driving the M88A2 (hatches open) our instructor stood behind us in the commander's seat. He kept a mattox handle in his hand, and if we didn't follow his driving instructions perfectly, he'd smash us in the head with it. We had comm helmets on, but he'd hit us so freaking hard. I remember the day we threw track on one of the tanks... it was one of the worst training days I've ever had. I wanted to kill our instructor and I actually fantasized about it later on that night. Obviously, I'd never do something like that. Watching this film reminded me of the Corps, which is crazy when you think about it.

So thats why i cried, cool.

I think perhaps there is also the dynamic of the whole jazz world and Fletcher as a jazz teacher, the pressure from society can push people to act terribly towards people

I took the last scene as a way of Andrew giving Fletcher a big "fuck you". I think this is because he takes over at the end of the show, takes over the band, and has the balls to cue Fletcher in. It was Andrew's way of essentially giving him the middle-finger. The ending was Fletcher finally respecting Andrew as a MUSICIAN not necessarily as a person. Which at the end, what Andrew wants is to be respected as a talented musician and one of the greats.

The most beautiful diamonds come from the highest heat and pressure. Could Andrew have achieved his dream without Fletcher's influence? It's definitely possible. Fletcher was an evil that led to a positive change. Does that make the end result horrible? Success always has a cost.

Its an archetypal story for the talented empathetic person being manipulated and used for supply by a overt narcissist

I can see your point of view as it pertains to the ending and looking at it in the aspect of abuser/abused but I think it’s all on who is watching it and how they see it. My opinion, at the dinner table with his family and when he broke up with his girlfriend he expressed how he is striving to be the best, to achieve immortality in a sense. Could a person with amazing talent achieve greatness without being pushed to the absolute limits? Maybe. The journey he took leading to that final scene, all the way to being embarrassed on stage (“they never forget” going through your mind) taking him to the most lowest moments and telling yourself, no I will show him, the other musicians, and the crowd (which in my opinion matters given how he looks out at them) his talent, was to be noted. The validation of fletcher smiling back, to me shows that he does not need to chip at the rock anymore to reveal the diamond, that greatness has been achieved. The dedication, pain and suffering the greats put themselves through we may never truly know the full extent but one thing is for certain, they will forever be written in the history books and never forgotten. If that matters to them then to them it was worth it.

When watching the movie for the first time I kept thinking “this is Stockholm syndrome 100%”. And in a way, I think when Neiman losses his shit and attacks Fletcher, Neiman won, because he grew to tell Fletcher to go fuck himself. But when Neiman smiles back at Fletcher, he’s lost, because he so desperately wanted validation that he turned right back to his abuser for it.

The entire movie Andrew struggles to match Fletcher’s tempo. To play music exactly how Fletcher wants. At the end he stops caring about what fletcher thinks and decides to show the audience what he can do. He plays at his own tempo which is what all the greats do. He didn’t become great because of fletcher but rather in spite of fletcher

This is not a Boy friend girlfriend relationship. This is not a marriage. This is about Achieving Greatness in your craft. Achieving greatness in your craft or art comes at a high cost. This is not for everyone, but the very few. Teachers like the character of Fletcher are more needed now in society than ever.

😊😊

An analysis about a story where you can either boil like a potato or boil like an egg being analyzed by an American living in 2021 (at the time) is hilarious.

I understand both ways of interpreting the movie. I think it’s great that both ways are so easily understood and it’s what makes the movie so incredible and it will never leave my top 10 movie.

Now with that said, I would like to explain the simple way that I understood the end of the movie.

I’m not saying a satisfactory ending is the only way to end the movie, but I do think it is the most fitting and most fun way to end the movie while still giving a great lesson (which is a big part of the movie, the lesson). But I think the satisfactory is the ending that I understand the most and I personally just like it more. My way of seeing it is as follows: Fletcher did make that kid kill himself, he made students feel bad, and he made Andrew extremely upset and mentally screwed. But I think this changes a lot at the end of the movie. When you finally realize that the only goal Fletcher had was to achieve greatness in his students, not his own success, not anything else. Just to make someone great.

Once we got to the end, Fletcher tells Andrew that he knew it was him who testified against him and in my opinion this serves as the final twist in the movie to build the perfect satisfactory ending. When the movie finally ends.

Then Fletcher messes with him, playing a song that he doesn’t know. You as the watcher think that he is trying to embarrass him, and feel bad for Andrew. But then when Andrew goes back in to play Caravan, you slowly realize that all both of them want is for Andrew to be great, Fletcher’s were purely to push him to his limit.

I think the reason Nicole is in this movie is because she symbolizes sacrifice of greatness and career. Yes, Andrew was harsh, but this just ties back to my point about tricking the watcher into thinking that Fletcher was the villain even though he wasn’t. You could say that Fletcher made him do this, but I think it was purely Andrew making a mistake and just being a mean person unintentionally, a simple mistake.

As for the other ending, the non-satisfactory, I understand why anyone could think this is the correct ending, but personally I think the other way.

You have a terrible perspective on things, making your whole analysis terrible due to your personal perspective.

How have I not considered this point of view prior

Yes, emotional abuse can be devastating… but, harden up. Don’t take it too personally. Don’t let them get the best of you. Stop whining and whinging. Get it done. Get better. Be better. Some of us are getting a little too weak for our own (and others) good. Life is hard. Transcend it.

thank god im not the only one thinking something is not right 😂

The brilliance of the ending to whiplash is that It might be the only film where it doesn’t even matter what its creator(chazelle) intended, but rather who you are. I’m just going to be blunt here, because I don’t know how to church this up properly. If you watch it and you’re a puss, you’re going to view Fletchers actions as a net loss. Whereas if you’re someone with a tough mentality, then you’re going to view his methods as a positive.

Abuse is not teaching. There is no justification for it. Some students need to be pushed in order for them to achieve their potential. But, there is a difference between pushing someone forward and punching them in the back of the head. And, even pushing can be harmful if the person is not willing and/or ready to move forward.

The only thing that Fletcher gave Nieman, which Nieman actually needed, was acknowledgement. Nieman would have been great, with or without Fletcher. He already had talent, skill, ambition, and drive.

Fletcher is the major antagonist in the story. But, another is Nieman's father. He's the reason Nieman needed Fletcher's acknowledging, so badly. I don't blame Nieman's father for not understanding Nieman's passion for drumming. Nor, do I blame him for placing a higher value on Nieman's continued health and happiness than drumming. However, I do fault him for discouraging Nieman from following his path, rather than encouraging him and attempting to help him navigate along it.,

this movie does NOT just apply to music. any thing, climbing, art, running, whatever. keep going. push your self. bleed A LOT (i do in climbing all the fucking time.) When people tell me to stop i look back on this movie and just keep going. DONT STOP. If you got that fire you will make it.

in the words of my old coach "you cannot enjoy the product but hate the process. the same is with teaching"

YES finally somebody said that!! I hate the ending of the movie exactly because of this reason. Now I understand What director wanted to say, but still It looks like glorification of this behaviour.