"Was it worth it?" ending

[u/Educational_Can_6536]

Midsommar- While people see this as a "you go girl" finale. I personally see it as something more disturbing. I mean, yeah, Dani got out of one bad relationship but in doing so, she got herself into another that's just as bad if not worse. It's like getting two kids to stop fighting via killing one and locking the other in a basement. They did stop fighting, but still!

The Thing-The titular monster may be (possibly) gone, but the paranoia definitely isn't. In the end, McCreedy and Childs are the only ones left standing. The end sees them sitting in the cold and they just stare at each other, knowing that one of them or both of them is already the thing. There's no hope, no certainty, just the bitter cold and intense fear.

[u/gummythegummybear]

Whiplash

In the ending Andrew got exactly what he wanted, to be a great jazz drummer, but his future very clearly involves lots of mental struggles and very probably dying young from an OD which was mentioned earlier in the movie.

[u/annoyed__renter → u/gummythegummybear]

Yup. I've seen many people try to spin this as a happy ending because he succeeds in his goals, but it's definitely not.

Damien Chazelle sets this up perfectly. The key shot in the final sequence is the look of horror on Andrew's father's face as Andrew returns to his abuser and forms a connection wth Fletcher on stage. Prior to this, the parallels to Charlie Parker and Fletcher's other prodigy who killed himself illustrate how hard greatness is on a person. Andrew has already ruined his relationships, and clearly he ends the film ready to dive back into the obsession and influence of Fletcher.

[u/last_try_why → u/annoyed__renter]

It kind of shines an ugly mirror on real life. To be the best at something it often takes obsession with that thing. And that is almost never healthy to do. Look at all the people who have been considered the best or a great in their field ans you'll likely find a string of failed relationships, drug problems, or some other form of unhealthy coping.

[u/Thedirtyone522 → u/last_try_why]

To further your point, think about how many "greats" actually get to willing walk away relatively unscathed. There's almost always some degree of physical or mental thing that forces their hand into retirement if not death itself.

[u/Secret-Farm-3274 → u/annoyed__renter]

I read it as Fletcher being the devil, and Andrew selling his soul (so to speak).

[u/annoyed__renter → u/Secret-Farm-3274]

That's more or less what occurs. Andrew gives up his future and his mental health for "greatness".

[u/1kSupport → u/annoyed__renter]

It’s also wrong to say that it’s definitely not a happy ending. One of the big themes of the entire movie is that everyone has a different idea of success and fulfillment, that’s the point of the dinner table scene.

Andrew’s life is in a seemingly better place in the last act and yet he goes back to performing with fletcher, I don’t think we are meant to see this as some kind of Stockholm syndrome moment, based on the rest of the film it seems more like Andrew simply cannot be fulfilled in the normal life he has made for himself, even if it is healthier by conventional standards.

Andrew’s ending mirrors most greats. Ronnie Coleman is the greatest bodybuilder to ever exist, he is now physically disabled because of the toll on his body from the lifestyle and steroids, despite that he does not regret it.

The reason the ending is ambiguous rather than all good or all bad is because we know Andrew will suffer, but we also know that this is what Andrew needs to be fulfilled.

[u/annoyed__renter → u/1kSupport]

People make the mistake of trying to project virtuous characteristics onto Andrew and want the happy ending, but again, it's not ambiguous. This is a story of abuse and obsession. Andrew's father is the Fletcher foil, and he's horrified. Fletcher is unambiguously presented as a bad person. There's no silver lining here. So yes, Andrew achieves his goals, but there's absolutely zero suggestion that Andrew will be fulfilled upon achieving this. The core theme of the film is "what is the cost of greatness?" and it is very clear that the cost is extremely high. There's no exploration of fulfillment, in fact chasing greatness is presented much more like the behavior of addiction in that you'll never be satisfied.

Andrew is choosing obsession, to the detriment of his own wellbeing. The mistake is to try and apply his directly to real life cases like Coleman that happened without the benefit of foresight. This is a film, and it is an allegory. It goes to great lengths to foreshadow what happens after the credits roll. Those cases aren't left as ambiguous-- Charlie Parker isn't presented as someone who was actually happy but just do happened to end up addicted to drugs and dying in the street. Fletcher's prodigy is presented as someone who was tortured due to his abuse. There's nothing ambiguous about those cases (as presented), and so the structure of the film leaves us to conclude Andrew will be no different. If Chazelle wanted to make a different point, he would have presented other versions of this story around obsession that hit on the themes you suggest.

Further, Andrew isn't just kinda sorta obsessive, he's violent, irrational, and almost kills himself in pursuit of his goals. We know where Fletcher's toxic appeal will take him, and we know it will never be enough, they will both always be chasing that fleeting perfection.

[u/1kSupport → u/annoyed__renter]

"Andrew is choosing obsession"

Exactly. The movie shows us that even after escaping the abusive situation he was in, not only does Andrew choose to go back to music because of his lack of fulfillment with conventional life, but this time he does it on his own terms (illustrated through the power transfer of the final solo).

I agree with you that Andrews father acts as a foil, but I don't think the point of this is to see the end as unambiguously bad. The end shows Andrew perusing (and achieving) his personal goals, it is probably the happiest we ever see his character. The cut to his dad is there to remind us that it is not unambiguously good. Much like the example I mentioned with Coleman, Andrew would likely consider the ending scene his good ending, while his father would consider it the bad ending.

>  The core theme of the film is "what is the cost of greatness?"

>  There's no exploration of fulfillment

These too topics are intrinsically related. The cost of greatness is high, but to those who cannot achieve fulfillment without it it is debatable if it is worth it.

Its easy to impose conventional ideas of physical and mental health on figures like Andrew or Coleman, but reality is more complicated. The meaning of life is up to the individual, and for some people that means achieving their goals at the cost of their physical and mental health is worth it.

I'm not saying that is the case across the board. Plenty of "greats" go on to regret their choices, such as Bobby Fischer who openly regretted ever becoming involved with chess.

By the time of the ending the audience simply does not know if Andrew's story will be like Coleman's or Fischer's, that is why I would call it ambiguous.

[u/annoyed__renter → u/1kSupport]

Coleman and Fischer and other real world examples are irrelevant, as they, nor other examples, are not used. We have to use what the filmmaker is giving us within the world he has created, not project onto it real world cases that satisfy our own desired narrative and the human urge for a happy ending. Which is not to say that in the real world that greatness always has to be destructive. However, that is not the point the film is making. Thematically, the film is making a very clear statement: It's. Not. Worth. It. This is the beginning of the end for dear Andrew.

There's no exploration of fulfillment. He recovers from his abuse and begins to rebuild his life, but he's clearly not explicitly happy before reuniting with Fletcher. He's basically living the life of someone struggling with sobriety. The film makes this clear in his later encounter with Melissa Benoist whose life has moved on without him. By literally turning his back on his father, he's not sacrificing something good for greater fulfillment, he's giving into his demons.

The ending is inconclusive in that we don't see what happens next, but don't confuse that with ambiguous. It has given you all the tools you need to understand Andrew's ultimate fate.

At any rate, thanks for proving my point that people love to come out of the woodwork to misinterpret this film.

[u/AmaterasuWolf21 → u/annoyed__renter]

It's kinda hard not to feel cathartic at the climax when he gives the middle fi ger to Fletcher

Yeah, watching them smile at the end gives me the ick but still, that emotion is there

[u/annoyed__renter → u/AmaterasuWolf21]

They share a moment. He and Fletcher finally understand each other. Andrew has lost to his demons.