Well, Nate Lang plays Carl. Just did some googling, and it's apparently kind of a mystery who actually played Miles Teller's parts. Some speculate multiple drummers. I read one claim that it was Gary Hobbs. Which is kind of cool, I met him in 1995 at a jazz camp.
I'm sure it did take two days to shoot... the visual. And all throughout that shooting, Teller would've been actually playing, hitting the drums... to the pre-recorded drum track.I researched further. Nate taught Miles jazz technique and it is Miles actually playing:
"That's not to say what you see in the film was Teller playing those songs straight through, though. Chazelle broke the songs into chunks, and shot them piece by piece. Remember that "Caravan" solo? It took two days to shoot. Then it was editor Tom Cross' job to make it look as if Teller "was playing his little heart out." As you saw, he did a great job. In fact, Cross' editing work in "Whiplash" is already earning awards, including one at last month's New Orleans Film Festival, where the film made its local debut. So, long answer short, that is, indeed, Teller playing the drums -- but with help from some great editing and no small amount of hard work. The end result, as I'm sure you'll agree, is some beautiful music, indeed."
It most certainly can. Constant friction on any part of your body will eventually break skin. I've taped up bloody fingers more than once in my younger days. Though, for the most part, I would tape my fingers before they got to that point.Playing drums doesn't make your hands bleed...
This is the most balanced response of this movie, in my opinion. This movie was out several years back.I love Adam Neely's channel and watch religiously. Personally I think jazz musicians haven't been able to see the forest for the trees regarding this film... I found Adam's review here better than most... but still IMO the same problem...
For anyone interested, here's the comment I just posted on YouTube....
reply to Whiplash review---
<<<Adam - The thing is yes, it got jazz kind of wrong… yet for the first time in my life, I found myself in a multiplex filled with lay people, that by the end of the movie seemed to walk away (and I eavesdropped on many post-movie conversations to know this) with a sense of the incredible joy to be had from the fruits of the demanding, grueling, and often solitary and misunderstood pursuit of being a jazz musician (or any musician for that matter).
You seemed to get part of that with your first chapter before falling into - like every other jazz musician penned review I’ve read/viewed - about how the movie failed as a jazz education documentary.
But what purpose would an accurate jazz education documentary serve? Those that know jazz, already know it. And those that don’t, have no reason to care. As they have a no cultural reference - film, TV show or otherwise - to give them any real insight into musicians. IMO this is the first movie ever to even come close to telling a story of a musician struggling with actually Being A Musician. As opposed to struggling with drugs… struggling with fame… struggling with love… anything and everything BUT a story about actually BEING A Musician.
What other movie has ever had anything like the dinner table scene? None. And yet, how few jazz musicians lived through that (or something painfully like it). And for a lay audience to experience that - coupled with the “it was all worth it” pay-off at the end. For me - there is no purpose for this movie to exist, except to reach those people in this manner. To reach the layman. Who doesn’t get us… at all. And give them just a taste of what it is to be a jazz musician.
So IMO getting Buddy, count-offs, what’s hip jazz and dumb jazz, and who should be told to sharp the 9 all wrong is 100% a moot point compared to giving the lay audience even a taste of what it is, what it means, what it’s like, to be us.>>>