Really? I loved the second song.
I don't have it fresh in mind, but girl didn't say anything about the boyfriend, for starters, and they never seemed to tell each other their schedules, or feelings, or anything, until it became a problem and blew up. That is not a healthy relationship.
The date with the boyfriend thing happened before they got together, to be fair. And everything else after that when it came to Sebastian scheduling his band tours are understandably complex in planning for somebody not involved like Mia. Couples bring up unexpected plans related to work all of the time. Not every single couple is extremely diligent enough to tell their loved one every single thing that's going to happen with their job. There are times where you just trust them unless you're THAT high maintenance. This type of trust occurs all over fictional media and allows for spouses to keep dirty secrets for tons of drama potential. Your perception of relationships being constantly informed about everything is a bit unrealistic, to say the least. It's cool if that works for you, but it certainly doesn't for plenty of people who just don't have the interest to know intricate details or like being hounded.
On the part about feelings, they talked plenty about their motivations in life and we got loss of visual montages of their time together and how they got attracted to each other. They don't need to spoon feed us verbal statements of how much they like each other when it's pretty obvious that they had chemistry earlier on. And on Sebastian's part with his insecurities, it's understandable why he kept his feelings a secret and tried to delude himself.
She just left that dude in the middle of dinner without saying a word. That is a total dick move, I don't care how blah you feel about the dude. She was like 'bored now lawl gonna cheat on you'.
It is a total dick move. I didn't mean to sound like I was justifying that action specifically, just that Mia's feelings up to that point were understandable and not completely unprovoked. But love is more complex than treating someone as being irredeemable just because they feel pressured to cheat. It's wrong and even distasteful, I get that. But it's not some sin that eternally dooms you. End of the day, you have to be honest with what your heart craves. It doesn't justify cheating, but it's unfortunately a real phenomenon. It's totally fine for you to not like Mia for doing that though, that's one solid criticism I can agree with. It should have had more complex execution then just having actions like that be showcased as purely justified moments of true love condoning inconsiderate behavior. But I can overlook it because better relationships can come from meeting other people while in a relationship. It's sad, but true. And all it tends to show is how fragile and likely non-existence the love in the first relationship was in the first place.
Thanks for reminding me of the premise on that argument, too, which was idiotic. Girl doesn't care about the guy, only her vision of him, and if he deviates from that, even to support his own dream (playing with that band was a necessary step for him, regardless, unless the movie wants to make a point on how you shouldn't do hard unlikeable work to pursue your dreams, but there's a whole other argument). On the actual scene, ignoring that this woulda not been a problem if the dude just remembered he had a goddamn photoshoot that day, if he can't afford to be honest with the person he supposedly cares about, then he doesn't really care about that person. If he can't set aside a dumb argument and a photoshoot to be with a person he supposedly cares about, then he doesn't really care about that person.
But the issue is that Sebastian playing with the band WASN'T helping him pursue his dreams. If anything, it was driving him further away from what he really wanted and placing him in a perpetual cycle of working and travel without any emotional payoff. He got cash, but was most likely going to give up his dream. He only accepted the job offer in the first place because of feeling insecure about his and Mia's future, and then gradually tried to convince himself that just having a sustainable job was worth losing why he accepted it in the first place.
And she didn't just have this "vision" of him that popped out of nowhere, they literally talked to and inspired each other when it came talking about the passions and dreams. It's understandable to hold your partner accountable for something that meaningful, yet you're treating he expression of your life's passion like it's some insignificant delusion. It wasn't the fact that they had to do unlikable work, but it was unlikable work that kept getting them shunned and shifted around without any progress made. Sebastian kept getting ripped off and fired while Mia kept getting rejected for acting roles and had to monotonously work in a coffee shop. Unless a miracle happens, nothing changes unless they alter their game plan, which they motivate each other to do. Unfortunately for Sebastian specifically, he comprises his morals and sense of satisfaction out of fear. There is more to caring about someone than just being satisfied with them being able to put food on the table in and of itself. People have psychological needs too.
And you're seriously going to blame Sebastian for forgetting he had a photo shoot? He's human and is going through rough times, and he JUST had a heavy argument the previous day where a dinner he planned out got completely ruined. And it's a photo shoot lol, do you really have to inform your significant other of every single little detail that happens in your job if you don't think it interferes with any big plans off the top of your head? People can forget when life gets hectic. Again, it's human. You're really exaggerating the severity of this when it's an event that lots of people could care less about, especially someone who doesn't truly feel passionate about their job like Sebastian.
Yes, not being honest and thinking he could still get by was his fault. But you keep ignoring that the buildup to that makes sense in-character with the conflicts that are present. You're SUPPOSED to not like how he chose to have the photo shoot and get that he accepted it because of the relationship getting strained. And even then, Mia became aggravated only as Sebastian kept being a hypocrite about everything he said to inspire Mia earlier throughout the story by letting his fears of not being successful or liked get to him and make him think that he could be satisfied just by having a sustainable job. He was just disparaging himself with a delusion when it came to what he truly cared about and how willing he became to let it all go in favor of just making a living with no emotional/artistic profit for him. It's not even like Mia was willing to break up with him just because he wanted to keep the job, it was Sebastian's attitude and emotional vulnerabilities making the conversation volatile that caused her to walk out on him. It was about how they talked and regarded each other. Sebastian kept shoving words into Mia's mouth and accusing her of things. If you're going to criticize her, do it right since she was the one with the level head who could see that Sebastian wasn't really doing himself any real favors by trapping himself in a cycle of working. When you love someone, you care about their happiness and integrity. And when they make it seem like you're acting selfish and doubting their capabilities, it hurts. A lot. I just hope you don't decide to try spinning this into proclaiming how Sebastian's reasons for what he said are stupid. Because while they are, they make sense in-character and realistically as a character flaw.
You have this flawed perspective of how every good relationship can continue to function normally if it hits major bumps where tensions rise and both sides feel significantly insulted. It doesn't mean they never truly valued each other. It's that one or both of them let their flaws get in the way of what truly matters in making their relationship work. It's how relationships that hold a lot of potential can understandably fall apart. Relationships are rarely executed perfectly from the start, which is how and why you learn. Their strength is tested in how they overcome ordeals, and some couples can immediately get over it while others take more time and can almost completely end. Yes, they should push their problems aside for the sake of how they care about each other, but that is MUCH easier said than done.
Flaws make characters compelling as they and the plot's themes continue to develop. But you're criticizing flaws for... being flaws despite having built-up context for why they're present and making the characters vulnerable towards making mistakes. That doesn't make sense. Their relationship was supposed to be a faulty in a tragic way as their insecurities and/or dreams found ways of obstructing them. It happens all the time in real life, and characters experience downfalls to learn and find out what they should do if they really care about someone and themselves. Acting as if every person should know what to do from the start to have a healthy relationship is literally saying that you don't want there to be drama, or that you can't get emotionally invested in a relationship that struggles because the character involved make mistakes. Not every person is going to be invincible by not having words hurt them and propel them to make regretful actions. Relationships can go through rough times before both parties grow up. It's called character development. You get into stories likes this to see how characters learn how to do thing right and rise from their shortcomings. Stumbling doesn't mean you're hopeless. Just probably stupid at first, and that makes for engaging characterization in various forms lol.
That was not a dumb argument. Sebastian said hurtful things he can never take back, and he felt like he was being devalued while being too prideful to admit his dissatisfaction. That was an interesting conflict that got explored and had big ramifications. You do not move past that overnight when hearing those things from someone you deeply care for, because it hurts all the more knowing such words came from their mouths. A couple texts or a phone call isn't going to do much to help things, and can be expected to not be the first thing you're willing to do in that situation if you're a relationship amateur. People can get emotional and commit mistakes they don't initially think could be harmful. It's life. You might as well critique any relationship on any level, romantic or not, that involves dramatic struggling and claim that because they didn't immediately know what the right choices were, they never cared about each other. Regardless of if they eventually made up or wish they could've changed the past. I've never read something so naive and prejudicial on the subject of romance.
If I have to sum up their relationship in one statement it's that they don't care about each other, only their images of each other.
And that is a very shallow way to interpret their on-screen relationship. Apparently, caring about the dreams and passions about your significant other is just having a superficial "image" of them. See someone you care about doing something that they are about to regret or are currently obviously suffering through? Or compromising something you know they care a lot about? Let them be. Trying to warn them means you're only concerned with "images" you have of them. Those insightful talks they had to learn about each other and what drives their creative passion and perspectives on life? Those are just falsehoods, nothing you should rely on. Instead, we should have generic lovey-dovey small talk that doesn't go anywhere and generically states what we already know without any profound insight.
I'm talking about when the dude shows up at her childhood home (no phonecalls or anything) to rally her to come back, and then waits for her to leave with him the next morning, but whoops, one minute too late, gotta jet, fuck your dreams. Use a cell phone, dude.
Do you really think she's going to accept calls from him after how she refused to talk to him when she thought the theater production fell apart? He needed to make a visual impression of how much he cared about her, so he drove all the way down there to surprise her. And not even for the sake of getting he rack, but telling her that her theater production did impress an acting firm. And he had no personal gain to get out of doing any of that since they pretty much broke up. That's love right there in its most raw, daring, and embarrassingly awkward fashion.
And the previous night, Mia kept denying that she was good enough and kept trying to go on about how she should just conform to being a successful lawyer to play it safe in life rather than fulfill her passion for acting by succumbing to the painful experiences she's had with auditions and performing. When you take into account that and how the argument/break up was still the second-to-last moment they had together, yes, it's completely understandable why he almost left. Being able to text and call does not magically fix everything when there's more conflict going on than just not talking to each other. Also, what if he did text her and she just didn't have time to respond from rushing to get ready It would've had the exact same effect. Your phone critiques just feel like bloated nitpicks when the story still flows together comprehensively.
A hot narcissist that actually pays attention to her, inspires her, wants to know about her, and is actually willing to spend substantial amounts of time with her while all the boyfriend cares about is work and traveling. Even during their own dates. Like you said, leaving for another guy in the middle of a date was a dick move regardless . I get not liking Mia for that moment. I would've preferred something less blatantly disrespectful too. It's distasteful, but it doesn't make her a completely rotten person that can't ever redeem herself.
Ending the relationship would be reasonable. But she didn't. She left the dude cold to bone a hot narcissist.
They left each other on amicable terms. You're telling me that in five years they never once decided to catch up? No 'congratulations on your debut!' or even a 'I'm going to be in town soon, we should catch up?' And the film wants us to believe they care about each other? But nah, guess since they aren't having sex, they aren't allowed to check in.
Probably at first. But jobs and family can get in the way. It happens all of the time in real life when it comes to how friends can grow apart. Reconnecting can often be awkward and, believe it or not, can just not come to mind when visiting old areas. You're just forcing the characters act how you want them to act for the sake of it when there's no incentive to when the relationship over. This is nothing more than a nitpick. Just because they don't think about each other constantly, they can't care about each other? I thought you were having an issue with how the final scene apparently made them looked obsessed with each other? It's excusable to suspend disbelief when it comes to social media since that can often get in the way of potential in terms of suspense unless you decide to have your story take place in another decade for an excuse like Stranger Things on Netflix (it takes place in the 80's only for the sake of not having cell phones or the internet around). Life happens. There's no real need to question it so much outside of maybe joking about it.
The dude made the name of the club her suggestion. He's still playing the same grandpa jazz with the same stool he couldn't bear to get rid of in the first scene of the movie, in the club location that he was dead set on having because of its history, but he somehow gave up the point on the name. He's stuck on her, like he's stuck in the past on all other things.
Because a name holding sentimental value means that you have to be hopelessly obsessed with someone. C'mon, you're just prejudging Sebastian without acknowledging context. Breaking up with someone doesn't mean you can't value or take to heart any moments you had with each other. Your expectations for relationship ethics are getting overblown outside of the Mia ex-boyfriend date thing. Being a huge jazz geek doesn't mean you're obsessed with the past, as if caring about it is a bad thing. There's no reason to be so vindictive about being passionate about classic jazz as if to mean you obsess about everything with the past and completely ditch the future. That sounds rather offensive towards anybody who has a hobby and occupation related to something of antique value.
What really makes the scene creepy, though, is that it undermines their current happiness. Girl isn't allowed to move on. Girl being with a different man and having a child isn't a happy ending. A happy ending is pretending that their relationship wasn't awful.
Because a relationship not working out has to mean that every little bit of it was regretful and holds no merit. As if you can't ever still feel for your exes sometimes.
It was a chance reunion out of the blue, it's okay to get sentimental when thinking about the past. It doesn't mean you have to undermine everything since then as not mattering. It's okay to think about what could have been and the delights you shared together. Looking back on the past does not mean everything that happened up until now is worthless. It's just giving value to what was it it was meaningful.
If it was Mia then that's even worse! Great to know that she married a dude without having fully moved on and that she's thinking of cheating on him even though they have a child. This would all be a sensical extension of her character, too, since she left the first boyfriend cold cause she got the hots for the same guy. And they play that beat!
I KNEW you would point that out when I was typing up my earlier reply lol. Just because you've moved onto another relationship doesn't mean you can't ever be reminded of feelings you used to have for somebody else, especially if you haven't seen them since reluctantly breaking up. Not every relationship is this unrealistic you seem to have where you have to dump every single thing emotionally and literally that's tied to any previous experiences. They're human, for pete's sake. Old feelings can reasonably resurface here and there.
It comes into play based on how their characters work and act. Mostly the dude's inability to move on from a period of jazz, a failed business plan, and a dead relationship.
So being passionate about a specific era of an art form and not favoring a contemporary style automatically equates to never being able to move on or adapt? Having old feelings resurface temporarily does not mean you're obsessed with a past relationship. It's understandable when you wish that it didn't have to be forced to abruptly end.
It casted the guy in a bad light, not for compromising, but for succumbing to insecurities and eventually being willing to give up on a dream he still cares about but isn't willing to admit. Mia was the one who compromised in the end. Sebastian was going to give up. There's a clear difference.
Surprisingly succeeding does not make her arc pointless at all. She got the acting gig for being willing to stand out and not subjugate herself to being miraculously liked by random disrespectful interviewers. And even then, when it came to her audition, she had to make a convincing performance that would shape the role of her character based around her personality and ideals. She succeeded because she followed her individual passion by taking a chance rather than being bound to what other people think about her at first glance or already like. If she really didn't get an acting gig, then the message shifts from being an under-appreciated aspiring actress with ambitious talent that had to make her own rules to be truly recognized to being a naive amateur with a pipe dream who was always mediocre and only fooling herself. Your suggestion is what actually makes her arc irrelevant and actually credits the interviewers who dismissed her because she didn't look beautiful enough or interrupted her performances disrespectfully by justifying them in seeing Mia as a poor acting choice.
Either way, it's hard to take the narrative on dreams seriously when it casts the dude in a bad light for compromising, and when the girl only succeeded by a ball's hair of a chance (which is admittedly how some of that stuff works, but it makes her arc pretty irrelevant).
Also I can't buy that the dude had problems compromising and joining that one band when we saw him playing fucking keytar in an 80s pop cover band, haha.
Which he also visibly didn't like. Hence why he didn't want to play the cheesy cliche 80's song Mia wanted him to play and was embarrassed to admit that he was getting bossed around. If anything, that helps build up how he's vulnerable to taking jobs for cash that go against his preferences in music.
He's not unfairly biased, he's running a restaurant and hiring a person who he let go of before for similar issues. The dude caused a scene in the restaurant because he was a smug elitist who had to stick it to 'the man'.
Except that he didn't cause a scene in the restaurant. Literally NOTHING changed. You're probably confusing how the scene looks dramatized when he's playing despite how afterwards, the restaurant is completely normal. He just gets called by Simmons and fired because he doesn't like jazz and only wants to lower the standard of his employees to playing trite Christmas songs. Sebastian was asking to get fired after getting warned, sure. But Simmons' perspective on jazz in the first place was dumb.
I'm a huge fan of jazz and John Legend was spot on. It changes and needs to be open to change. The people who are stuck on older jazz are total elitist pricks just like main dude in the film. There are purists who think that Miles Davis ruined jazz, or that only New Orleans jazz is real jazz. Meanwhile, the actual musicians paved the way to the future by playing what they wanted to. Sometimes it meant becoming less accessible (free jazz and beyond), and sometimes it meant bringing things back and making them more appealing (cool jazz, which was less abrasive than bebop, or collaborating with other genres like rock or hip-hop). John Legend's character wouldn't be saying that dudes like Oda should stop, but be willing to evolve, and that anyone afterwards shouldn't be actively copying them and claiming that it can't get any better. The biggest and most influential jazz musicians didn't stay in one place, and neither did a lot of those mangaka (especially Araki, who continues to improve by leaving old concepts behind and adjusting his style with the times).
John Legend's character would have said that Oda should stop appealing to 90's young boys who liked classic shonen like Dragon Ball and should move onto more consistently edgy, dark content like Tokyo Ghoul. And that Luffy should get substantial character development that makes him drastically change from being a lot like Goku. He would have a freaking ball if he found out that Totland is the third Straw Hat rescue arc (not even counting Usopp leaving the crew) while ignoring the context and individual characterization merits of those arcs. There are plenty of flaws that can be pointed out with One Piece, but there also lots of people that diss it just for being an older, long series that doesn't change its story formula foundation that much. Araki was a bad example though, my fault.
Just because jazz as a genre should change and adapt doesn't mean EVERY musician has to. Artists have preferences and should stay true to them if they hold a lot of solid meaning. And Sebastian gave that when he explained to Mia why he liked jazz and opened her up to liking it. It's not like I think John Legend's character is a bad guy at all or doesn't have a point in what he's saying. It is good to be open to newer things and understand why people like those aspects. But that doesn't make his statement about how you should feel compelled to ditch what you like in favor of what other people like for the sake of people liking you a good mentality to have unless all you really care about is the money and it's not detrimental to the rest of your life or aspirations. That is not the case with Sebastian, as we saw with the argument and how strained his relationship was becoming before then. If you hold art to a high degree and want personal satisfaction, you need to stay true to yourself and be open to hearing other people out. If you don't like what they say and can back it up, then that's okay.
If they favor the classic form, they should engage in what they like. Simple as that. It's not like Sebastian wanted to become the next big music celebrity, he just wanted cash to support his night club and to play what he likes. He never even once actively dissed contemporary of forms of music by saying they're objectively bad, he just doesn't like modern art forms. It's a matter of preferences. Liking older jazz more than modern styles automatically means you're total elitist pricks? What? And EVEN then, just because people are progressively evolving a genre doesn't mean you have to do it in the same way. He liked jazz for a reason, and the new form that Keith's group liked to play did not have that. The main lead's attitudes aren't that the rest of the band shouldn't change, but that he doesn't want to change to something he doesn't care for. It's that simple.
Because having an open mind means that you have to label favoring classic jazz as only appealing to old farts, and that everything you do artistically has to appeal to whatever the younger generation spontaneously likes for the sake of conforming. You only criticize one extreme of being nostalgia-obsessed, but don't acknowledge the other of thinking that you can only artistically value what the mainstream is into. You can totally argue that Sebastian was narrow-minded, but that doesn't mean he shouldn't be allowed to find a job that allows him to play the music that he likes and that he can't reasonably have a preference.
Male lead's attitude is that those dudes shouldn't change, and that anything that's not like 60s jazz is utter shit. It's his attitude towards the pop music he was playing in the cover band, and any of the work John Legend was doing, and really to about all other music. This isn't an unfair read of his character, at all, that's just how he is, and his attitude is a lot worse than John Legend's. At least he had an open mind.