Read Mixed User Reviews for TÁR (2022)

5

Compi24Nov 1, 2022

As much as I hate to be in the minority on this one, I just have to come to terms with the fact that "Tár" wasn't for me. That's not to say I don't appreciate what this movie has set out to do and what it manages to achieve. In fact, I'd sayAs much as I hate to be in the minority on this one, I just have to come to terms with the fact that "Tár" wasn't for me. That's not to say I don't appreciate what this movie has set out to do and what it manages to achieve. In fact, I'd say Todd Field has directed this picture with a commendably sure hand. I think the cinematography, sound design and editing are all top notch and Cate Blanchett — to no one's surprise — is absolutely fantastic in this. For me, I think it's the approach to the thematic material and the length that ultimately let me down. Make no mistake, the subject matter at hand is a decent place to start and the film eventually takes its conversations involving "the death of the author" into a place that I think most would agree is correct. I just felt myself wishing for more attention to be directed towards that moral conundrum. With the whole "death of the author" debate essentially boiling down to the question, "can an artist (warts and all) truly be separated from their work?" Field's piece effectively gives us one side of that debate — the artist and their flaws. What we don't get nearly enough of is that other component — their work. Sure, we see the titular character conducting an orchestra — essentially interpreting another artist's work (in this case Gustav Mahler) — but what of her own work? To that end, all we have to go off of is what we're told. We're told, "Lydia Tár achieved 'x' feat related to composing." We're told, "Lydia Tár has 'x' amount of accolades related to writing music." We're told, "Lydia Tár is the most 'x' composer working today." We don't, however, see her do much "authorship" at all in this. Instead, it's all about her conducting of somebody else's work rather than her own compositional prowess. Is that enough to illustrate the actual trade-off and ethical tension between someone crafting pieces of art that are loved by so man and the lives that this same person may or may not have destroyed along the way? In my case, no. For others, it seems like it is. Again, I think there's a great deal to like here. For me, I just couldn't justify how esoteric and long-winded things got.… Expand

7 of 10 users found this helpful73

All this user's reviews

5

Data1001Dec 11, 2022

Look, Cate is always an interesting presence on screen. But the story feels incredibly underdeveloped. Scenes with absolutely no point (nor further exploration) abound. Nothing is cohesive. I wish the basic idea had been rewritten fromLook, Cate is always an interesting presence on screen. But the story feels incredibly underdeveloped. Scenes with absolutely no point (nor further exploration) abound. Nothing is cohesive. I wish the basic idea had been rewritten from scratch with different writers, and brought to life by a different director. As it is, however, it's incredibly disappointing.… Expand

4 of 6 users found this helpful42

All this user's reviews

4

everettJan 11, 2023

Besides being a vehicle for Cate Blanchett's star performance, I don't understand what the point was in making this film. I went into it thinking it had to do with the topic of whether artists' despicable personal behavior should come intoBesides being a vehicle for Cate Blanchett's star performance, I don't understand what the point was in making this film. I went into it thinking it had to do with the topic of whether artists' despicable personal behavior should come into play when judging the merits of their work. But Tar doesn't create her own work; her attempts at being a composer don't go far, and her fame is derived from conducting the work of others.
Now I'm wondering if the film is an attempt to demonstrate that famous, successful men aren't the only ones who use their power to prey upon women - that women do it too. In that sense, I guess it succeeds. Point taken. Good for you.
But is that kind of "point" enough to justify our showing up - especially for over two and a half hours? Where's the takeaway, the universal kind that makes a movie great?
It's very possible that I'm missing something, so please tell me. Otherwise, I'm left with the sinking feeling that I've wasted my time on someone's self-indulgence.… Expand

2 of 3 users found this helpful21

All this user's reviews

4

EFRAMDec 3, 2022

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I love Cate Blanchett. I like Todd Fields. So why didn't I like Tar. Well, first, it's almost three hours long without a compelling narrative to justify its length. Second, it dances around the main issue brought up by Fields. What happens to a wunderkind conductor, (blanchett) who is at the pinnacle of her career and minutes away from commanding her most impressive achievement yet, who is faced with a scandal that destroys her career and sets her on a path of self destruction. That sounds like a good premise for a film, but Fields never delivers on its promise. Instead we are given a much more than-needed verbose and overly intellectual narrative that presupposes that every viewer of Tar is interested in the intricacies of Music theory and composition, and the inner workings of a conductor's professional existence without fully fleshign out the woman and her motivations behind that existence. As a documentary, this might've worked to some degree, but as a drama the intellectualization of the personal demons of this remarkable woman doesn't do justice to the narrative or Ms. Blanchett's uneven performance. A good example of Fields over intellectualization comes during some of the conducting scenes where Tar is conducting the Berlin philharmonic rehearsals in German but there are no subtitles, so we don't know what she is saying to her orchestra. You'd think in a film about a Conductor reveling in her craft, that you'd want to see exactly what she was saying to her orchestra, but Fields leaves us wondering and annoyed. The first 30 minutes of the film is set at an interview with Lydia Tar and The New Yorker where we go through a biography of her work and her accomplishments along the way. As a creator myself, I've always been told that exposition is the death of great storytelling. In other words, don't tell, SHOW, something Mr. Fields seems to forget as Tar moves forward. The most interesting aspect of the film, namely how this incredibly talented woman is brought down by a sexual scandal is glossed over, told in warped dream sequences and oddly relegated to behind the scenes viewpoint when it should have been front and center. The film comes alive when Tar has to deal with her past relationships, (the main relationship being with another up-and-coming conductor, who ends up committing suicide, naming Tar as the cause of her suicide.) It's a weak construct, made even weaker by Fields inability to fully bring the affair and its consequences to the forefront, something that would give the audience a window into Tar's life and enable the audience to either side with her or against her. Instead, Fields brings another young conductor into the picture, someone Tar obviously has an attraction for, but the plotline happens so far into the film, and never gets fully resolved that by the time we become interested in Tar's new protege, the film is over. These half-hearted attempts to draw us into Tar's inner world, whether it be with her lover Sharon or her stepdaughter Petra left me wondering what this woman is really about. Instead, the film meanders through Tar's professional life, never giving us the depth behind her talent, or allowing us to see the intricacies of her life path. So, in the end, the film delivers an uneven portrait of a fascinating woman, but never fully delivers on the promise of getting under her skin, or into her head where we can either root for her, or understand fully why others are rooting against her.… Expand

4 of 7 users found this helpful43

All this user's reviews

5

moviemitch96Oct 21, 2022

Cate blanchett stars as fictional German philharmonic composer Lydia Tar, whose personal and professional life is depicted here, along with the many trials and tribulations she faces within both. Written and directed by Todd Field, with thisCate blanchett stars as fictional German philharmonic composer Lydia Tar, whose personal and professional life is depicted here, along with the many trials and tribulations she faces within both. Written and directed by Todd Field, with this also being his first film in 16 years (since 2006's 'Little Children ' with Kate Winslet), the film starts off intriguingly enough and is filmed and edited with great confidence to accompany Blanchett's commanding screen presence. The film unconventionally seems content in focusing on the little and mundane details of Tar's every day life, as the film is largely composed (no pun intended) of extended conversations and business meetings between her and several colleagues of hers, along with the occasional scene of symphony rehearsal. And like I said, this starts off all good and fine for the first half hour or so, largely in thanks to the confident and intriguing editing to go with Blanchett's performance. Unfortunately, at a little over two and a half hours, that all gets dragged way the hell out and completely overstays its welcome. The further in I got into the film's runtime, the more and more pretentious and self-gratifying the whole thing started to feel. By the time the film reached its end, I couldn't help but scoff at it all and what I'd just watched. Blanchett's tour de force performance is literally the only good thing this film has going for it in the end, but even that might not be enough to warrant a view in my eyes. Overall, Blanchett graces us with some of her best work in years here. I just wish the same could be said about Field's first outing in 16 years, because the film is as pretentious and self-indulgent as they come.… Expand

5 of 9 users found this helpful54

All this user's reviews

6

IHaveGreatTasteOct 28, 2022

The filmmaking is great. The script, however, is only okay. And ultimately, at 2.5 hours, it's not engaging enough to earn its length. The biggest problem for me though is Cate Blanchett. How this is considered good acting I'll neverThe filmmaking is great. The script, however, is only okay. And ultimately, at 2.5 hours, it's not engaging enough to earn its length. The biggest problem for me though is Cate Blanchett. How this is considered good acting I'll never understand. She's mannered, melodramatic, and every line reading feels entirely rehearsed. You never once feel like you're watching a real human experiencing a real moment. You're only ever watching a 'performance' (and a 1930s Old Hollywood-style performance at that). Even when she's punching a punching bag, she's ACTING punching a punching bag! It's everything acting students are taught NOT to do. A younger Meryl Streep would've been brilliant in this film.… Expand

3 of 6 users found this helpful33

All this user's reviews

6

UncleWillardFeb 14, 2023

TAR is beautiful to watch and I'm not just talking about Cate Blanchet. I love how we're 100% onboard with TAR's genius, even after her career starts to decay. I'm sure there are many layers to this, but the one that struck me most was herTAR is beautiful to watch and I'm not just talking about Cate Blanchet. I love how we're 100% onboard with TAR's genius, even after her career starts to decay. I'm sure there are many layers to this, but the one that struck me most was her encounter with the student in her class who simply can't imagine NOT judging art through the lens of identity politics. I love how she framed her argument that it was about the music and not the person and then how, even despite that truth, that very essence is turned against her and lesser people steal her art.

Where it loses me is the blurred lines. Why is this statement being made? I haven't delved into reviews yet as I'm still chewing on my own opinion, and I'm guessing I'm missing something, but the ending was not as satisfying as I'd hoped it would be.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

4

Onlyclassicvg1Apr 23, 2023

This was my favorite movie of last year. And my favorite performance of last year. Blanchett is the one of the best we have. The direction and cinematography is gorgeously haunting and the impact of the movie on me was staggering.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

5

alanpotter17Mar 10, 2023

Tár é o típico filme que irá certamente dividir opiniões, dificilmente aderindo-se a uma impressão mediana. Vou, assim, optar pelo equilíbrio, pois consigo enxergar pontos fortes e outros pontos decepcionantes.
Em primeiro lugar, embora sejaTár é o típico filme que irá certamente dividir opiniões, dificilmente aderindo-se a uma impressão mediana. Vou, assim, optar pelo equilíbrio, pois consigo enxergar pontos fortes e outros pontos decepcionantes.
Em primeiro lugar, embora seja justíssima a indicação da Blanchet, não a vejo como favorita ao OScar de melhor atriz (escrevo isso dois dias antes da premiação), ainda que, de fato, sua atuação seja aquilo que há de mais forte no filme. O modo como Blanchet compõe o personagem é incrível, mas aí é mais uma qualidade do roteiro por não entregar algo convencional mesmo.
Tirando isso, tudo o mais eu achei hiperlativo, verborrágico, cansativo. São mais de duas horas passeando entre ótimos diálogos (aquela aula em que ela discute com um aluno negro e põe em cheque o vitimismo identitário atual é sensacional) e diálogos meio constrangidos (a sua relação com as parceiras parecei algo de adolescente).
A **** do filme é tão singela quanto precária mesmo, e não entendo essa necessidade de tornar tudo episódico, repare que a edição poderia embaralhar tudo, depois da primeira parte, parecia que as coisas iam acontecendo meio aleatoriamente, como se fossem esquetes, e um final que mescla uma confusão cultural da qual parece padecer o próprio filme.
Ou eu assisti a algo muito errado, ou me pareceu de forma proposital criar confusões identitárias como se a vida não fosse uma orquestra mesmo, fosse muito mais complicada do que reger uma sinfonia. Ainda assim, saí com uma experiência aborrecida, horas intrmináveis, uma fotografia pálida cansativa, e os números da orquestra pouco inspirados.
Não sei se era para ser assim mesmo, mas ficou a sensação de um filme pálido, e que essa biografia inventada ganhou um contorno de "Memórias póstumas de Brás Cubas", mas sem a genialidade de um Machado de Assis, assistindo a um filme de uma mulher chata, que ao menos pode contar com a sorte de ter sido corporificada por um Blanchet da vida. Esperava mais.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

TechnoirMar 8, 2023

It feels like an acting exercise, not so much a film. As a performance, it's brilliant, but there's no character development. All the little details are interesting, but insubstantial. The stakes are not very high here. Ultimately it's a sortIt feels like an acting exercise, not so much a film. As a performance, it's brilliant, but there's no character development. All the little details are interesting, but insubstantial. The stakes are not very high here. Ultimately it's a sort of comedy of manners. The final shot gave me a good laugh.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews