Tár

For every era of cinematic history, there are the films that decades later people look at them as the ones that showed a period in time for how it was. Tar will be remembered as one of the movies that defined the early 2020s. It's a complex character study that refuses to take a side, one that shows a deeply complicated person for who she is. This is a downfall story (you can see why Scorsese called it his favorite movie of the year), in which highly successful composer/conductor Lydia Tar falls from grace after allegations (that may or may not be true) emerge that she had a sexual relationship with a student, Krista Taylor, that ended in her suicide. It's an intensely psychological film, with a thin line between what is literally and not literally happening.

An intense character study by definition needs to be driven by a strong performance, and Cate Blanchett delivers not only the best performance of her career, but also the best performance of the year. Every part of her masterful performance is believable. At times she does not seem like a movie character as much as a real person whose life is being broadcast. She is equal parts powerful yet vulnerable, imposing yet fragile, villain yet victim. Blanchett humanizes Lydia Tar and all of her faults in a way that very few completely fictional movie characters are.

Tar is a film driven by well-handled juxtapositions. The primary example (as well as the most successful) is the aforementioned aspects of Lydia Tar's character. The setting of present day Berlin adds to the juxtaposition. It's one of Europe's premier cultural cities, but yet the aesthetic of the film turns it into a claustrophobic, lifeless prison. Even the concert hall of the Berlin Philharmonic, one of the most important venues in classical music, feels limiting. And then, of course, there's the ending. All I'll say is that it took us gamers by surprise.

It is perhaps unexpected for a movie that takes aim at cancel culture to gain traction in the way that Tar did. At a time when people fall in line with hiveminds and nuance is nonexistent, Tar is a movie that shows the deep complications of the human condition, where no one is all good, and no one is all bad. This is a distinctly contemporary aspect that adds a new layer to the classic downfall story, a character arc that has been told for millennia. The corrupting nature of power never changes; Citizen Kane is as relevant now as it was in 1941. The message here is clear: power corrupts not only the individual, but the masses as well.

One of the best things about Tar is the power of what is not shown. Krista Taylor's face does not appear on screen even once. Her voice is never heard either. She is the downfall of Lydia Tar and one of the most important characters in the movie and is completely invisible, and it works perfectly well. This aids the unbiased look at Lydia, by blocking any possibility of our own biases being affected by Krista as a character. Mahler's music is the perfect choice for this movie, as he was one of the great composers of the Romantic era, and is very emotionally driven, especially that 5th Symphony.

In a few decades, people will still be talking about Tar. People will associate Tar with the 2020s the same way they associate Taxi Driver with 1970s urban America, or even Caligari to the Weimar Republic. It will be a window into today's world for future generations. It's a great film back by a fantastic performance that handles its subject matter very well. This is the best film of 2022.

Don't be fooled by the great reviews, if you're someone who's not particularly interested in orchestras, conductors and random old musicians from times past, this movie is an utter bore. The first 10 minutes are CREDITS. JUST CREDITS. Then it drags on with the most absolutely annoying, long, mind-numbing scenes where rich, white people just talk to each other about the most esoteric stuff, with cameos of the actress talking to her orchestra about which string needs to be pulled in which direction.

I'm dead serious, 1 and a half hour later, you still can't tell what the hell's going on. It's just scenes of her talking about the most mundane stuff, and playing instruments.

It's a pretentious movie, that appears completely different and way more interesting in the trailer, but in reality is just an elitist blob of nothingness aesthetic. If you value your money and time, don't watch this movie.

It is not surprising that this film is tanking at the box office since it is much too long and slow paced for the average movie goer's attention span. Indeed parts of it, like the agonizingly protracted opening scene where a New Yorker magazine music critic interviews the title character about her classical music esthetics, seem designed by writer/director Tod Field as a boredom experiment wherein if you can survive it without running and screaming into the night out of sheer and utter ennui then you are worthy to see the rest of his "masterpiece".

Thing is, though, that a lot of this film does approach, if not encroach upon, masterpiece territory. Certain scenes, like Lydia Tar's bleak Staten Island homecoming where she summons the spirit of her mentor Leonard Bernstein in an effort to recapture the humanistic values she has lost, are genuinely heartbreaking. And the sequences that deal with Lydia's manipulation of her acolytes are difficult to watch as we see how artistic power feels even more corruptible, somehow, than the political kind, perhaps because it is a profanation of a purer space.

And I think we can all agree that Cate Blanchett is one helluva fine actor! As are Nina Hoss, Noemie Merlant and Sophie Kauer who play various of her entourage/victims.

Bottom line: For all its faults I have a sneaking suspicion that in twenty years they'll be watching this and not "The Fabelmans". Give it a B plus.

Initially I was put off by Tár-it's cryptic, drab, and sluggish. Until I realized what the filmmakers were actually accomplishing. No spoilers in this review, but to enjoy the film you have to know certain things:

1. Yes, Cate Blanchett is fantastic and rightfully deserves the accolades.

2. The film is the slowest of slow burns.

3. The film does not hold your hand.

4. The film's narrative cuts out key elements of scenes that other filmmakers would have highlighted. This was the sticking point for me-it didn't dawn on me until halfway through the film what was happening. If you know this going in, I believe you'll have a better experience with the film. The film purposefully *doesn't* show you the "important" elements of scenes or relationships between characters. You have to figure that out yourself, just like putting together the puzzle of who Lydia Tár actually is. Here's a quick non-related example:

Bill stared at the smoke in the frying pan.

Bill rubbed his nose five times and took a call from Ernest while sipping coffee at Station 271.

If those two sentences above were in a book, it would be leaving out major plot points that other authors would have filled in. First, there was a fire in Bill's kitchen. He called the fire department. He had to evacuate, so the fire may have been bad. And who is Ernest, if we have not been introduced to that character before? Why is bill rubbing his nose so much? Is it a tick or OCD or nervous habit?

That's what Tár is like. It presents to you all the items "between the lines" and lets you solve for X for yourself. Once I understood that that was the dominant cinematic approach in this film, it became immensely more enjoyable...and challenging. Very much worth your time if you put in the effort.

Everybody writing about this mock biopic focuses on Cate Blanchett's knock-it-out-of-the-park performance, but when compared to Field's "Little Children" (2006), "Tár" lacks the storytelling and editing skills which make the earlier film a masterpiece of human relations, whereas the latter is an interesting character study that somehow collapses under its own weight.

There's a strong establishing scene showing Tár demolishing an aspiring musician's conceited views on Bach, yet one has to wait for a long time for a follow-up showing the main character's boundary issues. The central topic emerges rather quickly (abuse of power), but there are diversions which support character development, yet drag on the narrative, which is probably why many reviews here find the film frustrating.

Being an ex-Berliner, I like the fact that the city is being used as a real location as opposed to the usual tourist / Cold War hot spots, and the Philharmonics rehearsal scenes are very well done, but they don't really push the story forward and could have easily been wound down a bit.

Nina Hoss as Tár's partner is a brilliant counterpoint, because she keeps a good deal of her thoughts to herself until she doesn't, so more focus on their relationship would have helped the story. Hoss would deserve a supporting actress Academy Award nod if only she had more screen time.

The initial scene of conflict eventually loops back into focus, and Field could have used this to explore societal misjudgment as he did in "Little Children" - but he doesn't, which makes "Tár" rather distant and cold. Field expects viewers to interpret a lot on their own, which is bold and demanding, but with this approach it is crucial to keep focus on an underlying message, otherwise it gets lost.

In conclusion, "Tár" has all the ingredients for a masterpiece - interesting characters, great performances, nice camerawork - but weak storytelling ultimately reduces the film's potential.