Spoiler about the ending: I didn't get it until someone explained it, but the headphones Lydia gets at the beginning of the performance is to give her the click track, keeping time for her. She, who at the beginning delighted in being in control of the tempo of the music, becomes, in the end, a glorified time keeper.
I was so frustrated with people writing it off as pretentious when I wanted to talk about it and how people just started chatting away about their weekends when I saw it in the theatre - I loved it and thought it was very witty. Even as someone who doesn't know much about the music lore, I could understand the overall themes and messages just by paying attention... but it was exciting because it made you work and think a lot! And Cate was ofc mesmerising to watch. thank you for this video! :) *edit: typo ("aboutt" into "about") changed "calling it" into "writing it off as"
Thanks for the comment! I think this movie does a great job of presenting a nuanced and balanced take on some pretty complex topics like separating the art from the artist and challenges the viewer come to their own conclusions and I think its unfortunate that some people saw the first 30 minutes and then dismissed the rest of the movie (I guess me included at first :0)
@@JerbloFilm couldn‘t agree more with you! Glad you gave it another go :) but I suppose sometimes we are just not in the right mood for certain movies I think, giving them another go in a different setting can do wonders :)
i was amazed by the sheer _competence_ of Blanchet delivering this movie. And of the writers, set design, music, cinematography... every aspect was masterful. For all that the subject can be hurtful, it was a masterpiece.
It's a horror film but you might not realize it at first or even until the second viewing. She's being haunted by the girl who k*lled herself. You'll spot her in the background throughout the film if you're looking for her. You can read the haunting as either literal or figurative. Either way. And while I'm no scholar of music, I do know from Ken Russel's film about Mahler that he was known for reinventing himself as a kind of Wagner clone and his motivations were likely cynical and financially motivated. Some accuse him of being fraud, and of course that's what we're to conclude about Tar. She created a character in her professional life and behaves as if she is this imagined person she concocted.
@@atticstattic There's more than two scenes. You see the back of her head when she sitting in the audience. It's right in the middle of the frame, the subject of the shot. In addition to all the dialogue and plot points about her, which are ultimately the catalyst for Tar getting cancelled and becoming a target of a rumor mill, you see her watching Tar from another room. You see her briefly sitting in the chair when she wakes up from a dream and so on. The whole film is really about the girl who k*lled herself. It's a film about a haunting. If you read the haunting figuratively, rather than a literal supernatural haunting, it still works.
@@atticstattic Yeah I'm not going to comb through the film and give you time stamps. You can just search TH-cam for videos on the hidden ghosts. And as I've already pointed out, the plot itself is about her life unraveling after a rumor campaign that was started because of the girl who k*lled herself. You also never see her face. That's why it has scenes where she's hearing weird noises at night, or the thing in the park where she hears the screams. They're shot and constructed like scenes from horror films. Just watch the movie again with this in mind and you'll see it instantly. Or don't. I don't really care. I'm done with this conversation. Have a nice life.
@GlynDwr-d4h Hey, I love this film and have participated in several back-and-forths on interpretation; this one doesn't hold up. Tar's unraveling is based on who she is and begins well before Krista's death. A lot of suppressed guilt follows but, no ghosts.
Very interesting take on this movie. Lydia is a fascinating character that dominates most os the narrative, until she doesn't. The ending is perfectly ironic, indeed.
I agree, in the beginning when we see the posters for Tar Mahler V, Lydia's face takes up half the entire poster and its very much about her, and by the end, her conducting is very much in service of others and she takes a much smaller role
I’ve seen it five times, one of my all time favorite movies. It’s so rewatchable. The way it doesn’t hold your hand leads to new discoveries on every rewatch. Very layered.
There's a whole conservation that can be had about the fact that if the film were about a male conductor, people wouldn't care, as that's "normal" behaviour for "genius" men. Why did it take a woman doing the exact same thing to get people talking about these behaviours?
It blows my mind how someone as amazingly talented as Cate Blanchett could do this and then Borderlands…not just in the same century…but in the same universe…what even is that, Cate? You played Bob Dylan and Galadriel and Katherine Hepburn! What the hell happened?
Interestingly, she filmed “Borderlands” first then “TÁR”, and the worthy film came out first. Then again, Cate Blanchett is one of the most versatile actors out there regardless of the quality of the films. Plus, she’s sublime in “DISCLAIMER*”.
Blanchett' apparently took Borderlands project in COVID , she needed something to do that time. If she's getting a bigger paycheck where she could bring out bangers like Tar, I don't think we should have any problem. She's the best working actor today
Brother you deserve to have wayyyyyy more subs than you do at this moment!!! What a great analysis of the movie! I hope your channel becomes very big and i hope you keep doing more film breakdowns! This one was great
This is spot on! I had a very similar experience. My parents are both violinists and my dad was a conductor, and since I was also a cellist in orchestras all my life, I grew up in that jargon but still rolled my eyes hard at how pretentious it was. Initially wanted to turn it off as well and thought the film is trying to portray musicians as pretentious idiots but I am also glad that I actually watched it to the end.
Okay, but just because someone talks with a lot of knowledge or terminology that the average uninitiated person outside their specific speciality or field wouldn't know ALSO does not automatically mean that they are pretentious, it does not automatically mean they are doing so to make anyone or anything seem greater or more important than it actually is NOR just to try and make themself seem more impressive somehow either. 😅🙃
one of the most exciting moments from my year was stumbling across a tar dvd for $1 at a second-hand store (aus). i was on a high for a week after that!!
I have tried to watch Tar twice but the dialogue is so very dense and musically specific. I can read sheet music but not professional level music especially chief conductor for a country!?! Cate is impressive but I can’t find any Hook into caring about the meticulously crafted world. Maybe I should try again, I’ve enjoyed 90% of her works. Rare. Like kidman , she picked wonderful scripts and gets deep into her characters. Hopefully both will keep working like meryl
That ending was the one thing that pissed me off about the film. That would never happen to a conductor. She would just be ushered off to another orchestra. Cancel culture doesn’t really exist in classical music and that would make a much more interesting and complicated ending.
I saw it in theaters and just couldn’t get into it. Which is okay, it’s a challenging movie so it’s easy for someone like me to not keep up, and I respected it all the same. But for me it needed something to help me engage with it, and it’s also so far from my preferred style of film that all I can say is that it’s not my cup of tea. There’s really no reason to accuse it of being pretentious, nor to gatekeep it as “high art” which is a very elitist and, well, pretentious behavior lol.
i definitely do agree with your take, especially that lydia is pretentious and insecure and tries to overcompensate by affecting this facade of ig her idea of a wealthy, aloof, intellectual musical genius. she doesn't even seem to enjoy the process of composing for all her talk, and i think it's the power of being in a position like that which is more alluring to her. that said, i also don't think the movie really deconstructs the ideas it presents enough? it seems very ambiguous with what it wants to say about lydia's pretension, and doesn't really grapple with the class politics within the music industry that produces and motivates people like lydia, and the nature of those politics itself. i think it definitely tries to, through the character of lydia, but doesn't quite hit the mark. it has been a while since i've watched it and i remember it leaving me so frustrated and with such a bitter taste in my mouth for some reason, but maybe those opinions would change upon a rewatch.
I reviewed it when it came out and compared it to Paul Thomas Anderson‘s The Master, as those two films, ten years apart, seemed to me the most ‘art film’ Hollywood films in recent memory. Here’s where I differ with your take: to me, Tar is a character quite like Joaquin Phoenix’s Freddie in The Master, who is of course extremely far from being an intellectual. I don’t think Tar’s intellectual “pretensions” are actually pretentious, or meant to be taken as fraudulent, empty, wrong or insincere on her part. She’s not a narcissist, exactly, but is a massive egotist. Her accomplishments are the trappings of her character. The trappings of Freddie in The Master’s character are his rough, vagabond lifestyle. The trappings are different but the essence of the characters is very similar: they have big egos, they act by instinct, they want to dominate. The only difference is that Freddie also finds Lancaster Dodd and allows himself to be tamed or dominated by a bigger egotist, who is supposedly connected with religion or a higher power. The door is left open to mysticism in Tar too. It is like she is being haunted. Apparently her apartment is broken into, and we can see the intruder in one of the shots, but I missed it when viewing at the cinema. So the movie feels like there is some mystical retribution at work in Tar’s downfall. Maybe a tribal spirit of music, as discussed in the first scene, is responsible for upending her life which is full of the distractions of fame and flattery, and post-disgrace she is brought back to essentials. It’s hard to tell if she’s definitely unhappy in the final scene. She’s still conducting. Anyway, my point is that I don’t think she’s meant to be taken entirely as a narcissist whose interests are all wrong and insincere.
Pretentious? "That's you, Lydia Tar!" Precisely. Anyone who even uses the word "pretentious" in the 21st Century is likely overcompensating for their own insecurities by defensively exercising pretentiousness and condescension themselves. What they're saying is that something is bothering them, or they feel like somebody's trying to go over their heads, so they lash out to defend themselves. Just like Tar does. They're blaming their discomfort on someone else. But what do they think this movie is showing them? And how does its reach exceed its grasp? Sometimes viewers attribute a character's self-seriousness and self-importance to the movie or the filmmakers rather than the character. (The same clueless "pretentious" charges have been aimed at "Saltburn" for some of the same reasons: they assume the film is "about" something other than what's on the screen.) In this case, do disapproving viewers think "maestro Tar" is supposed to be the heroine, a sophisticated role model of some kind? She's an accomplished, intelligent, expressive interpretive artist -- and an empty shell of a human being, a total failure in her personal life. I know some musicians who thought Tar's over-the-top conducting style (a grotesque, amateurish exaggeration of Bernstein's) was pretentious and laughable... and it is. Look at those megalomaniacal low-angle shots of her at the podium. She's a narcissistic drama queen, a musical Trump -- but she has actual accomplishments that attest to her artistic talents. That's what the opening establishes as the premise of the movie, though you only see it in retrospect (complete with the end credits sequence -- the stuff most people never watch -- transposed to the front of the film and imposed on the audience as a form of punitive discipline -- like her conduct of her Juilliard class). Then what happens?
@bacarandii I think that point you made makes a lot of sense, theres a difference between a specific character acting pretentious vs a movie itself being pretentious. The idea of insecurity also makes sense, throughout the film we see lydia have multiple nervous tics, and we also see her steal and abuse her wifes Metoprolol, which is used for high blood pressure (what sharon uses it for) but is also prescribed for anxiety so I think it does paint a picture of someone who deals with a lot of insecurity behind her pretentious/self important facade
Can someone help, in scenes towards the end of the movie when she's going to Phillipines I think in taxi, and another scene maybe she's in her apartment, is there a few seconds Cate is replaced by another actress, it doesn't look like her at those moments. Very quick moments.
5:12 - _IS_ it, tho? 🤔🤔 OR is it simply acknowledging that, just because the composition exists thanks to the composer assembling/arranging it, it's still up to the performers and/or to the conductor who is directing them to actually realize it and bring it into being in a way that can be witnessed and appreciated not only by those capable of reading the sheet music??😅 😂 (idek! 🤷♀️🤷🤷🏻♂️ -just random thoughts) Lol
I think what truly makes this film stand out from most other films in 2022 is its subject matter and presentation style. This is a slow-burn, 158-minute drama about a classically-trained musical conductor, and that description would already turn off mainstream moviegoers. Therefore, *the film stands out because it completely affirms itself as high art.* Specifically, TÁR is mostly set across Europe and in New York, in big concert halls and lecture rooms, with countless monologues and conversations where the characters all discuss philosophy and the deeper meanings behind compositions. The film also starts off by playing the closing credits, which makes it seem like a highbrow arthouse picture and risk being called "pretentious" by less astute individuals. Of course, the characters also reference the works of Bach, Mozart, Beethoven, and other composers who lived over 300 years ago, and whose direct influence would be lost upon Millennials and Gen-Z'ers with no familiarity for the classics. If you don't have an above-average IQ, you won't understand or like this movie at all, and you're probably better off watching something simpler for your own liking, like Barbie or a Star War. While I'm here, I might as well discuss my interpretation of the titular character. Lydia Tár is someone morally complex who performs some questionable acts, such as gaslighting her fellow musicians, students, benefactors, and lovers, while silencing anyone who dares to question her power. She's a lot like Terrence Fletcher from Whiplash, a respected composer who's also manipulative and abusive to his subjects, and normally I wouldn't question the actions of the star conductor because they're just doing their job. But because this is a woman at the forefront, and she mentions how many boots she had to lick to become this famous in a male-dominated field, it makes me more aware of how messed up she is. In this current era, people are finally becoming more critical of institutions that were once respected for decades just as new generations are about to take the reins in these industries, and it's especially gratifying to see a so-called "trailblazer" in Lydia experience her gradual downfall. TÁR is everything that intellectually-minded film fans could possibly want. And its meager box office only re-affirms that statement, showing that most audiences are uncultured plebeians who only pay for the usual blockbusters. With clips from the film circulating all over social media, people clearly misunderstand the point of scenes that can be played out of context, thereby proving that these people are not smart enough to understand the whole context and that the film is beyond criticism. That's what makes the film stand out above all its peers from that year. It's not a crowd-pleasing superhero movie, a zany multiverse adventure, a kid-friendly cartoon, an aerial action film, or a sci-fi epic set on a distant planet. Rather, it's a deliberately-placed slow-burn drama made by an auteur, with characters who are all wildly intelligent, and this makes it inherently more prestigious than its peers. The fact that TÁR didn't win any Oscars-not even for Blanchett's performance-while 7 awards went to a movie that appeals to the Letterboxd and Marvel crowds, means that the film industry has firmly rejected the notion of the medium as art over product. But as long as high-quality character studies like this film exist, cinema will survive as an art form, and more people will watch films like this over other audience-friendly movies over the coming years.
TAR is totally Inside Baseball. It’s going to be extremely hard to follow for anyone who doesn’t have a long history of listening to classical music. (That’s clearly you because you mispronounced a few really important names in classical music in this piece.) I don’t say this to wag a bony finger at you because this piece changed the way I think about this movie. The film itself discusses, other conductors, real people mind you, who were driven out of the business because of their sexual proclivities. James Levine, Charles Dutoit, and others. You have to know those back stories to fully understand how Tar feels about what is happening to her. So, great piece, man!
Thanks for the insight! I did do a little bit of research afterwards on a 3rd watch and started to notice some of the things you're talking about, so I appreciate that even when the jargon is used it does have a deeper meaning for those who are familiar with that world. Could you help me understand the names I mispronounced? I try to look these things up beforehand but it seems sometimes I miss it
Bernstein recorded all the Mahler symphonies by the early seventies. The short clip of her "conducting" here is of course reminiscent of Bernstein's theatrical technique but a far cry from how most conductors behave. It's ironic that a female conductor gets the "treatment" here when it should be common knowledge that there are so few female conductors of note. I would have preferred to see the ignominious role go to a male pretender.
Dark depressing movie. If Tar was a man, the movie could not have gotten financing to make. Tar she is a narcissist, user, and can not escape her own terrible behavior. She can not change, she can only destroy herself. Those closest to her can only leave.
I had a similar experience-I heard Tar was a “biopic of a fictional composer,” which sounded both boring and pointless. But for all the reasons you outline in this video (and more), it’s much more than that description would suggest.
I think you missed the irony of the ending, which is that video games is where classical music is actually fresh and happening, and she ended up in a better place, rather than a worse one.
yes. The audience in that final concert were totally engaged, really involved in the music/experience/creativity - in sharp contrast to the first audience (during the interview) who were being stale old cliches about music (how unalive the ideas were was shown by the assistant mouthing along with the dialogue - it was all the same tired stuff she had heard a hundred times before). Lydia's exile was actually a redemption - she was really getting to grips with a new composition for an audience who really cared.
@@hopehoping The way I interpretted francesca mouthing along was actually that she had provided the introduction for the interviewer to say word for word. Later on in the film we also see francesca then taking the words of the interviewer and adding it to lydia's wikipedia page and I saw it as a commentary on how one can falsify and construct their own legacy. As someone also pointed out in a different comment by the time we get to the end lydia gets a headset that plays a click track, so by the end she actually has become a "glorified time keeper" and I wouldn't say that its a better place for her neccessarily. To your point though it is a better place in the sense that she is no longer making the performance all about herself, but is forced to do this in the service of others enjoyment. By the end its all about what the audience wants, and not what feeds lydia tar's ego
Spoiler about the ending:
I didn't get it until someone explained it, but the headphones Lydia gets at the beginning of the performance is to give her the click track, keeping time for her. She, who at the beginning delighted in being in control of the tempo of the music, becomes, in the end, a glorified time keeper.
whoa I totally missed that! thats a great insight
I missed that! That's such a good detail. thanks.
I think most people found that obvious
@@RonPaul42069 I'd say most people are unfamiliar with clicktracks.
I didnt catch that. Props
I was so frustrated with people writing it off as pretentious when I wanted to talk about it and how people just started chatting away about their weekends when I saw it in the theatre - I loved it and thought it was very witty. Even as someone who doesn't know much about the music lore, I could understand the overall themes and messages just by paying attention... but it was exciting because it made you work and think a lot! And Cate was ofc mesmerising to watch. thank you for this video! :)
*edit: typo ("aboutt" into "about")
changed "calling it" into "writing it off as"
Thanks for the comment! I think this movie does a great job of presenting a nuanced and balanced take on some pretty complex topics like separating the art from the artist and challenges the viewer come to their own conclusions and I think its unfortunate that some people saw the first 30 minutes and then dismissed the rest of the movie (I guess me included at first :0)
@@JerbloFilm couldn‘t agree more with you! Glad you gave it another go :) but I suppose sometimes we are just not in the right mood for certain movies I think, giving them another go in a different setting can do wonders :)
i was amazed by the sheer _competence_ of Blanchet delivering this movie. And of the writers, set design, music, cinematography... every aspect was masterful. For all that the subject can be hurtful, it was a masterpiece.
The bit where she lampoons different pianists in the lecture had me convinced this might be the greatest performance of all time.
@@MrOtistetrax I concur
It's a horror film but you might not realize it at first or even until the second viewing. She's being haunted by the girl who k*lled herself. You'll spot her in the background throughout the film if you're looking for her. You can read the haunting as either literal or figurative. Either way. And while I'm no scholar of music, I do know from Ken Russel's film about Mahler that he was known for reinventing himself as a kind of Wagner clone and his motivations were likely cynical and financially motivated. Some accuse him of being fraud, and of course that's what we're to conclude about Tar. She created a character in her professional life and behaves as if she is this imagined person she concocted.
Debatable: 'throughout the film'? - hardly- there are supposedly two scenes with Krista's 'ghost' in them, neither of which really show anything.
@@atticstattic There's more than two scenes. You see the back of her head when she sitting in the audience. It's right in the middle of the frame, the subject of the shot. In addition to all the dialogue and plot points about her, which are ultimately the catalyst for Tar getting cancelled and becoming a target of a rumor mill, you see her watching Tar from another room. You see her briefly sitting in the chair when she wakes up from a dream and so on. The whole film is really about the girl who k*lled herself. It's a film about a haunting. If you read the haunting figuratively, rather than a literal supernatural haunting, it still works.
@@GlynDwr-d4h
Time stamps or you're imagining it.
I've watched this film a dozen times by now and that interpretation doesn't hold up.
@@atticstattic Yeah I'm not going to comb through the film and give you time stamps. You can just search TH-cam for videos on the hidden ghosts. And as I've already pointed out, the plot itself is about her life unraveling after a rumor campaign that was started because of the girl who k*lled herself. You also never see her face. That's why it has scenes where she's hearing weird noises at night, or the thing in the park where she hears the screams. They're shot and constructed like scenes from horror films. Just watch the movie again with this in mind and you'll see it instantly.
Or don't. I don't really care. I'm done with this conversation. Have a nice life.
@GlynDwr-d4h
Hey, I love this film and have participated in several back-and-forths on interpretation; this one doesn't hold up.
Tar's unraveling is based on who she is and begins well before Krista's death. A lot of suppressed guilt follows but, no ghosts.
Very interesting take on this movie. Lydia is a fascinating character that dominates most os the narrative, until she doesn't. The ending is perfectly ironic, indeed.
I agree, in the beginning when we see the posters for Tar Mahler V, Lydia's face takes up half the entire poster and its very much about her, and by the end, her conducting is very much in service of others and she takes a much smaller role
I’ve seen it five times, one of my all time favorite movies. It’s so rewatchable. The way it doesn’t hold your hand leads to new discoveries on every rewatch. Very layered.
Cate Blanchett's Lydia Tar is the best performance i have seen since DDL in There will be blood
There's a whole conservation that can be had about the fact that if the film were about a male conductor, people wouldn't care, as that's "normal" behaviour for "genius" men. Why did it take a woman doing the exact same thing to get people talking about these behaviours?
essentially it is about a narcicist asshole
if this movie was the exact same with a man, then nobody would have watched it
A lot of people think James Cordon, Donald Trump, Andrew Cuomo, and Elon Musk are full of themselves, and they are.
We could have that conversation, but it'd be a waste of time as it relies on a false premise. That's why we don't.
@@birchwwolf ooh, LOVE that angle!
Name a Greek hero whose flaw isn’t pride. People have been talking about this for over 2000 years. Grow up.
It blows my mind how someone as amazingly talented as Cate Blanchett could do this and then Borderlands…not just in the same century…but in the same universe…what even is that, Cate? You played Bob Dylan and Galadriel and Katherine Hepburn! What the hell happened?
Interestingly, she filmed “Borderlands” first then “TÁR”, and the worthy film came out first.
Then again, Cate Blanchett is one of the most versatile actors out there regardless of the quality of the films. Plus, she’s sublime in “DISCLAIMER*”.
Money.
Blanchett' apparently took Borderlands project in COVID , she needed something to do that time. If she's getting a bigger paycheck where she could bring out bangers like Tar, I don't think we should have any problem.
She's the best working actor today
Fun fact: she did Borderlands first. She was practicing her conducting movements on set between takes
Plus, I would have thought Borderlands would be a fun shoot. We all need fun between the serious, nerve-wracking performances
Brother you deserve to have wayyyyyy more subs than you do at this moment!!! What a great analysis of the movie! I hope your channel becomes very big and i hope you keep doing more film breakdowns! This one was great
This is spot on! I had a very similar experience. My parents are both violinists and my dad was a conductor, and since I was also a cellist in orchestras all my life, I grew up in that jargon but still rolled my eyes hard at how pretentious it was. Initially wanted to turn it off as well and thought the film is trying to portray musicians as pretentious idiots but I am also glad that I actually watched it to the end.
It was one of my favorite films of 2022. I wish we wouldn't have to wait so long for another Todd Field movie.
I LOOVVVEE how clearly you explained this film!! Only place I’ve been able to understand it!!
I might honestly put Blanchett as Tàr among the best ever cinematic performances
I truly believe Blanchett's performance is best in 21st century along with DDL and Isabelle Huppert in TWBB & Piano teacher
Okay, but just because someone talks with a lot of knowledge or terminology that the average uninitiated person outside their specific speciality or field wouldn't know ALSO does not automatically mean that they are pretentious, it does not automatically mean they are doing so to make anyone or anything seem greater or more important than it actually is NOR just to try and make themself seem more impressive somehow either. 😅🙃
Excellent analysis! I loved it... like you, I also had to see it in two sittings. It's not predictable and it makes you think. 10/10
I too gave up on this movie after about 10 or 15 minutes, but you've talked me into giving it another try. We'll see how it goes.
Rented it. Was blown away. Wanted it on disc but it doesn’t seem to be available in the UK so had to buy it digitally.
one of the most exciting moments from my year was stumbling across a tar dvd for $1 at a second-hand store (aus). i was on a high for a week after that!!
“That’s you! That’s you, Lydia!” Well, yeah.
I have tried to watch Tar twice but the dialogue is so very dense and musically specific. I can read sheet music but not professional level music especially chief conductor for a country!?!
Cate is impressive but I can’t find any Hook into caring about the meticulously crafted world. Maybe I should try again, I’ve enjoyed 90% of her works. Rare. Like kidman , she picked wonderful scripts and gets deep into her characters. Hopefully both will keep working like meryl
Cate Blanchett plays a similar role in the miniseries "Disclaimer" also very interesting project I highly recommend if you like this sort of art
That ending was the one thing that pissed me off about the film. That would never happen to a conductor. She would just be ushered off to another orchestra. Cancel culture doesn’t really exist in classical music and that would make a much more interesting and complicated ending.
I saw it in theaters and just couldn’t get into it. Which is okay, it’s a challenging movie so it’s easy for someone like me to not keep up, and I respected it all the same. But for me it needed something to help me engage with it, and it’s also so far from my preferred style of film that all I can say is that it’s not my cup of tea. There’s really no reason to accuse it of being pretentious, nor to gatekeep it as “high art” which is a very elitist and, well, pretentious behavior lol.
i definitely do agree with your take, especially that lydia is pretentious and insecure and tries to overcompensate by affecting this facade of ig her idea of a wealthy, aloof, intellectual musical genius. she doesn't even seem to enjoy the process of composing for all her talk, and i think it's the power of being in a position like that which is more alluring to her. that said, i also don't think the movie really deconstructs the ideas it presents enough? it seems very ambiguous with what it wants to say about lydia's pretension, and doesn't really grapple with the class politics within the music industry that produces and motivates people like lydia, and the nature of those politics itself. i think it definitely tries to, through the character of lydia, but doesn't quite hit the mark. it has been a while since i've watched it and i remember it leaving me so frustrated and with such a bitter taste in my mouth for some reason, but maybe those opinions would change upon a rewatch.
I was wondering if you could specify I am definitely interested.
I had the same reaction - walked away from my first viewing, but so glad I came back.
Masterpiece. Did you catch the woman sitting in the chair the first time you saw it or on a rewatch?
I reviewed it when it came out and compared it to Paul Thomas Anderson‘s The Master, as those two films, ten years apart, seemed to me the most ‘art film’ Hollywood films in recent memory. Here’s where I differ with your take: to me, Tar is a character quite like Joaquin Phoenix’s Freddie in The Master, who is of course extremely far from being an intellectual.
I don’t think Tar’s intellectual “pretensions” are actually pretentious, or meant to be taken as fraudulent, empty, wrong or insincere on her part. She’s not a narcissist, exactly, but is a massive egotist. Her accomplishments are the trappings of her character. The trappings of Freddie in The Master’s character are his rough, vagabond lifestyle.
The trappings are different but the essence of the characters is very similar: they have big egos, they act by instinct, they want to dominate. The only difference is that Freddie also finds Lancaster Dodd and allows himself to be tamed or dominated by a bigger egotist, who is supposedly connected with religion or a higher power.
The door is left open to mysticism in Tar too. It is like she is being haunted. Apparently her apartment is broken into, and we can see the intruder in one of the shots, but I missed it when viewing at the cinema. So the movie feels like there is some mystical retribution at work in Tar’s downfall. Maybe a tribal spirit of music, as discussed in the first scene, is responsible for upending her life which is full of the distractions of fame and flattery, and post-disgrace she is brought back to essentials. It’s hard to tell if she’s definitely unhappy in the final scene. She’s still conducting. Anyway, my point is that I don’t think she’s meant to be taken entirely as a narcissist whose interests are all wrong and insincere.
somehow his movie is really satisfying to watch I have no clue why
Pretentious? "That's you, Lydia Tar!" Precisely. Anyone who even uses the word "pretentious" in the 21st Century is likely overcompensating for their own insecurities by defensively exercising pretentiousness and condescension themselves. What they're saying is that something is bothering them, or they feel like somebody's trying to go over their heads, so they lash out to defend themselves. Just like Tar does. They're blaming their discomfort on someone else. But what do they think this movie is showing them? And how does its reach exceed its grasp? Sometimes viewers attribute a character's self-seriousness and self-importance to the movie or the filmmakers rather than the character. (The same clueless "pretentious" charges have been aimed at "Saltburn" for some of the same reasons: they assume the film is "about" something other than what's on the screen.)
In this case, do disapproving viewers think "maestro Tar" is supposed to be the heroine, a sophisticated role model of some kind? She's an accomplished, intelligent, expressive interpretive artist -- and an empty shell of a human being, a total failure in her personal life. I know some musicians who thought Tar's over-the-top conducting style (a grotesque, amateurish exaggeration of Bernstein's) was pretentious and laughable... and it is. Look at those megalomaniacal low-angle shots of her at the podium. She's a narcissistic drama queen, a musical Trump -- but she has actual accomplishments that attest to her artistic talents. That's what the opening establishes as the premise of the movie, though you only see it in retrospect (complete with the end credits sequence -- the stuff most people never watch -- transposed to the front of the film and imposed on the audience as a form of punitive discipline -- like her conduct of her Juilliard class). Then what happens?
Saltburn had a poor script development but was not pretentious. Tar on the other hand...
@bacarandii I think that point you made makes a lot of sense, theres a difference between a specific character acting pretentious vs a movie itself being pretentious. The idea of insecurity also makes sense, throughout the film we see lydia have multiple nervous tics, and we also see her steal and abuse her wifes Metoprolol, which is used for high blood pressure (what sharon uses it for) but is also prescribed for anxiety so I think it does paint a picture of someone who deals with a lot of insecurity behind her pretentious/self important facade
I urge you to watch any Neil Breen film and then report back. Pretentiousness exists in film, you just haven't been exposed to it yet...
Fellow man watching Tár on the plane
Can someone help, in scenes towards the end of the movie when she's going to Phillipines I think in taxi, and another scene maybe she's in her apartment, is there a few seconds Cate is replaced by another actress, it doesn't look like her at those moments. Very quick moments.
I recommend it to all serious musicians.
5:12 - _IS_ it, tho? 🤔🤔 OR is it simply acknowledging that, just because the composition exists thanks to the composer assembling/arranging it, it's still up to the performers and/or to the conductor who is directing them to actually realize it and bring it into being in a way that can be witnessed and appreciated not only by those capable of reading the sheet music??😅 😂 (idek! 🤷♀️🤷🤷🏻♂️ -just random thoughts) Lol
I loved it.
I think what truly makes this film stand out from most other films in 2022 is its subject matter and presentation style. This is a slow-burn, 158-minute drama about a classically-trained musical conductor, and that description would already turn off mainstream moviegoers. Therefore, *the film stands out because it completely affirms itself as high art.*
Specifically, TÁR is mostly set across Europe and in New York, in big concert halls and lecture rooms, with countless monologues and conversations where the characters all discuss philosophy and the deeper meanings behind compositions. The film also starts off by playing the closing credits, which makes it seem like a highbrow arthouse picture and risk being called "pretentious" by less astute individuals. Of course, the characters also reference the works of Bach, Mozart, Beethoven, and other composers who lived over 300 years ago, and whose direct influence would be lost upon Millennials and Gen-Z'ers with no familiarity for the classics. If you don't have an above-average IQ, you won't understand or like this movie at all, and you're probably better off watching something simpler for your own liking, like Barbie or a Star War.
While I'm here, I might as well discuss my interpretation of the titular character. Lydia Tár is someone morally complex who performs some questionable acts, such as gaslighting her fellow musicians, students, benefactors, and lovers, while silencing anyone who dares to question her power. She's a lot like Terrence Fletcher from Whiplash, a respected composer who's also manipulative and abusive to his subjects, and normally I wouldn't question the actions of the star conductor because they're just doing their job. But because this is a woman at the forefront, and she mentions how many boots she had to lick to become this famous in a male-dominated field, it makes me more aware of how messed up she is. In this current era, people are finally becoming more critical of institutions that were once respected for decades just as new generations are about to take the reins in these industries, and it's especially gratifying to see a so-called "trailblazer" in Lydia experience her gradual downfall.
TÁR is everything that intellectually-minded film fans could possibly want. And its meager box office only re-affirms that statement, showing that most audiences are uncultured plebeians who only pay for the usual blockbusters. With clips from the film circulating all over social media, people clearly misunderstand the point of scenes that can be played out of context, thereby proving that these people are not smart enough to understand the whole context and that the film is beyond criticism. That's what makes the film stand out above all its peers from that year. It's not a crowd-pleasing superhero movie, a zany multiverse adventure, a kid-friendly cartoon, an aerial action film, or a sci-fi epic set on a distant planet. Rather, it's a deliberately-placed slow-burn drama made by an auteur, with characters who are all wildly intelligent, and this makes it inherently more prestigious than its peers. The fact that TÁR didn't win any Oscars-not even for Blanchett's performance-while 7 awards went to a movie that appeals to the Letterboxd and Marvel crowds, means that the film industry has firmly rejected the notion of the medium as art over product. But as long as high-quality character studies like this film exist, cinema will survive as an art form, and more people will watch films like this over other audience-friendly movies over the coming years.
TAR is totally Inside Baseball. It’s going to be extremely hard to follow for anyone who doesn’t have a long history of listening to classical music. (That’s clearly you because you mispronounced a few really important names in classical music in this piece.) I don’t say this to wag a bony finger at you because this piece changed the way I think about this movie. The film itself discusses, other conductors, real people mind you, who were driven out of the business because of their sexual proclivities. James Levine, Charles Dutoit, and others. You have to know those back stories to fully understand how Tar feels about what is happening to her. So, great piece, man!
Thanks for the insight! I did do a little bit of research afterwards on a 3rd watch and started to notice some of the things you're talking about, so I appreciate that even when the jargon is used it does have a deeper meaning for those who are familiar with that world. Could you help me understand the names I mispronounced? I try to look these things up beforehand but it seems sometimes I miss it
A very clever film. I enjoyed it.
IMHO The director made this as a closure to his own role as a pianist in "Eyes Wide Shut".
Yeah! You learned Something and shareholder it! Judge slowly, my friends.
I'm going to have to watch this, maybe. Thanks! 😊 💖
Very interesting review. Watching from Northeast India..
Bernstein recorded all the Mahler symphonies by the early seventies. The short clip of her "conducting" here is of course reminiscent of Bernstein's theatrical technique but a far cry from how most conductors behave. It's ironic that a female conductor gets the "treatment" here when it should be common knowledge that there are so few female conductors of note. I would have preferred to see the ignominious role go to a male pretender.
Sorry. I didn't hear "first female" to conduct M S. Hopefully the film will inspire some to listen to Mahler.
Dark depressing movie. If Tar was a man, the movie could not have gotten financing to make. Tar she is a narcissist, user, and can not escape her own terrible behavior. She can not change, she can only destroy herself. Those closest to her can only leave.
"Pretentious" is such a lazy critique
I had a similar experience-I heard Tar was a “biopic of a fictional composer,” which sounded both boring and pointless.
But for all the reasons you outline in this video (and more), it’s much more than that description would suggest.
I think you missed the irony of the ending, which is that video games is where classical music is actually fresh and happening, and she ended up in a better place, rather than a worse one.
yes. The audience in that final concert were totally engaged, really involved in the music/experience/creativity - in sharp contrast to the first audience (during the interview) who were being stale old cliches about music (how unalive the ideas were was shown by the assistant mouthing along with the dialogue - it was all the same tired stuff she had heard a hundred times before). Lydia's exile was actually a redemption - she was really getting to grips with a new composition for an audience who really cared.
@@hopehoping The way I interpretted francesca mouthing along was actually that she had provided the introduction for the interviewer to say word for word. Later on in the film we also see francesca then taking the words of the interviewer and adding it to lydia's wikipedia page and I saw it as a commentary on how one can falsify and construct their own legacy. As someone also pointed out in a different comment by the time we get to the end lydia gets a headset that plays a click track, so by the end she actually has become a "glorified time keeper" and I wouldn't say that its a better place for her neccessarily. To your point though it is a better place in the sense that she is no longer making the performance all about herself, but is forced to do this in the service of others enjoyment. By the end its all about what the audience wants, and not what feeds lydia tar's ego
didnt know that was monster hunter even though i know what that is haha wow
Gotta say you just summed up why i didnt like it for the same reason i hate drakengard 3
Haven’t watched it. Will wait till it streams.
her and her stolen wand. criminal.
I DESPISE that movie. I can’t express how much I hate it.
Sounds similar to another Cate film where she ends up old and crazy on the streets.
C'mon the movie it not that difficult on first viewing.
molto, not malto lol
Cate just acts like Cate, I swear she just acts like herself. I don't know why I think that I just do
You thought that because it had a woman protagonist? Shame on you !!!😢
Sorry! There aren't enough first rate female orchestral conductors alive, to justify presenting a nasty caricature of the rise and fall of Tar.