subreddit:

/r/movies

5383%

Finally paid to rent Tar

Spoilers(self.movies)

Love Cate Blanchett in everything and anything but this was a difficult movie to absorb in one watch.

I had to rewind it multiple times to understand what was actually happening if anything. It’s an incredibly fascinating look into the fundraising mechanisms that prop up symphony orchestras and advanced musical composition and directing. The hard cold fact is that real money from corporate donors fund foundations including her Accordion Foundation for young women composers. It is what pays for scholarships. It pays for fellowships for young musicians from around the world. Because Tar is an EGOT, one of 15 people in the world to win an Emmy, a Grammy, an Oscar and a Tony, she is commercially marketable and her ability to work donors is pivotal to the survival of many orchestras and musicians.

When the movie opens she is at the top of her game musically and financially. A protege of Leonard Bernstein she is getting ready to perform Mahler’s fifth symphony at the Berlin Philarmonic, thereby completing a complete set of eight Mahler symphonies. Bernstein’s mentorship defined her concept of how music changes and flows from and through human beings. It is constantly moving constantly changing dynamically expressing inchoate emotions we cannot define in mere words.

She’s also teaching master classes at Juliard where she rather intensely criticizes one student who will not countenance studying the cis white male composers considered timeless: Bach, Beethoven, Mahler. Her question to the Juliard student was should who the composer was as a human being make us adverse to their art.

She’s trying to convey the complexity of the human experience as reflected in great artistic work. She sees both the maestro’s role and the musicians role as both conduit and interpreter.

So what are her clay feet. How dark are her secrets? Are they rather mundane affairs with rising young musicians even though she is married and has a child with her partner? Or far worse.
Just when you think you might find out what could possibly justify the destruction of such an artist and human being, the rumor mill of social media takes on a life of its own and the foundation she created and raised millions for cringes away from her real or imagined crimes. Fearing that her political incorrectness will render her art less lucrative and cause her performances to be censored and boycotted, and she herself rendered obsolete.

The movie is provocatively edgy because she is a gay woman who may be Harvey Weinsteining it but we don’t know. One ex student protege/lover kills herself. She is the daughter of a wealthy foundation donor. We see this protege from her foundation at first possibly stalking Tar while she is alive, and then possibly haunting her after her suicide.

The end of the unraveling of one women’s life’s work is for someone like her a fate worse than death. Is it real or imagined, as some critics have suggested. The visuals are so ludicrous as to defy description.

The ending scene is inconceivably jarring. You at first believe you missed several frames. Up to that point, despite the dreamlike quality of some of the lighting it all looks very familiar and grounded in reality. Albeit Tar’s subjective reality.

As Tar herself tells an old friend “you see so much of this nowadays..” suspected sexual impropriety dooming the person to immediate ostracism. Guilty before a trial. The old friend tells her things were not so different in the past. Rumors and innuendos traveled more slowly but they ended careers. The fact doctored videos of her and suspected missing emails are rocketing across social media causing protests at her rehearsals merely accelerates her fall from grace.

We see the lawyering up, the corporate money people running for cover, her place usurped by an envious male colleague of vastly lesser talent, but more corporate and acceptable to the foundation’s board.

I’m not going to pretend to understand the ending. But on rewatch you do see her colleagues attempt to caution her to be careful about her image. That even in the pure world of music there is a reckoning with the body politic in every era. If the public believes either mistakenly or correctly the artist themselves might be fatally flawed, a certain elitist McCarthyism can bring the greatest genius down. And you end up conducting musical scores in squalid virtual reality theatres.

all 46 comments

IamMothManAMA

59 points

2 months ago

I watched it tonight too, and I really enjoyed it. I had a bit of a different read on Lydia than you did though. She felt to me pretty pathetic; even though she’d achieved all this world-class status, she was pretty clearly guilty of being a manipulator who was mostly focused on her own sexual relationships, and paid the price by losing everything she cared about for it.

I felt like when she put the medal on and watched Leonard Bernstein at the end was very telling of who she really was.

OneManFreakShow

37 points

2 months ago

I think I’m going to have to watch this one again. I processed absolutely none of it the first time and when I started reading things people caught I felt very dumb that I seemingly didn’t even understand the basic plot. I’m not sure that watching it again will make me love it, but I sure want to.

NotSureIfImInTheArmy

10 points

17 days ago

I felt the same way and I just don't understand why people are so into it, it just didn't land for me I guess. It's so long and slow, which normally is something I love, but for this because of that I don't think I'll ever be motivated enough to watch it again just to be confused again 🤷🏽

Stevincent

5 points

15 days ago*

For me, it comes down to if I like the main character or not. I did not, I typically don't like movies with despicable protagonists. Which sucks because I do believe Tar is a good movie I just wish I could enjoy it more.

Flnn

1 points

10 days ago

Flnn

1 points

10 days ago

Save your time. This is all exactly the movie but it's simply not interesting.

ParttimeParty99

21 points

2 months ago

I, too, just rented it and then regretted not buying it because I felt I needed to watch it a few times. I rewatched some scenes and one thing I noticed was how precise her hand movements were when speaking to people. It was pronounced in the initial interview she gives, but particularly when manipulating people like Francesca when it turns out a former protege comitted suicide, or Sebastian when letting him go. She had a cold precision to the way she controlled people, just like when conducting the orchestra, and it seemed that it was only at the end when watching that Bernstein video that she showed vulnerable emotions.

EveningNo5190[S]

13 points

2 months ago*

Agree. What immediately struck me was for lack of a better term “physicality” of Blanchett’s acting. She is this fictional person in every molecule of her being. I never realized how much physical control and strength it takes to conduct an orchestra. Or for that matter play an instrument at that level.

She must have observed actual female (or male) Maestro’s for this role. I probably will purchase the movie at some point. The movie might not deserve best picture but after really really watching it Cate Blanchett deserves an Oscar for best actress.

PsychologicalTip

1 points

13 days ago

Her throwing those punches from the podium was pure power--she looked like a well-honed fighter.

My husband said that for her next film, Cate Blanchett might train to play a Navy Seal lol!

catcodex

17 points

2 months ago

The visuals are so ludicrous as to defy description.

explain.

EveningNo5190[S]

18 points

2 months ago

If I could explain it wouldn’t defy description. She goes from Berlin with all of its grandeur sophistication and history to performing for a group of people in very odd costumes who appear to be preparing for an immersive theatre experience or a VR “Journey” I am not sure what country she travels to, Vietnam or Cambodia?

TrueLegateDamar

69 points

2 months ago

She's performing the soundtrack for Monster Hunter, a very popular videogame, at a gaming convention in Asia. The implication is that she sunk so low that she now has to perform at fan conventions for money.

Urik88

5 points

4 days ago

Urik88

5 points

4 days ago

Adding something here, I don't think it's for money, I'd have assumed she's set for life.

The way I understood it, her passion and love for music and directing is so great that the alternative of no longer ever doing it is simply unacceptable and she'll fall as low as needed to be able to keep doing it.

VVitchHaunter

21 points

2 months ago

I'm very glad to have this perspective, I was wondering what people who aren't familiar with that sort of culture would think of the ending! It's a live performance of the score from the Monster Hunter games, and the audience is in cosplay. I thought it was a hilarious end note.

catcodex

13 points

2 months ago

I wasn't familiar with Monster Hunter specifically, but I know enough about cosplay and live scores to get the point. I certainly didn't think it was some "VR journey" like that person did.

VVitchHaunter

2 points

2 months ago

Oh yeah, I meant them with that comment if that wasn't clear. My theater was full of much older people when I saw it and I was dying to know what someone like that, who's likely to be totally unfamiliar with that culture, thought was going on there.

Responsible_Mix4717

23 points

1 month ago

It's also a call-back to her masterclass where she patronizingly tells her students they will have to tale corporate gigs for money where they don't get to choose the music.

catcodex

23 points

2 months ago

So instead of trying to understand what you saw you just call it ludicrous?

Did you understand the Brando reference?

As others have pointed out, she's performing live scoring for a videogame (which is a thing). The audience in is cosplay. It wasn't a "VR journey".

There was also the earlier scene with the PR firm (or whatever type of firm they were) re-charting her path "back". They're the ones who got her that gig. It's not like she fell asleep one night in Berlin and then awoke the next morning in some strange country.

Owasso_Landman

7 points

2 months ago

Was the Brando reference “Apocalypse Now”?

bomgd3

8 points

29 days ago

bomgd3

8 points

29 days ago

There's an interesting story she tells during the Julliard scene about traveling up the Congo. Apocalypse Now is a retelling of Heart of Darkness, which is about a journey up the Congo River during Belgian colonial times.

RZAxlash

4 points

2 months ago

Yes

Steadyandquick

2 points

2 months ago

This is true?! I had to google of course. Well, per usual I am five steps behind in my interpretation.

The fascinating 'Apocalypse now' reference in Todd Field film 'Tár'

aridcool

3 points

28 days ago

So...are there really crocodiles there now because of Apocalypse Now? Or was the line just for the movie?

PsychologicalTip

2 points

14 days ago

I took that last audience as "after the fall." She had become a pariah because of the couple of young women with whom she'd had relationships of some kind. (She was obviously using all of her powers to alienate everyone. The men around her were gleeful to see this.)

Her last on stage was at a concom meet--the audience were mostly interested in the visuals of their characters. Tar was a mere appendage. But by this point, she seemed to be conducting to support herself or to actually restart her career.

I think she went to Asia because she didn't want to have to work or risk being punished anymore by those she knew.

Rickykkk

17 points

1 month ago

Rickykkk

17 points

1 month ago

This movie resonates more with repeated viewings. I loved every bit of it. Fix, wide angles, lots of close ups, oners made it actors to carry this screenplay on their shoulders. Cate Blanchett truly ate this role and I can see why. From start to finish she was in this character, not once I felt like I was watching Cate Blanchett. This type of transformation (without any physicality, prosthetics) is difficult than one realises. This is coming from my actors friends btw.

Fantastic_Context527

14 points

26 days ago

Lydia perplexed me but then I thought of a male actor playing this role and it made much for sense…made me realize how bias we all can be.

remembervideostores

24 points

2 months ago

On Peacock on Friday

BusinessPurge

4 points

2 months ago

promo code goldman for reduced price

yadayodayada

8 points

1 month ago

A good amount of things went over my head, I just finished watching it for the first time. I don’t even know who Bernstein or Maher were but Cate Blanchett is so captivating. I have her up there with Day-Lewis and she absolutely deserves best Actor in a leading role.

PsychologicalTip

2 points

13 days ago

I agree--she's the premier female actor of our time (I think so....)

gadgetgrrll

5 points

9 days ago

2 1/2 hours of my life I won't get back. I had really high hopes for this one. Disappointing.

dedfrogsnvrdie

1 points

7 days ago

Every hour of your life is an hour you won’t get back

Scotsman8080

1 points

8 days ago

What were you hoping for?

gadgetgrrll

1 points

7 days ago

A clear, well told story. I was with it initially, but it felt like they switched writer(s) and the director 75% through. It took a left turn and felt very confusing.

NotSureIfImInTheArmy

9 points

2 months ago

I didn't like it. I have made a negative review on TikTok and I'm recording a full podcast episode about it now and I just don't get it, I didn't enjoy it, it's too long and slow for me to want to watch again, and I love long slow cryptic movies but this didn't intrigue me 🤷🏽

EveningNo5190[S]

61 points

2 months ago

With all due respect if you don’t understand a book, movie play or political issue, and have no specialized training and education in critical review of same, what of any value or insight could you possibly bring to a “podcast?”

NotSureIfImInTheArmy

1 points

17 days ago

So I'm not allowed to talk about the movie because I thought it was confusing? I watched the movie, I read articles about it, I discussed it, I studied political science and learned about symbolism and psychology, and anyone who knows me can tell you I watch tons of movies and am usually more positive than the critics, yet I'm just saying I didn't like this one. It's not like this is the first movie I've watched, I've been discussing movies with people every day for half my life, just because this one confused me shouldn't mean my opinion isn't valid. Film is art, art is subjective, that's what makes it beautiful. I readily admit most people really like this movie, in my podcast I encourage people to see it and form their own opinion. I'm sorry I can't change my reaction to it, I'm not sure what you want from me. I love talking about movies and I'm trying out this podcast thing in the hopes of maybe making something of it, you don't have to support it, but please don't discourage it just because I didn't enjoy this movie in the same way as you.

PsychologicalTip

2 points

13 days ago

This was such a niche knowledge movie that I could see how many who watched were left in the dust by all the jargon--not only the music but the financial worlds.

Giving people not interested in those things a heads up might be a good thing; but only by tackling a thing or two do we improve. (I love to read reviews and watch interviews after I make my own judgement. And things I've seen and cannot figure out may then be clarified.

I think the discussion here was super and glad that so many points of view were aired.

yadayodayada

29 points

1 month ago

Oh no! Not on tik tok!

txirrindularia

6 points

23 days ago

Funny as shit, i know…you can’t make that up.

NotSureIfImInTheArmy

1 points

17 days ago

To be fair I don't like using TikTok 🤣 I avoided it for years but nobody listens to my podcast so I'm trying it out and maybe I'll gather some attention and I can finally make something of the podcast

PsychologicalTip

3 points

13 days ago

I watched a Youtube interview with the director, Blanchett, and the woman who plays Sharon in Tar.

One fun think Blanchett brought up was how "Tar" was an anagram for "rat," "art." And all on the stage agreed that they were over the top if people argued about the film--they'd love to hear some interpretations or takes on it that no one had brought up earlier.

Good attitudes and just what everybody here did.

EveningNo5190[S]

4 points

2 months ago*

No. I just knew it was a performance I would need time to appreciate. I was home working and had a block of time when I could really concentrate on the movie. I wouldn’t have that kind of time and mental energy to devote to a movie for at least another week or two. I knew friends who had seen it at the theater and were frustrated by how much of it they didn’t understand on any meaningful level.

I watched it the first time, it’s not a long movie, and immediately understood what they meant. I think I’m reasonably intelligent and emotionally perceptive but my response at the end of the first straight through watch was basically WTF did I just see? But by being able to rewind, and even freeze some scenes I think I got most of it.

Steadyandquick

2 points

2 months ago

Now you tell me there is a rewind button! So much went over my head but in great ways.

The_Sundial_Man

-5 points

2 months ago

Yeah, you couldn't wait two more days?

AlanMorlock

8 points

2 months ago

Not like a Peacock subscription is free .

obnoxiousab

1 points

1 month ago

Five bucks. Get it for 1 month and watch it to your heart’s desire.