Clevercell Very disappointing...

UnowPriceless hyped garbage

Mandeep Tyson The acting in this movie is really good.

Bumpy Chip It’s not bad or unwatchable but despite the amplitude of the spectacle, the end result is underwhelming.

sugarmack Carlos Saura is a genius, and Tango is a paragon of his artistic vision and cleverness. The staging (all in a studio) is wildly imaginative, with dazzling and stirring number after number. I didn't really care whether there was a storyline given how powerful the dancing was, particularly any time the character, Laura, was on screen. However, there is a very clever set of story lines woven together in an almost mischievous way, or as the young folk today would say, 'very meta'. In case the stories of Mario, his show and Argentina since the turn of the 20th Century weren't enough, the mirrored sets add an extra level of irony. The lighting and music are almost characters in themselves in this film, which is not to diminish the strong, subtle acting. I absolutely love this film, which left my mind blown as the final credits rolled.

laurel14 Tango may well be the greatest dance movie ever made. Its stunning dance sequences, relentless tango music (orchestrated by Lalo Schiffrin)and throbbing sexuality place this film in a class by itself. There simply has never been anything like it. And, if you have any male hormones left and do not fall immediately head over heels in love with Mia Maestro than something is definitely wrong with you. She is what Audrey Hepburn might have been had Miss Hepburn been Latin and had a spectacular dancer's figure. But the entire cast is wonderful and the lighting and color are explosive. Go see it, then take the next plane to Buenos Aires. I did.

lvoky This movie is one of the most beautiful pieces i ever saw. It's such a pleasure to watch it. A prefect camera, gorgeous colors and exciting dancing scenes make this film a piece of poetry. The evidence is a lack of a strong story. This is just lyric film. It will make you happy. Surely.

tedg I love this stuff. This film has weaknesses, but the ambition is so grand one can forgive, at least in deciding to watch.The general problem is mixing film and dance. Rarely, oh so rarely is it done well. The stock choices are two: either film a dance more or less as an audience would see it, or to incorporate dance into the theatric presentation as a device. Either way, the audience is necessarily at a distance. And that's the problem: dance is human, to watch it (I'm talking about a performance here) you intimately participate in the space built and folded by the dancers. So by definition, most film/dance mixtures turn flat.The solution here is to create an openly recursive storyline, mixing the dance as sometimes a filmed performance or rehearsal, sometimes "real" life, sometimes dreams or visions or imaginings. This combined with a never-rooted camera -- which sometimes plays the role of a character itself -- makes the audience part of the dance, and adds depth. The sets are designed to confuse: sloped floors, mirrors (used liberally) distortion, translucent screens and so on, further breaking the "performance" mold. On these terms alone, this is an intelligently conceived film.I cannot say the same for the dancing proper. I think the film suffers from sticking too close to an Argentine palette, so the music and dance lacked breadth, and ultimately became repetitive. Whether the dancers were authentic, I cannot say. There certainly were exciting moments for me, but the dancing wasn't sufficiently vibrant to carry all of the scenes.The Latin flavor was intriguing in the large: that the director would attempt such a self-referential conflation: national horror; angst of aging; layering of creation. Such a project would be considered outrageous in the US long before it is explored. And the Latin character was also interesting in the small: bigbottomed dancers and dumb, dependent women talking about how intelligent and independent they are.Check this out. Not for the dance, but for a solution to filming dance.