A Complete Unknown - A Great Story Trapped In A Bad Film

Full disclosure: I believe Bob Dylan is perhaps the greatest artist to ever live. I hang on to his every word and I think about him and his art every day of my life.

Since this film was first announced in January of 2020, I have oscillated between skeptically interested, and downright cynical. In the last couple of years I had come around on Chalamet, convinced he could pull off Dylan, and I was right. He does great. He really loses himself in the role and makes you truly believe he's the man himself. He's certainly the highlight of the film. My true hang-up has always been Mangold. I like Ford v Ferrari, and I enjoyed Walk the Line, but it has become the blueprint for cookie cutter sappy musician biopics. I was unconvinced that he could handle the complexity of an artist so varied and refusing definition. And, to a certain extent, that has proven true.

However, he handled some parts with more care than I expected. It's obvious to me that Mangold has been obsessed with the legend of the infamous Newport Folk Festival (and for that, I cannot blame him). Every event in the film points to it. When we reach the festival, it is the scene that is given the most thought, and certainly the most interesting and memorable moment in the film. Besides this and some other scattered golden moments, it is largely the film I expected; a by-the-numbers biopic about an artist struggling with fame, love, and rampant infidelity.

Let me be clear, I liked a lot of the film. I enjoyed all the songs, the moments with Woody Guthrie genuinely moved me in a way I was not ready for, again, Chalamet killed it as Dylan, and if it gets more people my age to listen to Bob Dylan, then that's awesome. In my heart of hearts, however, I believe there are much better ways to tell this story.

It is well known by now that Dylan himself had a small role in developing the story for this film, which for many lends to its authenticity. Anyone who knows anything about the man would disagree with this. Bob Dylan is many things. One of them is a liar. Dylan fabricating his own history is such a known entity that it is a small plot point of the film. So, using his involvement as evidence that it is an accurate and faithful story should be disregarded. I am, however, not interested in nitpicking a film for historical inaccuracies. What I am interested in, however, is discussing why the film misses the spirit of what makes Dylan special.

Every music biopic treats their subject as a troubled genius who struggles to overcome their vices. What makes Dylan truly compelling is his refusal of definition. Bob Dylan has written masterpieces in folk, rock, country, western, gospel, and blues. He has starred in films, held art galleries for his paintings and sculptures, and published poetry and non-fiction prose, all on top of his 40 studio albums that earned him the only Nobel Prize in Literature awarded for song lyrics to date. He has continuously reinvented himself over an almost 70-year career. Mangold focused on this single, incredibly popular, and well-documented period in Dylan's life. While the Newport Folk Festival is a compelling story, this narrow view, paired with Mangold's limited ability as a storyteller, creates a very limited and generic caricature of one of the most interesting and profound individuals of the 20th century.

So, if you like this film, and are looking for more compelling stories about Bob Dylan's early years... I recommend Martin Scorsese's 2005 documentary, No Direction Home: Bob Dylan. If you are looking for a thoughtful drama that focuses on the Greenwich Village folk revival, go watch the Coen brother's excellent 2013 picture, Inside Llewyn Davis.

But, if you want a real Dylan biopic, a drama that encapsulates the artist and tells his whole life story, without falling victim to the standard formula, look no further than Todd Haynes' 2007 masterpiece, I'm Not There.

And please, my friends, listen to Bob Dylan. His music has power that words cannot describe.