A Complete Unknown
*insert "Like a Rolling Stone" lyrics in caption*
Hello!
I’ve been waiting to see this movie. But I can’t kick the can down the road anymore. Here are my thoughts on A Complete Unknown (the Timmy Bob Dylan movie for those of you who haven't been inundated by the press tour that includes stops on College Gameday or Theo Von’s podcast).
A Complete Unknown
Director: James Mangold
B
I can’t say I’m the most well-versed on Bob Dylan, but I felt it necessary to write about the latest attempt to depict him on its own post (even though it’s been over a month since it came out lol). From all of the trailers, I was really worried director James Mangold would portray Dylan in the most uninteresting way. But perhaps I misjudged.
I will say, Timothée Chalamet does a fine job as Dylan and you can really tell how much of a GRADE A movie star he has become. But it’s more interesting how Mangold and screenwriter Jay Cocks navigate portraying one of the most consequential artists of the 20th century. It would’ve been a mistake to do a massive career biopic about Bob Dylan just because there’s so much to cover.
Since A Complete Unknown only focuses on Dylan’s career from 1961-65, there’s actually an interesting dynamic of how the artist navigated the folk scene in Greenwich Village. It’s fascinating to see how Dylan never wants to be stuck in one box, especially to the detriment of Sylvie Russo (Elle Fanning), Joan Baez (Monica Barbaro) and Pete Seeger (Edward Norton). It follows a standard linear story, but the ambivalence in this portrayal stands out.
The only problem with all of this is that Dylan isn’t standard. He’s a contradictory force of nature. And guess what? There’s already a narrative feature that strikes at those contradictions even harder, and that film is Todd Haynes’ I’m Not There. I know it’s not fair to A Complete Unknown because that’s not necessarily meeting it on its terms. Mangold’s film is much more focused on Dylan’s rise through folk up until the 1965 Newport Folk Festival. But the movie portrays Dylan as this comet and force of nature who almost feels detached from the ground. And yet, he never tries to conform or stay in one box. Haynes’ film reflects this by breaking a narrative flow and examining the idea of performance. Meanwhile, the latest Dylan biopic rarely experiments or goes in bold new directions. It didn’t make me interested enough in Dylan.
If anything, I wanted to listen to more Johnny Cash than Bob Dylan. Boyd Holbrook, in his few scenes in the film as the Man in Black, came off as more compelling and fascinating than even Chalamet’s Dylan.
God, there should be a biopic about Cash out there somewhere. Wait, so you’re telling me James Mangold already made one? In 2005? Well, then he should make one AGAIN DAMMIT. AND HE SHOULD MAKE ONE WITH BOYD MOTHERFUCKING HOLBROOK.