Throughout his career, Bob Dylan created an image of himself in which he never had one persona but several. His allusive and shifting personality has provided various directors with a sparse canvas on which they can paint their own iteration of Dylan. These include D.A. Pennebaker’s documentary “Don’t Look Back,” Todd Haynes’s “I’m Not There,” and to a looser degree, the Coen brothers’ “Inside Llewyn Davis.” In late December, James Mangold’s Dylan — a more one-note, straightforward version — hit the big screen. Timothée Chalamet plays Dylan as he moves to New York with a guitar and dream, begins to interact with key folk figureheads, and rises to fame, making multiple controversial choices along the way.
“A Complete Unknown” is a film that generally follows a conventional biopic structure and intention, providing a rough overview of a snapshot of the protagonist’s life, focusing on straightforwardness rather than authenticity and complexity. The story centers around his relationships with Joan Baez and Pete Seeger, the destruction brought by fame, and his fallout with his folk roots. The film primarily shines in its performances and sixties word building. In “A Complete Unknown,” Mangold appeals to audiences less familiar with Dylan through utilizing his connection to the historical period, albeit superficially.
With effective historical costuming and magnificent set design, “A Complete Unknown” has the effect of making the audience want to be transported to the time period. Despite the stellar performances — particularly Chalamet’s enigmatic Dylan, Fanning’s heartfelt Russo, and Norton’s both gentle and later disappointed Seeger — the characters lack sufficient exploration and have a tendency to feel one dimensional. By the end, the audience is left with an unfinished rendition of who Dylan is.
As a rebellious figure, Dylan didn’t wish to be defined by the protest music that began his career. At the climax, Dylan and Baez perform at the 1965 Newport Folk Festival, and upon his transition from folk to rock and roll, ignites disappointment from his forefather, Seeger.
As Dylan began to release albums like his 1969 “Nashville Skyline,” he travelled further into his own, less clearly defined musical territory by going electric. Although the film acknowledges the influences of Seeger and Guthrie, it delves less into the political influence of Suze Rotolo — fictional Sylvie Russo —who first immersed Dylan in the political scene. Additionally, it fails to meaningfully address details of the Civil Rights Movement, which had more than a brief impact on Dylan’s life and art.
Despite these factors, “A Complete Unknown” makes what it can from Dylan’s complex history. As someone with several sides to his personality and experienced several phases throughout history, making a film that attempts to address everything wouldn’t be possible. The film is especially good at providing younger viewers a glimpse of what the time period was like and Dylan’s relevance.
Though Dylan purists, superfans or historians will reasonably see Mangold’s Dylan as more of a caricature, “A Complete Unknown” showcases stellar performances and worldbuilding that make it stand out. It is a film that provides those less familiar with its subject matter an escape into a different time, despite being composed of half-baked interpretations.