Hill Auditorium in downtown Ann Arbor, where Bob Dylan has put in numerous appearances over the years. Henry Sinic | The Washtenaw Voice
Henry Sincic
Contributor
 4 out of 5 stars |
It might be fair to say that the big screen has experienced a glut of musical biopics, such that the movie-going public might reasonably be tired of the whole idea altogether, something which “A Complete Unknown” director, James Mangold, was probably keenly aware of.
The past five years alone have yielded takes on musicians like Elvis, Whitney Houston, Bob Marley and more, to varying degrees of critical success. Mangold, a noted director of successful biographical dramas (“Girl, Interrupted,” “Ford v Ferrari,” etc.) last dipped his toes into the musical biopic with 2005’s “Walk the Line”, featuring a Joaquin Phoenix performance as Johnny Cash.
Now, almost 20 years later, Mangold has returned to the musical biopic with “A Complete Unknown,” detailing the early career of Bob Dylan, from his early days as a newly minted “folkie” in Greenwich Village in 1961 to his controversial decision to ditch the folk for rock and go electric in 1965.
“A Complete Unknown” had a difficult job to do. Not only did it have to contend with satisfying the expectations of one of the largest fan bases for a musician living (Dylan was voted the greatest lyricist of all time in 2001 BBC News Online poll–ahead of names like John Lennon and Paul McCartney), but it also had to chronicle the formative years of Dylan’s career–a period which has long been shrouded in myth and misinformation.
We see Dylan achieve success, but not without hiccups–both in and out of the movie. While in the movie, we find that Dylan isn’t always faithful to his partner(s), it might not be surprising to know that the movie itself isn’t always faithful to the story of Dylan. While claims of this movie’s fanciful interpretation of fact have been numerous since its release (with the fanciful depiction of the 1965 Newport Folk festival seeming especially bound to roll the eyes of some purists), the inaccuracies don’t feel like an obstruction to the story the movie is trying to tell.
“I don’t think the inaccuracies are daunting to the story of Bob Dylan,” says Michael Naylor, a long-time studio musician and professor of music theory at WCC, who added, “It’s the integrity of the music that means more than anything else.”
Indeed it is. The movie smartly focuses on Dylan’s music, using it as an anchor to guide us between scenes depicting his tumultuous personal life–like many a young folkie of the time, Dylan liked to tell tall tales and spend his time in the company of pretty girls, something that strained his relationship with then-girlfriend Suze Rotolo (renamed Sylvie Russo in the movie and played expertly by Elle Fanning).
The cast, as a whole, does a wonderful job, with Chalamet’s performance being a standout (he nails that nondescript Midwestern slurry-drawl). The set work and cinematography are also tops–Mangold-regular Phedon Papamichael has really honed his craft to perfection. What is most striking about the film though, is its screenplay; Mangold and screenwriter Jay Cock decided to eschew traditional biopic format by focusing on the four most formative–and interesting–years of Dylan’s life, that being his rise to the top of and seeming-sudden rejection of the folkie world between 1961-1965.
“A biopic is best when it focuses on one aspect of the person’s life,” said Hope Bernard, a professor of drama and film at WCC, who said, “It gets to be a PBS documentary when they try to do everything.”
This focus is one of the strongest qualities of “A Complete Unknown,” and serves to distinguish it from other musical biopics of note such as “Bohemian Rhapsody”, which, as Bernard said, “tried to do too much.”
“A Complete Unknown” is surely a must-see for any fan of Bob Dylan (or fan of music, for that matter) and comes recommended to those who have a yearning to appreciate the music of one of the greatest American artists of all time in a suitably enjoyable medium of storytelling. Purists might balk at some of the inaccuracies, but then, as Dylanologist and author Clinton Heylin might say, the Bob Dylan story might best be appreciated with a grain of salt or two. Sometimes, the myth is worth entertaining.
