*Some spoilers ahead, read with caution*
How does it feel to be getting another music biopic? A little tiring, to be honest. The genre is a sturdy, tried-and-true staple in awards conversations every year.
Even the less successful ones are likely a box office draw and conversation starter for older filmgoers. In 2024 alone, we had films dedicated to the lives of Bob Marley, Amy Winehouse and Robbie Williams.
Easily the most well-regarded attempt at spotlighting an artist’s life from 2024 is James Mangold’s “A Complete Unknown.”
Helmed by the eager Timothée Chalamet, the story is a snippet of the enigmatic Bob Dylan’s life–specifically his transition to electric.
Last summer, my mom and I saw Bob Dylan live for the first time, which was a bewildering experience. Part of Willie Nelson’s Outlaw Music Festival, the set mostly consisted of deep cuts, with Bob Dylan stagnant and obscured by the piano in front of him.
Neither of us being hardcore Dylan fans, we were a bit disappointed, to say the least. It was almost to the point my mom considered boycotting “A Complete Unknown.”
When the other choices for a Christmas day flick were “Nosferatu” or “Babygirl,” though, we settled on the reliable biopic.
Mangold is no stranger to the biopic, including those of the musical variety. “Walk The Line” examined a similar era in music history, focusing instead on the outlaw country icon Johnny Cash.
The period clearly holds some significance to Mangold. Being a journeyman director, it seems obvious where the interest in the constrained, struggling artist comes from.
Rather than a single-perspective tale of one man’s life, “A Complete Unknown” functions more as an ensemble hangout drama.
A charismatic array of notable faces from the Greenwich Village folk scene wander to and from the frame, and music history buffs will definitely have a fun time playing a folksy game of Where’s Waldo.
Right off the bat, three legends meet to kick off the movie: Bob Dylan, Woody Guthrie and Pete Seeger. It’s 1961, and Dylan has come to pay respects to the ailing Guthrie by performing a song for him.
Seeger, played by the always-solid Edward Norton, quickly recognizes the unknown’s talents and subsumes him into the local scene.
Chalamet does well enough in this role. In biopics, the line between embodiment and impression is often blurry — if not invisible — but the difference is clear when it’s seen (I think of Sebastian Stan in “The Apprentice” as a recent example of full embodiment).
The nasally voice does feel like a “Saturday Night Live” skit at times, which took me out of the immersion, but Chalamet does have Dylan’s aloof cockiness pretty down pat.
This is especially apparent in the movie’s romances. Dylan, an awkward and at times rude figure, somehow has this magnetic charm to him that draws the attention of Sylvie Russo, loosely based on his real-life girlfriend Suze Rotolo, and musician Joan Baez.
The man who on paper reads like an antisocial jerk really is that, but with the obtuse allure of a figure like Andy Warhol.
Most of the conflict in the first two-thirds of the film comes from these relationships, with Dylan not wanting to sacrifice his independence and individuality for other people. Although the conflict itself shifts in the final act of the movie, Dylan’s nature holds true–he’s just too stubborn to bend to others.
While this makes for a somewhat interesting character portrait, it doesn’t make for the most compelling storytelling.
Much of this film really could be boiled down to people seeing Bob Dylan, saying “you’re great, but you’re also the worst,” and exiting the frame.
To be fair, the ensemble does well with these limits. Monica Barbaro as Joan Baez in particular gives a worthy supporting performance. She’s an interesting foil to Dylan, experiencing a similar rise to fame, although navigating it with a bit more humility.
Honestly, I would argue there’s not a lot of story going on here. A decent chunk of the runtime is, obviously, the musicians (primarily Dylan) playing their songs. It’s fun to watch, but concert films exist, and they feature the actual artist instead of someone portraying them.
We finally get to the real meat and potatoes of the story when Dylan begins to break away from stripped-down folk and experiment with electric instruments.
The screenplay is adapted from a novel about this decision, titled “Dylan Goes Electric!”
The style shift seems trifling now, but in 1965 it was sending shockwaves.
The down-to-earth folk community feels they’ve been betrayed by Dylan. In a sentimental scene near the end, Seeger makes an earnest plea for Dylan to abandon the raunchy electric instruments and return to his roots for the Newport Folk Festival.
Norton is doing his best “disappointed uncle” act here, and he succeeds in being the most sympathetic character in the movie. Imagine a messiah-like character popularizes your scene, only to abandon it after his fame is achieved. Wouldn’t you feel betrayed?
The “climax” of the film comes when Dylan, despite Seeger’s wishes, ultimately plays his new electric hits at the 1965 Newport Folk Festival, namely his biggest hit “Like a Rolling Stone.”
Easily the highlight of the film, Chalamet owns the stage and the comedic chaos plays out remarkably well. Dylan dodges items hurtled from the crowd while Pete Seeger and Albert Grossman fight to cut the sound in a not-so-triumphant narrative climax moment.
As the film wrapped up, I was really struggling to pinpoint my opinions. To say it completely fell into biopic tropes would be a lie. The restricted setting is admirable, refusing to make us sit through hours of cradle-to-grave fact-telling.
Technically, it’s also hard to find faults. Seasoned vets in movie productions were brought in for this one. Jay Cocks, frequent writer for Scorsese, collaborated with Mangold on the screenplay, and Oscar nominated cinematographer Phedon Papamichael manned the camera.
To quote Dylan in the film, “she’s pretty, that’s for sure.”
But what else is there to chew on?
While handsomely composed, the real struggle of “A Complete Unknown” comes with its purpose. Audiences feel little urgency in this film, besides its post-production rush to get released in time for the 2025 awards season. Why tell the story of Bob Dylan now?
The primary conceit of the movie appears to echo the meaning behind the title–Dylan is an unknowable figure. He practically appears out of thin air at the beginning of the film, and by the end of the movie I can’t say I knew much more about him aside from his bullheadedness.
And yes, this is a unique way to do a biopic. But one has to wonder if there is a bit of formal dissonance when you utilize an educational genre to construct a “vibes” movie.
I think whether “A Complete Unknown” will work for you largely depends on the kind of person you are.
Self-proclaimed “Dylanologists” will likely have a great time; it’s a respectful tribute to the beginning of a revered artist’s career.
But if you’ve never listened to Dylan before, this might as well just be a sampling of his biggest hits.
Or, one perspective more in the middle: casual fans frustrated at Dylan’s live performance may walk away from this film with a glimpse into the man’s psyche, and an understanding of why he so stubbornly remained hidden behind the piano.
The man does what he wants.
