A Complete Unknown (2024)

[GulfportDoc]

105688

A Complete Unknown (2024)


Entertainer biopics are tough to pull off because they often end up being caricatures of caricatures, the subjects themselves being larger than life in their fame. Although A Complete Unknown encapsulates only 4 years of Bob Dylan’s early rise to stardom (from 1961 to 1965), which should have been an easier task than trying to highlight events over Dylan’s 50+ year career, the writers nevertheless broke no new ground in the method of telling the story. The screenplay had a formulaic feel to it, even though director James Mangold had previously directed and co-wrote the excellent biopic of Johnny Cash, Walk the Line (2005). So Mangold’s reputation, along with the obvious attraction of Dylan’s star power, likely were the major factors in securing the $50-$70 million funding for the project.


The chief draw in this film is the superb acting of its star and co-stars: Timothee Chalamet as Bob Dylan, Edward Norton as Pete Seeger, and Elle Fanning as Sylvie Russo. Honorable mention goes to Boyd Holbrook as Johnny Cash.


But it is Chalamet who is stunning with his near perfect impersonation of Dylan, and his ability to express moods and thoughts with the use of his eyes and facial expressions. His impression of Dylan’s singing and speaking voices, along with his not dissimilar facial resemblance to his character, combined to present an uncanny likeness of the famous musician. His portrayal is certainly the equal of Austin Butler’s in Elvis (2022), Sissy Spacek’s Loretta Lynn in Coal Miner’s Daughter (1980), or Dennis Quaid as Jerry Lee Lewis in Great Balls of Fire! (1989).


It’s remarkable that Chalamet, Norton, Holbrook, and Monica Barbaro (as Joan Baez) did their own singing and instrument playing, all the while recording their songs live during filming.


For those who were present during those early ‘60s years, and were fans of the principals, the movie is a poignant revisiting of that era. Reportedly the main driver of the project was Dylan’s then heretical use of electric instruments in opposition to the orthodoxy of the established folk music scene, and what a strong negative reaction that it caused among the seasoned folk movement. It was if Dylan had betrayed them and their collectivist philosophy. Their resentment was profound. Many viewers in contemporary audiences will not be troubled by that distinction, since it appears in hindsight as a natural progression. Dylan was chiefly driven by his desire to express his art rather than be a representative of an established subculture. He would go on to compose and perform in many music styles in his famously eclectic career.


Though the screenplay itself is not remarkable enough to garner the highest awards, the first rate quality of the performances alone make A Complete Unknown a fascinating picture.


Doc’s rating; 7/10

[medarda]

I really enjoyed A Complete Unknown, especially Timothée Chalamet’s incredible performance as Bob Dylan, but there’s one scene that’s been puzzling me. When Dylan storms off stage during the duet with Joan Baez, I didn’t quite get why he reacted so strongly. Did I miss something about their dynamic? Could someone explain what was going on there?

[Allaby]

My review: Timothée Chalamet is fantastic and the rest of the cast are good too. The story elements aren't as strong as the music portions of the film and we don't really learn anything new about Dylan. The film feels too long though. Overall, this is well worth seeing for the performances and the music. 7/10 is my rating.

[skizzerflake]

Given my reservations about biopics for people who are still or recently alive, I thought it was pretty good. There's not much about the movie that tells me anything I didn't already know, and some elements of MY bio of Dylan (the one I haven't made) were missing, but it was otherwise good. Chalamet was a good mimic, the sets were decent and the predictable elements of a decent biopic were all there. I enjoyed it, given my muted expectations.

Now....since we're doing 60's stories, on to a biopic about the Beach Boys, a story that has a lot of latent drama.

[Gideon58]

A link to my review:

https://www.movieforums.com/reviews/2533541-a-complete-unknown.html

[beelzebubble]

I really enjoyed A Complete Unknown, especially Timothée Chalamet’s incredible performance as Bob Dylan, but there’s one scene that’s been puzzling me. When Dylan storms off stage during the duet with Joan Baez, I didn’t quite get why he reacted so strongly. Did I miss something about their dynamic? Could someone explain what was going on there?
The reason he is angry is because his use of electric instruments turned the audience against him. This was talked about for years. He was seen as some kind of traitor to the left and folk music because of it. I know its hard to understand at this point in time.

[Stirchley]

I loved the movie & most probably will watch it again. Chalamet amazing as Dylan. Only negative for me was there was a lot to cram into the movie. Boyd Holbrook, who looks like he was terrific as Johnny Cash, had only a few seconds in that scene before it cut away to something else.

Anyway, hugely entertaining. (Loved Ed Norton as Pete Seeger. He really was Seeger.)

[exiler96]

I thought this kinda sucked. Pleasant to look at but what's the point if we don't buy Chalamet for a second as Dylan?

It's less to do with his underwhelming performance (young man you spent 5 years of your life on this?) and more on a script which doesn't let him explore anything beyond a surface-level impression in the second half (which Cate Blanchett did more interestingly back in 2007 ffs); cannot believe he was a threat to Brody for a moment there. Easily the weak link in that line-up.

You won't leave this movie having learned anything more through and about Dylan and what made him special (in other words, he remains... a complete unkown. maybe that was the point!). It's 2 hours of faces looking at him with unearned amazement... and don't let me start on Monica Barbaro's overrated turn as Joan who?-I-hear-she-was-into-politics.

Ed Norton the sole saving grace of this thing... Fanning tried her best too but again, this script brings them all down.

[Stirchley]

I thought this kinda sucked. Pleasant to look at but what's the point if we don't buy Chalamet for a second as Dylan?

It's less to do with his underwhelming performance (young man you spent 5 years of your life on this?) and more on a script which doesn't let him explore anything beyond a surface-level impression in the second half (which Cate Blanchett did more interestingly back in 2007 ffs); cannot believe he was a threat to Brody for a moment there. Easily the weak link in that line-up.

You won't leave this movie having learned anything more through and about Dylan and what made him special (in other words, he remains... a complete unkown. maybe that was the point!). It's 2 hours of faces looking at him with unearned amazement... and don't let me start on Monica Barbaro's overrated turn as Joan who?-I-hear-she-was-into-politics.

Ed Norton the sole saving grace of this thing... Fanning tried her best too but again, this script brings them all down.

I embraced the fact that Chalamet was Dylan 5 minutes into the movie. I thought the movie was hugely entertaining. Not perfect, but that’s okay.

[skizzerflake]

I thought it was as good as I could expect. A biopic about an elusive character like Dylan is going to be a poster picture view, just as he was at that time. He was never all that personally revealing, so the "Real Dylan"...who knows? I was hoping for a decent caricature and a period piece and it certainly was that. Dylan was never really "folk music" in that sense of music from the folks, but he lived in that somewhat fabricated world until he electrified and was denounced as a traitor to authentic folkiness. It would be much easier to just see him as an ambitious entertainer who went the way the wind was blowing.

[exiler96]

I embraced the fact that Chalamet was Dylan 5 minutes into the movie. I thought the movie was hugely entertaining. Not perfect, but that’s okay.

I did see your post. Not sure why you did that but, you do you :D

[Stirchley]

I did see your post. Not sure why you did that but, you do you :D

What are you talking about?

[Captain Quint]

I found it a pretty standard biopic, "I'm Not There" did it better, with more imagination - it captured the idea of the myth builder, the man with many versions of himself. And Cate did Bob better in the earlier picture as well.

I gave it a passing grade (a 3) but when it comes to movies based on musicians, I'm less impressed with these scripts that are just glorified Wikipedia pieces and prefer when you break out and try to capture the essence of the person and their music. These folks are creative forces of nature, so be creative in turn.

[Hotel Security]

>I did see your post. Not sure why you did that but, you do you

I think the idea of someone becoming Dylan is entirely based to your perceptions of Dylan going in. I've seen him live about six/seven times and I can't imagine anyone "being Dylan," especially since his performances, interviews and press conferences were unlike anything. I had no interest in this movie as a result ( to be fair, I don't care for most biopics) since I'd rather just watch a 2-hour Dylan concert than watch a movie about it. But if someone doesn't have this close a relationship with Dylan, I think they'd accept Chalamet's performance. He's not exactly Dylan but he's "Dylan-adjacent" enough.

[Stirchley]

These folks are creative forces of nature, so be creative in turn.

The three main leads (Dylan, Baez & Seeger) were played by actors who had to learn how to play instruments. None of them had prior knowledge of this. Then all 3 had to learn & sing the Dylan songs. None of them had sung before. Not sure about Norton & Barbaro, but Chalamet sung all his songs live, which he didn’t have to do, but wanted to do.

If this isn’t being “creative”, I don’t know what is.

[Captain Quint]

Learning how to play isn't what I was talking about, a lot of people in the world do that, I've been all around this country, playing in bars and whatnot, and people doing Dylan are a dime a dozen (hell, I did a mean Dylan myself), I'm speaking about what they did in "I'm Not here", or "Miles Ahead" for Miles Davis, you're cinema, you get creative in cinematic areas, you do what only cinema can do, you get visually imaginative, you capture the persona, the vibe (the jazzy vibe, for example, in Miles).

A wiki page screenplay with people doing impressions... yawn.

[crumbsroom]

I thought this kinda sucked. Pleasant to look at but what's the point if we don't buy Chalamet for a second as Dylan?

It's less to do with his underwhelming performance (young man you spent 5 years of your life on this?) and more on a script which doesn't let him explore anything beyond a surface-level impression in the second half (which Cate Blanchett did more interestingly back in 2007 ffs); cannot believe he was a threat to Brody for a moment there. Easily the weak link in that line-up.

You won't leave this movie having learned anything more through and about Dylan and what made him special (in other words, he remains... a complete unkown. maybe that was the point!). It's 2 hours of faces looking at him with unearned amazement... and don't let me start on Monica Barbaro's overrated turn as Joan who?-I-hear-she-was-into-politics.

Ed Norton the sole saving grace of this thing... Fanning tried her best too but again, this script brings them all down.


Yes. Thank you.


I actually enjoyed it for the crowd pleasing pap that it was, but the accolades for Chalamets performance is mind boggling to me. These biopic impersonations are usually kinda bad, and sometimes kinda okay, but he was dead eyed lifeless in this movie. And the one thing Dylan has always been is very much a man alive in the moment, especially during those years.

[crumbsroom]

Learning how to play isn't what I was talking about, a lot of people in the world do that, I've been all around this country, playing in bars and whatnot, and people doing Dylan are a dime a dozen (hell, I did a mean Dylan myself), I'm speaking about what they did in "I'm Not here", or "Miles Ahead" for Miles Davis, you're cinema, you get creative in cinematic areas, you do what only cinema can do, you get visually imaginative, you capture the persona, the vibe (the jazzy vibe, for example, in Miles).

A wiki page screenplay with people doing impressions... yawn.
Also another yes to this.


Learning to play a guitar is just the basics when it comes to a role like this, and it has zip all to do with acting.

[Hotel Security]

>And the one thing Dylan has always been is very much a man alive in the moment, especially during those years.

I think the world at large still misunderstands Dylan and just judge him as this weird, spacey introvert. The movie kind of falls into that. Part of why I had little interest.

And all the hyperbole about his songs speaking to people and being the message for a generation...he ALWAYS rejected that nonsense, even as a kid. Watch interviews when he gets asked questions about that and he's always annoyed or sarcastic about it since he could tell people only cared about analyzing lyrics and not listening to the music.

To him, he's just writing music and wasn't trying to start any movements. I think a lot of people don't get this and are constantly trying to find important messages in music...while ignoring that most songs are just fun things to listen to. Dylan got that but I don't think a lot of his fans do.

[barkerxavierr]

Chalamet's performance really exploded in this one, I loved it!

[Stirchley]

Chalamet's performance really exploded in this one, I loved it!

Me too. Seen it twice.

[Stirchley]

[i]>I think the world at large still misunderstands Dylan and just judge him as this weird, spacey introvert. The movie kind of falls into that. Part of why I had little interest.

Dylan a “weird spacey introvert”? No, I don’t buy that at all.

[Tugg]

Bob Dylan is rare lyricist-composer-singer artist.