I still remember January of 2020 when my ecstatic sister told me they were making a Bob Dylan movie starring Timothée Chalamet. Five years later, we were both excited and skeptical before seeing the long-awaited movie, A Complete Unknown. To me, like many other fans of Dylan, the idea of a biopic seemed unfitting for an artist who maintained so much privacy throughout his life, never putting any effort towards his public image, not even to attend the ceremony when he was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. I was curious to see how the life of an 83-year old artist who has released 40 studio albums would be adapted into two and a half hours of screen time, and I can now say I was pleasantly surprised. Not only was the movie well done, with great performances and visuals, but it remained true to Dylan’s style by narrowing the focus to a five-year period, leaving plenty of mystery. 

The movie strays from the typical biopic structure by limiting the storyline to specific parts of Dylan’s life in New York between the years 1961 and 1965. The movie follows Dylan’s rise to fame, starting with his visit to his future mentor, Pete Seeger, and a dying Woody Guthrie, climaxing at Dylan’s controversial switch from traditional acoustic folk to electric instruments and folk-rock. The placement of these events in the plot serves as an impactful symbol of Dylan’s early music evolution, starting with his reverence towards two folk icons of the previous generation, and ending with his choice to go against the past standards for folk music and expand into his own unique style. Although this past-present-future theme makes for an inspiring watch and climactic ending, I personally think the events occurring between the two plot points were lacking in some areas. 

The neglect of various events and details are an inevitable flaw of biopics, but A Complete Unknown seems to sleep on some major pieces of its central theme. The first half of the film spends a lot of time following the progression and crossover of two of Dylan’s relationships, one with Sylvie Russo (my name twin!), played by Elle Fanning, and one with folk singer Joan Baez, played by Monica Barbaro. I should note that “Sylvie Russo” isn’t the real name of the woman in the movie, as Dylan himself wanted it changed to maintain her privacy, but I appreciate the rare “Sylvie” representation nonetheless. By highlighting Dylan’s unconventional and unfaithful nature in these relationships, the film presents him as a complex person with faults rather than simplifying him to an idolized figure. 

That being said, I felt that the simplified account of both relationships minimized Joan Baez’s role in the story, when, in reality, Baez was a crucial influence for Dylan during the period centered in the movie. The movie does touch on Baez’s role in Dylan’s initial rise to fame, but minimizes her immense impact on Dylan’s evolution as a songwriter and as a person. The long and complex relationship between the two is only explored at a surface level, while dramatized love-triangle dynamics around Dylan’s juggling of two women take center stage. As a result, Baez’s character in the movie is more or less reduced to “the other woman” archetype. 

In real life, Joan Baez’s consistent activism, including her involvement in the Civil Rights movement, was the primary cause of Bob Dylan’s exposure to the political movements which he would reference in his song lyrics. All of this could’ve been shown a lot more in the film, and would’ve been a relevant contribution to the central storyline. On a more positive note, Monica Barbaro did an amazing job as Joan Baez; her rendition of Baez’s voice when singing and talking is spot on, and she played the role with a confident, collected air reminiscent of Joan Baez’s character. The scenes of their duet performances highlight the dynamic between Baez and Dylan. Joan Baez holds her place on stage and matches the increasing volume of Bob Dylan, similar to the way she consistently matches his stubbornness across their interactions.

Though there are ample performance scenes throughout, it’s not until the second half of the movie that Bob Dylan’s musical evolution takes complete focus. Leading up to the final night of the Newport Folk Festival, when Bob Dylan performed his set using electric instruments for the first time, we see the main point of conflict and climax of the movie’s plot: Dylan’s use of electric instruments went against traditional standards of folk music, redefining his sound and the folk genre as a whole. This created controversy among his fans and collaborators who viewed his use of electric instruments as him succumbing to the establishment in pursuit of commercial success. The performance scenes with the electric instruments capture the degree of conflict that Dylan’s seemingly insignificant rebellion caused, and it’s now ironic to watch the crowd boo the music that went on to be known as some of the greatest of all time. Timothée Chalamet never disappoints, and his singing style emulates that of Bob Dylan without being obnoxious, as Timmy adds his own flair to the voice. The director, James Mangold, is effective in capturing the energy of both the music and the events throughout the movie. The final scene depicts the same setting as the first scene: Bob Dylan playing a song to a bed-ridden Woody Guthrie. By returning to this image, Mangold ends on a symbol of Dylan’s continued respect towards his beloved folk-singer predecessors who gave him his initial inspiration.

Overall, I really enjoyed watching A Complete Unknown and I would recommend it to anyone and everyone, regardless of whether or not they like Bob Dylan. The movie has received eight Oscar nominations, including Best Picture and Best Actor. It’s a fun, engaging, and inspiring watch, and it’s really special to see such a beloved actor sing the songs of such an exceptional artist!