A Complete Unknown

Even if you've heard the songs ten-thousand times, one of the many remarkable things about "A Complete Unknown" is remembering - or reliving - the sensation of hearing them for the first time.

People who tear up just watching the trailer for this Bob Dylan biopic will know what I'm talking about.

People who don't - including a couple of generations who weren't around yet - have a lot to learn from writer-director James Mangold's magnificent retelling of Dylan's early years. They span his 1961 arrival in Greenwich Village and pilgrimage to the bedside of dying Woody Guthrie, to the Newport Folk Festival where he upended the folk music world he had championed by going electric in 1965.

The movie features incredible Golden Globe-nominated performances - more like feats of channeling - by Timothée Chalamet as Dylan and Edward Norton as Pete Seeger, along with Monica Barbaro doing a wonderful Joan Baez and Elle Fanning as long-suffering girlfriend Sylvia Russo.

But the film's real "star" is the music, rather than the prickly personality of this honky tonk American demigod destined to win a Nobel Prize in Literature in 2016, and to still be performing on his endless tour well into his 80s.

With all the stars doing their own singing, "A Complete Unknown" is a chills-up-the-spine musical treasure chest, overflowing with dozens of the greatest songs ever written. Viewers of my generation will thrill witnessing the moment of creation of songs that changed history, over and over. Not only are the songs born anew, but still images - album cover photos in particular, stared at for years - come to life before our eyes.

Backgrounds, too - Greenwich Village, Manhattan apartments, recording studios and penthouses; outdoor folk festivals from Newport to Monterey - shine, seemingly in the light generated by the idealism of that brief American moment. Filmmaker Mangold's beautiful film pulses with energy amid all the impeccably observed period details.

Burning with ambition when he arrived in New York, 19-year-old Bobby Dylan had a new name and fanciful stories of traveling with carney shows instead of true accounts of his upbringing as Robert Zimmerman in Hibbing, Minnesota. A slave of his music, he was hardly ready when the fame he had sought descended on him overnight.

His genius and intuition were once-in-a-generation gifts. His psyche and temperament were made of flimsier stuff ... even though he was almost as good at wisecracking as he was at writing songs.

"You know, you're kind of an asshole," Joan Baez tells him shortly after they get together.

That doesn't stop them from making beautiful music together, amidst all the other exhilarating performances on screen.

The tension between Dylan's almighty gift and his his very human difficulties handling it make "A Complete Unknown" unlike other music biopics. Fans know lots of the details already. Every time Bob climbs on his Triumph, we know where he's heading.

Time has always been Dylan's "thing." He's a physicist as much as a poet in understanding the nature of change. The songs he wrote in the film's time frame were astounding for summing up everything, from romantic love to geopolitics, in words everyone knew were true the first time we heard them. It was Dylan, rather than our teachers in school, who educated us.

Sixty years later, at the other end of the timeline, his lyrics are just as just as immediate, just as profound, just as funny.

Bob Dylan was, and is, the voice of our culture in our time.

There's no way this movie can't be an homage and tribute, but it doesn't glorify.

Instead, it's more honest ... more interesting ... more ambiguous ... For all the books, PhD dissertations and decades of efforts to know the man behind the voice, Bob Dylan remains as elusive and enigmatic as ever. There's no "answer" to what, or who, he is.

He just is.

"A Complete Unknown" is just a new way of connecting some of the dots, resulting in a wonderfully alive film experience, a musical thrill show, a return to our youth.

When it opens in theaters Christmas Day, I imagine I won't have been the only one sitting through the final credits just to hear the songs one more time.

Just came back from the theatre this evening and and felt a bit deflated.

Timmy just didn't live up to the expectation.

His detached, semi broody sort of 'sexy timing' thing is alright I guess, for portaying an a#hole, but not at all the qualities I'd want to depict a complex and rounded human being and artist as I imagine Dylan is.

Thank god for every time Edward Norton appeared on screen. Almost like someone shook me up to pay attention to the movie. Mr Norton was able to make it interesting somehow, but I saw a lot of other talented actors just falling through the cracks of this thin story.

Because it just missed a substantial story. That's the real flaw.

I know the songs. Yes they are great. But I hoped for a little more to get my teeth in.

Left the theatre feeling like I saw 'the best off', without really getting any wiser.

And that T. C. needs to get a little more life experience.

As a rock music lover since I was a child growing up in the MTV 80s, I am always interested in learning the backstories of rock history. I'll read books, articles, liner notes (remember those)- I'll watch documentaries (there's some bad ones, but quite a few great ones)- but I usually avoid biopics. There are so many out there, and far more often than not, I am underwhelmed.

I am a fan of Bob Dylan. I have seen him in concert several times. I celebrate the man's entire catalog. I had some trepidation about watching A Complete Unknown.

The movie starts with Dylan(Chalamet) arriving in New York in 1961 and ends with his 1965 performance at Newport. It mostly focuses on his romantic relationships with Sylvie (Fanning) and Joan Baez (Barbaro). Along the way, we see Dylan's relationship with Pete Seeger (Norton) and Woody Guthrie, as well as Albert Grossman.

What I liked: -pretty much all of the acting performances were good. Most notably, Barbaro as Baez. The screen seemed to come alive every time she was on it.

• The music performances. I think the filmmakers did a great job making new performances of well known songs (Like a Rolling Stone for example). This could have gone bad, but they pulled it off. Chalamet and Barbaro deserve praise for their work here.

What I didn't like: -the uninspired script. It felt very paint by numbers. I would have liked to see more depth as to what makes Dylan Dylan. Chalamet's portrayal only enhanced this. The irony of playing Dylan, is that because he comes off as aloof and arrogant, playing him that way means you're being accurate, but not interesting.

I mostly enjoyed Ed Nortons portrayal of Seeger, but at times he laid on the "hokey Folkie" a bit too much. Again, maybe an accurate portrayal but lacks depth.

****Not sure if I'll ever watch this again. I will say it had more pros than cons, but overall, it was kinda boring.

Honestly I had very low expectations for "a complete unknown". Making a biopic about a person that's still alive, and such a specific and unique person as Bob Dylan had to have looked like nothing other than a caricature. But somehow Timothee transformed and became Dylan so organically and so effortlessly. The period of time when Dylan was in his early twenties, when the world was getting acquainted with him as well as he was with his own self was done well. I appreciated the humor in the script, our audience got in a few genuine laughs throughout the 2 hour run.

Monica Barbaro playing Joan was a breath of fresh air! I hope she gets the praise she deserves for this and more opportunities in the future.

Elle Fanning was a slightly disappointing choice for a character based on Suze Rotolo who according to Bob was this breathtaking and striking woman. I didn't feel like Elle did her best work, she was too much Elle Fanning.

However my favorite part must have been Edward Norton as Pete Seeger. I am unfamiliar with the real Pete Seeger so I cannot compare but Edward Norton did a fantastic job in the film.

I will not likely see this film again, but walking out of the theater I had a nice aftertaste of the honor to legacy that Bob Dylan will leave (and already has) in this world. Timmy deserves an Oscar nomination and recognition for this role. I'm very curious to compare this to the Bruce Springsteen biopic with Jeremy Allen White when it comes out.

I was expecting a lot from this film and in some cases it delivered. The acting is great across the board with Chalamet portraying Dylan brilliantly and his singing is really on point.

The problem with the film is that the story reads like a greatest hits rather than a biopic. It's like the writers and director wanted to fit as many songs in as possible and forgot they were meant to be telling a story at the same time.

It's not a bad film in any way, I just was expecting it to be better than average. With the quality of acting and singing in the film it really deserved better story telling to go with it.