A Complete Unknown: A Boomer Nostalgia Trip

A Complete Unknown boasts incredible performances by an all-star cast, especially Timothée Chalamet and Edward Norton, but falls prey to competing goals in a biopic film that should have been something more radical befitting the artist.

Biopics tend toward the cliche, but I would consider them to attempt to have one of two goals. The films can be sweeping biopics or plotted biopics. A Complete Unknown attempts to thread the line between sweeping biopic, plotted biopic, and hangout movie, which results in it not feeling like any of them. 

Plotted biopics are superior because they actually have a plot and are able to do their best in showing the complexity of an historical person through the intricate portrayal of an event or portion of their life. Lincoln is the best at this. We don’t need to see Abraham Lincoln splitting rails to understand him. The typical cliched biopic that shows virtually the entire person’s life or important portion of their life is effectively a highlight reel and is plotless. The historical person’s goal was not to be a legendary person. Even if it was, that’s far too vague of a goal. That’s not real, that’s not tangible, that’s not a plot. Abraham Lincoln getting the Thirteenth Amendment passed is a plot. But not all sweeping biopics are plotless. Braveheart shows all of William Wallace’s exploits, but it is extremely well-designed and is a cohesive story. 

Director James Mangold clearly wants the film to have a plot, but it really only has narrative drive for the last third of the film. Now, this isn’t a spoiler but a major part of the marketing of the film. Mangold puts Dylan going electric at the 1965 Newport Folk Festival as the climax of A Complete Unknown. Dylan going electric is a fine climax and if you’re going to tell a story about early Dylan, this is probably where most would want to end it. 

Of course, there are other options. His release of The Freewheelin’ Bob Dylan could signal his success at being taken seriously as a singer-songwriter. A political angle could have been taken with the culmination being the March on Washington. A weary Dylan plot could end with his motorcycle accident. And of course, his rejection of folk music and desire to be himself—a singular artist—which ended/began by going electric at Newport. These are all legitimate options that could have made fine movies. Hell, you could even make a movie that ends with him arriving in New York.

Bob Dylan (Timothée Chalamet) playing electric guitar in studio in a still from A Complete Unknown

The decision where to start and end a biopic is of the utmost consequence, maybe even more so than regular movies because biopics tend toward the plotless. This is what separates a Napoleon from a Lincoln. Ending it with the 1965 Newport Folk Festival is legitimate, though the problem with the film is that it starts with Dylan’s arrival in New York. This is where A Complete Unknown’s problems begin.

James Mangold attempts to both be a hangout film of early Dylan and a plotted biopic movie, whereas he should have chosen a lane. Mangold wisely does not try to cover a massive swath of Dylan’s career, which would have doomed the film to cliche, but he still covers far too much of his life.

A young Bob Dylan arrives in New York City looking for Woody Guthrie, who he meets in a hospital along with Pete Seeger. Dylan comes to New York to “catch a spark” and wants to be a respected singer-songwriter—an artist. The problem is that he accomplishes that goal halfway through the movie.

I have no issues with that first half to two thirds of the film. Mangold’s film is at its best when its just observing young Dylan and the early sixties. The early parts of the film feel almost like a concert film with hangout scenes interspersed. It works. It’s fun to hangout in early 1960s Greenwich Village. Hangout movies can be amazing. Once Upon a Time in Hollywood… and Dazed and Confused are incredible films with loose, meandering plots full of digressions, where it’s so much fun to hang out in 60s and 70s America.

Bob Dylan (Timothée Chalamet) walking toward the Chelsea Hotel in a still from A Complete Unknown

With the last half to two thirds of the film, A Complete Unknown begins to have serious narrative drive with Dylan having a clear goal: artistic freedom from his folk past. There are several issues with this that make the climax not feel like a climax. First, it feels jarring to go from a lazier plotted film to one that has drive and actual antagonists. The feud between Seeger and the folk festival is not built up nearly enough. Second, Dylan had artistic freedom at this point. Dylan played majority covers on his first album, but that’s rectified in his second album. Third, the degree of resistance could be disputed both in real life and in the film itself. In 1964, in the film and real life, Johnny Cash played electric at Newport. Why can’t Bob Dylan? In real life, Pete Seeger was also not nearly as antagonistic as he is portrayed in the film.

Incompetent antagonists are also an issue at this stage in the film. This is a testament to Edward Norton’s performance, but I just felt bad for Pete Seeger. Norton portrays him as a sweetheart with endless kindness and patience. It’s hard to believe this character would do more than say, “Well, I don’t agree with it, but I understand why you’re doing it and wish you the best of luck, Bob” in his sweet, unassuming voice. Even the more menacing member of the Folk Festival, Alan Lomax, is quite hapless. Before Dylan goes onstage, Lomax introduces him and sees him opt for his electric guitar over his acoustic. Dylan takes the stage and plays electric. Then, Lomax gets apoplectic at Dylan playing electric. I don’t know. Seems to me he could have done something about that. If they’re already playing fast and loose with facts as biopics and historical films do, they could have Lomax do a bit more. They already have Pete Seeger try to take an axe to the sound system, which is of dubious veracity. Why not pump up the antagonists even more?

Pete Seeger (Edward Norton) watching Bob Dylan (Timothée Chalamet) play guitar at a party in a still from A Complete Unknown

Then, there’s also the problem of stakes. Is Dylan’s career at stake? Not particularly. How much of a risk is he actually taking? He ostracizes people he doesn’t like anymore? Sounds like there’s no downside to his actions. This is especially true considering this is an historical film. Like a prequel film, most everyone watching the film knows nothing bad happens with him going electric.

A Complete Unknown may be said to be as unreliable a film as a story the man would tell himself. However, if James Mangold wanted to create a new Dylan myth, he could have done it in a more creative and groundbreaking way deserving of the artist. Instead we got a mostly cookie cutter music biopic film complete with the scene where the artist hums their greatest song and runs to write it down. Because that’s how that stuff is created.

Mangold fulfills a biopic’s basic promise. Shut up and play the hits. Whether those hits are Gandhi’s hunger strike or Patton slapping a soldier. People want to hear Bob Dylan play Blowin’ in the Wind, Like a Rolling Stone, and Subterranean Homesick Blues.

But would Dylan do that?

A Complete Unknown is fun and enjoyable, but it could have been much more. Perhaps a film about Bob Dylan should have been less a Baby Boomer nostalgia trip hybrid biopic-hangout film and more a film as radical and inventive as the artist himself.