‘A Complete Unknown’: What’s Fact and What’s Fiction in the Bob Dylan Biopic
“You walk into the room with a pencil in your hand,” Bob Dylan sang on “Ballad of a Thin Man” in 1965, pitying and condemning journalists who know when something is going on but “don’t know what it is.” So, A complete unknown manager James Mangold may be ready to mock everything below this paragraph: A writer engrossed in notes and events might miss the story he is trying to tell in the new film about the young Dylan, made with the approval of the mercurial recording artist and Nobel Prize winner.
Of course, a fictionalized version of one’s life will take some liberties. But for Bob Dylan, freedom is the whole idea. (What’s the name of the movie again?) Separating myth from humanity is one of Mangold’s main themes: At one point, Elle FanningSylvie Russo’s character confronts Timothée Chalamet‘s Dylan for never talking about his past or even confirming that his real name is Robert Zimmerman. Of course, Russo himself is only partly real; she is based on Suze Rotolo, who actually dated Dylan during his rise to fame.
But not the same Todd Haynes in his more fantastical Dylan meditations, I’m not thereMangold maintains a realistic style, focusing on Dylan’s evolution from wide-eyed folk to electrifying rock pioneer. So it’s not unreasonable to end the film by going online to see what’s true and what Mangold made up. Instead of wasting your entire afternoon (and having to do it something with all my useless Dylan knowledge), here are all your possible questions answered at once.
Did Bob Dylan really sneak into Woody Guthrie’s hospital room in the middle of the night and play “Song to Woody” for him?
Are not. But meeting Woody Guthrie was Dylan’s top priority when he arrived in New York, so much so that he showed up at Guthrie’s house. He later met his idol in New Jersey, at a private home where Guthrie often spent weekends during his illness. That encounter inspired “Song to Woody.” Pete Seeger was not present at that meeting, and it appears that the only real harmonica Woody Guthrie gave Dylan was a metaphorical one.
Was Pete Seeger really put on trial for singing a song?
The timeline is slightly distorted in the film, but Seeger was actually questioned by the House Un-American Activities Committee in 1955. He did not plead the Fifth Amendment, which would have protected him, and instead refused to cooperate. This led to a contempt of Congress charge and ultimately a jury trial. Seeger was convicted and received a prison sentence, which was later overturned. It can be said, like Edward Norton in the movie, his arrest for singing is probably too much, but his activities as an activist folk singer are what got the government’s attention in the first place—so definitely There is some logic in it. Years later, Seeger was awarded the National Medal of Arts by Bill Clinton.
How could a young man like Bob Dylan compose so many excellent songs?
This is a question for all ages and one that stumped Dylan himself (see embedded video below). But there’s one thing A complete unknown very intentionally omitted: There were so many in writing and talks about Dylan’s alleged use of amphetamines at this stage of his life. However, the film shows no drug use other than alcohol, cigarettes and coffee.
Is there anything else important that the movie leaves out?
For many people, including Bob Dylan, a little friendly competition can be a great motivator. A complete unknown well done inserting folk revival style easter eggs into the frame; looks sharp and you’ll see actors representing Dave Van Ronk, Odetta and Paul Stokey of Peter, Paul and Mary. But one very important person, Phil Ochs, is absent from Mangold’s film.
Ochs was perhaps the most influential “finger-pointing” folk artist of the era, who maintained a serious love-hate relationship with Dylan. The two admired each other very much but then encounter as Dylan’s work became less political. Many believe that Dylan’s “Positively 4th Street” is essentially a protest song against Ochs. Although we will never know for sure, Ochs did it a strange cover version about it, and later named his admiration, especially “the young Bobby Dylan,” in a conversation on a live album.
There’s a lot going on here Something completely unknown, and Edward Norton’s Pete Seeger is enough to express the “purity of the folk scene” that tries to hold Dylan back. Yet, in a flash, we see Monica Barbaro EQUAL Joan Baez sing Phil Ochs’s great song “There but for luck”in Newport. Baez had this song in her repertoirebut it doesn’t look like she’s really playing it there. So here’s a fun nod to James Mangold’s Ochs.
What’s the deal with Joan Baez and Bob Dylan?
Obviously, Joan Baez was a real person and she was a really big star in the folk music scene when Dylan started climbing his way. Her presentation of Dylan’s early music went a long way in preparing the stage for his appearance, as did Peter, Paul and Mary, who received very brief thank you notes. compact A complete unknown. (The movie makes it seem like everyone immediately embraced Dylan. This isn’t necessarily true. One historical witness, my mother, likes to talk about meeting Joan Baez in Boston in the early 1960s, eagerly Eager to hear her “clear as a bell.” When some strange kid with a frog-like voice came out, many people jeered, and Baez joked with the crowd that “one day he will grow up.” .”) Baez and Dylan had those romantic entanglements during that early period. day, and she joined Dylan’s “Rolling Thunder Revue” in 1975. Additionally, in the late 1980s, two share one bill on a few dates but things didn’t go well.
