A Complete Unknown finds its rhythm in historical accuracy but falters in the impossible task of recreating Bob Dylan’s singular voice.
James Mangold’s film ambitiously tackles the mythos of Bob Dylan, focusing on his meteoric rise as the scrappy troubadour who transformed folk music into a political and cultural force. The film excels in recreating the iconic Greenwich Village of the early ’60s, right down to the coffee-stained folk clubs and the simmering tensions of a youth culture in rebellion. It’s a beautifully rendered love letter to a pivotal era in American music, full of reverence for Dylan’s place in history.
Yet, for all its strengths, the film stumbles in its portrayal of the man himself, trapped by the very thing it celebrates: Dylan’s inimitability.
At the center of the film is Timothée Chalamet, who is nothing if not an intriguing choice for the role. Chalamet captures Dylan’s laconic physicality and a fair bit of his mercurial aura. His scenes with Monica Barbaro as Joan Baez and Edward Norton as Pete Seeger are among the highlights, brimming with charged dynamics that reflect the tensions and alliances of the burgeoning folk movement.
But when it comes to embodying Dylan’s voice—both literal and metaphorical—Chalamet’s performance falls flat.
To be fair, Dylan’s voice is a particular kind of bad that’s almost impossible to mimic. It’s nasal, monotonal, and ragged, but also imbued with an urgent passion that made it unforgettable.
Dylan didn’t sing with range; he sang with conviction. Chalamet, unfortunately, renders it as disinterested mumbling. His brand of bad isn’t charmingly raw—it’s just bad. Instead of evoking Dylan’s piercing intensity, he often comes across as aloof, missing the fire that drove songs like “The Times They Are a-Changin’” and “Blowin’ in the Wind.”
The result is a portrayal that feels more like an impression than an embodiment, which is compounded by the fact that Chalamet doesn’t quite carry Dylan’s androgynously beautiful mystique. Dylan wasn’t conventionally attractive, but his wiry charisma and angular features had an allure that transcended beauty norms. Chalamet’s interpretation lacks that edge, and it’s hard not to imagine a newcomer who might have captured it more faithfully.
That’s the film’s central irony: it’s called A Complete Unknown, yet its lead is anything but. While Mangold has crafted a film that sings with the spirit of its time, it’s weighed down by a central performance that misses the mark. Perhaps the role of Dylan was never meant for a star but for a newcomer—someone plucked from obscurity not for their fame but for nailing Dylan’s look, mannerisms, and ineffable essence.
Ultimately, the film’s biggest flaw might just be its casting. Dylan himself was an enigma, a paradox, and an outsider—a complete unknown. The film could have used the same.
