Customer Reviews

I'm Not There (Two-Disc Collector's Edition)

5 star:		(48)
4 star:		(25)
3 star:		(17)
2 star:		(19)
1 star:		(30)

 

 

I'M NOT THERE is clearly not a movie for everyone. The concept of the film is experimental, the execution of the 'documentary' is actually an amalgam of the aura and influence of one man in the music world instead of a linear history of a famous singer/poet, and the goal seems more to find the effect of Bob Dylan's chameleon persona on those people with whom he came into contact than it is to relate the story of a fascinating and important American artist.

Writer (with Oren Moverman) and Director Todd Haynes ('Far from Heaven', 'Velvet Goldmine') has gathered images, memorabilia, fragments of interviews, and responses from acquaintances and from these he has pieced together a quilt-like panorama of the enigmatic, elusive, ever-changing Bob Dylan. The result is not meant to be a precise history, but instead a 'feeling' for the man who so profoundly influenced American music in the 1960s. Haynes selected several top actors to inhabit various aspects of Dylan's life and times. The Narrator for this both black and white and color film is symbolist poet Arthur Rimbaud (Ben Winshaw) who through a series of comments opens the vignettes that reflect Dylan. Eleven-year-old Marcus Carl Franklin radiates the energy of Woody Guthrie when he is suggesting the early formative influences of Dylan. Christian Bale becomes 'Jack Rollins', among the closest of the actors to impersonate the performing Dylan. Heath Ledger embodies the love-life side of Dylan's character with the Claire of Charlotte Gainsbourg while Cate Blanchett comes closest to showing us the inverted personality as Jude Quinn - the name assigned to the character who most resemble Dylan's appearance and talk and physical reactions to the public, the press, and the audience. And as an homage to Dylan's preoccupation with history, the final version of Dylan becomes Billy the Kid (Richard Gere) in the surreal town of Riddle. Other important characters pass through this musical mélange - Julianne Moore comments as Alice Fabian, a Joan Baez-type figure, Michelle Williams becomes Coco for a moment, and Bruce Greenwood has double roles suggesting influences from the height of Dylan's career to his old age.

Throughout the film the music of Bob Dylan pervades the soundtrack, the tunes as important as the timely poetry of his lyrical output. The film is as strange as the man who inspired it, and Todd Haynes and his amazing cast of actors give us an impressive slice of our history as well as an appreciation of the aura of the strangely haunting Bob Dylan. In extended featurettes on the CD the director and cast give wonderful insights both into the character of Dylan as well as the concept of creating this amazing film. For some, watching these introductions BEFORE watching the actual movie may enhance appreciation of this art piece. Highly recommended - but the audience must understand this is not a routine movie! Grady Harp, May 08

After `Don't Look Back' and Martin Scorsese's `No Direction Home' Bob Dylan - No Direction Home what's left? With a subject as complex and multi-faceted as Dylan, it only makes sense to do more. Just look at Dylan's memoir/autobiography, `Chronicles'. We were given so much in Volume 1, but we know there's much more to come. And that's just from him. To capture all aspects of Dylan, there's `I'm Not There'. With portrayals by six actors, each representing an aspect of his life, we get a Dylan mosaic that both blends and clashes.

This is partly true because of Dylan himself, but it's also true because of the nature of the project. At its best the movie is an effectively surreal portraiture. At its worst it becomes a lingering still life that quickly needs the next piece in the gallery or provides some substandard reflections. More than half of the songs are Dylan's originals, but some of the covers are fairly effective, too. I was personally glad to have so many songs from his (subjectively greatest) masterpiece, ' Blonde on Blonde', but there is a wealth of material they use throughout. Their selection is nearly flawless.

One thing's for sure it's comprehensive. Having read the first `Chronicles,' having seen the aforementioned films, and owning several of his recordings, most of the time director, Todd Haynes, is right on the money. Not having read Dylan's own thoughts in 'Tarantula' or seen his portrayal in 'Pat Garrett and Billy the Kid' there are gaps that inevitably are provided for us. Still, the mosaic of Dylan effectiveness depends on the actor as well as the scene.

How does each actor do? Marcus Carl Franklin is Woody, the young, aspiring Dylan. It makes sense to have an African-American play the boy Dylan because in 'Chronicles' Chronicles: Volume One (Chronicles) his blues influences are amply noted, and we certainly know where the name came from. Remembering Robert Shelton's reflections of among his first interviews, I thought the circus vagabond aspect of his life was pure folklore, but maybe even that fits. Ben Whisham is Arthur Rimbaud, the rebel Dylan, facing a parole board before he's famous. So far it's a good blend.

Heath Ledger is Robbie Clark or Dylan, the lover and movie star. This is the Dylan whose underbelly is shown to be chauvinistic at times, but also someone who yearns for a stable family life. Picking Ledger makes sense. Christian Bale is sometimes the stage Dylan (Jack Rollins), and, well...sometimes the born-again Christian (Pastor John). Kate Blanchett is Jude Quinn, the incredulous rebel interviewee who refuses to be pigeon-holed or answer questions based on the elders' self-centered assumptions. Comparing 'Don't Look Back' Bob Dylan - Don't Look Back (Single Disc Remastered Edition) she's dead on. Both Jack Rollins and Jude Quinn represent the controversial period when Dylan went electric, and some of the best scenes are found during this era.

I came shocked and surprised coming into the movie noting there was a woman playing the part. I gave myself a pep talk to keep an open mind, and found her the most convincing Dylan. Ledger and Bale have their moments, but my biggest problem is that I kept thinking of Heath Ledger and Christian Bale more often than I thought of Dylan. Richard Gere plays the Dylan role in the movie `Pat Garrett...' Pat Garrett and Billy the Kid (Two-Disc Special Edition). Here he's Billy the Kid. He looked like Dylan, but reminded me the least of him.

The supporting players are essential. Julianne Moore is one of the best in the show as Alice Fabian (Joan Baez). Matching her is Charlotte Gainsbourg as Claire (Sarah) his wife. The playful vignettes with The Beatles and Alan Ginsberg are a joy to watch. Dylan's manager, Morris Bernstein (Albert Grossman), is represented as every bit as protective, resourceful, and demanding as one would expect. One of the best scenes is with needling newspaper man, Keenan Jones (or "Mr. Jones" if you will) played by Bruce Greenwood.

This biopic blends more than not. Their methods seem better than the random hop-scotch 'La Vie en Rose (Extended Version)' tends to do. Especially when we're at a chic cocktail party, and we see all kinds of images projected fully on the walls; it's very well done. Jerry Rabinowicz's editing does much for the flow of scenes, except when the 'Pat Garrett' scenes lingered too long, and when the criss-cross of time frames and aspects of his life were distracting and lacked focus.

Despite its flaws, 'I'm Not There' is a brave and magnetic portraiture of Bob Dylan. As a bold experiment it mostly succeeds and satisfies. The very fact that the 2:15 movie makes as few demands as it does on its audience shows that the results are a labor of love that mostly ring true.

Director Todd Haynes has reinvented the musician biopic by manipulating its conventions to suit its subject instead of the other way around which is what has always been done in the past. I'm Not There invites us into Bob Dylan's brain and has look at the world through his eyes. We also see how Dylan is perceived by the media and his fans. Because Haynes is pushing the genre to its extremes the film is quite hard to follow at times as we jump all over the place in time and are confronted by various takes on Dylan. However, I think it is a film that will only improves on subsequent viewings as what Haynes is doing becomes more apparent and understood.

On the first disc there is "An Introduction" featuring four text essays that help one get a handle on the film. "Who's Not There: Six Faces of Dylan" explains who each of the six Dylans the actors are playing and what they represent. "Tangled Up in Clues" claims that Haynes' film is "an homage to 1960s art films." It does an excellent job of breaking the film down to its basic elements. "Decoding an Entertaining Enigma" examines each incarnation of Dylan in the film. "Notes on I'm Not There" is written by noted critic Greil Marcus and features a solid analysis of the film.

There is an audio commentary by co-writer/director Todd Haynes. He talks about how he rediscovered Bob Dylan's music and his life via biographies. Haynes talks about how he pitched the project to Dylan and how he was inspired by the cinema of the 1960s because that was the time period where most of the film was set. Haynes certainly knows his Dylan history and does a great job analyzing his film and talking about the changes he made while shooting it. This is an engaging and informative track.

There is also an option to have the lyrics to the songs that appear on-screen.

The second disc features two theatrical trailers and an unreleased flash card trailer done in the style of the famous "Subterranean Homesick Blues" video with the cast.

There are "Audition Tapes" for Marcus Carl Franklin and Ben Whishaw. They both do a good job embodying the character they would eventually play.

Also included are two deleted scenes with Blanchett as Dylan messed up on drugs and another with Gere as Dylan during his western phase.

There are four alternate/extended scenes that provide an interesting, different take on these scenes.

An "Outtakes" gag reel features the cast and crew goofing around.

"A Tribute to Heath Ledger" features a montage of clips of the late actor in character and on the set. It is a sobering reminder of what a great talent has been lost with his tragic death.

"The Red Carpet Premiere" in November 2007 features footage of Haynes and his cast walking the red carpet and interacting with the press.

"Making the Soundtrack" examines how they mixed covers of Dylan's songs with original versions by the man himself. Haynes enlisted Sonic Youth's Lee Ronaldo to supervise some of the music and musicians like John Doe recorded their versions of key songs in the film. Assembling the soundtrack was as unconventional as the film itself.

"Conversation with Todd Haynes" features the director going in detail about his film explaining the title, the origins of the project, and so on. It's a nice compliment to his commentary track even if there is some overlap.

"Dylanography" includes the one-page proposal Haynes sent Dylan in order to get his approval for the film. There is also a chronology of the musician's life, a discography of his extensive output, books he's written, pages from the director's notebook, and stills of the various characters.

I adored this film. It is more like a puzzle or mosaic than a story, but it comes closer than anything yet to painting a good picture of such an interesting man.

This film is nonlinear and abstract - people who like a concise, plot based story are not going to like it. People who don't know or care much about Dylan's career probably won't get much out of it.

But for those of us who are diehard Dylan fans and enthusiasts, it is a very rewarding experience. You will recognize particular scenes and shots. You will marvel at how many known aspects of the man are shown.

I recommend this film, but only to diehard Dylan fans and fans of nonlinear storytelling.

"I'm Not There" is a brave attempt to capture the essence of the enigma that is Bob Dylan. Director Todd Haynes goes out on a limb with some artsy manouvers: firstly, a whole series of actors depict different sides of Dylan's personality, secondly a lot of the biographical information is skewed or simply made-up, and thirdly the film consists of a number of vignettes based on actual performances and interviews rather than telling a story. Sadly the film is a failure. The multiple actors are off-putting, the fictional elements are confusing, and without any narrative thrust the whole thing soon becomes very boring. The liberal use of Bob Dylan's music is the only thing that redeems it. Better to watch Scorsese's documentary "No Direction Home" if you want to get closer to Dylan.

While most bio-pics glorify or vilify the subject and play fast and loose with the truth, this movie mocks the glorification, the vilification, the truth, the myth - everything surrounding this icon of popular culture. It does this so aptly with the ultimate TRUTH of any artist - his art. the songs are such a strong vehicle for character, story, tone, transition, subplot - all of it. It is the strength of the movie and underscores the power of this amazing artist. While you may not leave this movie knowing any more about Bob Dylan, you will have been taken on an incredible ride. As Dylan is an acquired taste for most, so is this movie. I highly recommend.

I have been a fan of Dylan for 40 years and while it is interesting to see some key moments of his biography reenacted...Newport switching from folf to rock, The UK Royal Albert Hall incident, visiting Guthrie in the hospital, truth be told the actors depicting the different sides/personalities were irritating, screeching,egoistic,childish and had nothing to do with this mercurial, enigmatic icon, The REAL Dylan is best captured in Scorsese's " No Direction Home" and "Don't Look Back" another good one.

The Cowboy Junkies did a song "Cheap is How I Feel" and that is why this movie disappoints.. calling Dylan Edelstein, his roving with Ginsburg, his vomiting, come on....taking well known aspects of the picture and highlighting them for consumerism is not the real Dylan in my minds eye.Dylan is complicated stuff and this movie sure isn't despite the occasional wisdom lines.
Seeing a young conning hustling Black Dylan, a spaced out mercurial Dylan, An old drifter, recluse etc. is one mans image of Dylan..the pictures that come to my mind is very different..I don't think the portrayal can be captured effectively and one is left with a jumble..Yes, the best line in the movie is at the end "living with past,present future,
in the same room" and that is why I'm Not There is neither here or there and to quote from an album title "Time Out Of Mind"..his later life neglected in the movie.

Where is Dylan the mystic?? The man standing in Jerusalem not as a convert to Christianity BUT as a man grappling with his contradictions?
Where is Johnny Cash, the Gypsy Dylan of Rolling Thunder despite the paint mask of "Going To Acapulco", somehow I feel all these juxtapositions were not handled correctly despite the idea that the movie captures an elusive character that was probably the intention at the outset..too much was left out and to think that you can classify and break down a complex personality into periods or different personalities is where the movie fails despite it's cuteness on making the film a creation for the mass market and youth who are better served going back and listening to The Basement Tapes, Blonde On Blonde, New Morning on their own..
I highly doubt Dylan approved of this movie although it is cute seeing The Tarantula image and is entertaining despite some of the annoying actors portraying Bob..but again Dylan as some crazed marriage breaker of 2 daughters..the facts make it appear that the movie is almost a total fiction to the man himself.
Entertaining but I think it is better to see Scorsese and draw your own images by listening to his music on your own.

The movie captures so little if any of the beauty of Bob Dylan. It makes him look like a flake and a buffoon. I imagine it is hard to portray such a complex character, but this movie seems to do such a poor job of it. Blanchett as Dylan is awkward in every scene that she plays him. It transcends androgyny and makes Dylan look overly feminine and freakish. It was hard to get lost in the movie during these scenes. I was not there and only have his music and video as a reference for what I think Dylan was like, but the movie reeks of hollywood's touch and feels like a characture that catches much more of the bad and bizarre than the genius of Dylan.

Before delving into the vices and virtues of this film, I have to pause to say how astonishing Cate Blanchett was in this film. Though Todd Haynes famously used multiple actors to portray versions of Bob Dylan, Cate Blanchett's performance was hands down the most impressive of the bunch. If you have seen DON'T LOOK NOW -- D.A. Pennebaker's documentary of Dylan on tour in 1975 -- or Scorsese's BOB DYLAN: NO DIRECTION HOME, which featured extensive excerpts of color footage that Pennebaker took but didn't use in that earlier film, Blanchett's performance is bone chillingly accurate. The Dylan in those documentaries makes you nervous and ill at ease, just as Blanchett does. What was especially impressive was how completely she nailed Dylan's voice. An Australian woman in her late thirties would not be someone you would anticipate doing a dead on Dylan impersonation, but there you have it. Often when men try to sound like women or women like men, they merely raise or lower the pitch of their voice. Blanchett, who normally has a deep, rich voice, seems somehow to take her voice down very low, and then raise it up as if straining to speak as high as she does. The result is very much like the Dylan from DON'T LOOK BACK, who strains to speak in a high pitch. And if you've heard the soundtrack where someone in concert calls Dylan "Judas" you'll know that she seems to be channeling Dylan when she replies into the mike, "I don't believe you."

Cate Blanchett is one of three great things in the movie. The other is the music of Bob Dylan featured throughout. One of the Beatles -- I forget which one -- upon being asked if the Beatles would be listened to in 500 years, replied that he thought only Bob Dylan from this generation would still be listened to at that time. I think that is correct. There is just a staggering amount of it, much of it on a level of creativity and brilliance that no one else can touch. So any movie with lots of Dylan's music -- much of it performed by himself as background music, much of it in the form of covers -- is a better movie as a result. The third great thing in the movie is the look of it. I'm not sure he is capable of making a film that wasn't riveting to look at. VELVET GOLDMINE and FAR FROM HEAVEN were both exquisite to look at, and I'M NOT THERE follows form.

Unfortunately, there were long stretches of this very long movie that were unrelentingly dull. Haynes tries to resolve the many contradictions in Dylan's persona by breaking these out and having various aspects played by different actors. As mentioned, Cate Blanchett's Jude Quinn is a tremendous success in presenting the electric Dylan of the mid-sixties. Heath Ledger's bad-family-man Dylan was a terrible failure (and it is very sad to see Ledger so horribly miscast in what would turn out to be one of his last roles). Richard Gere's version of Dylan as Billy the Kid was also strange, never quite shifting over to the Dylan of the Basement Tapes, never quite shifting over into any version of Dylan. I found it also strange that he was not asked to perform at all. I don't know if Gere can sing, but I've read that he is a professional quality guitarist and played professionally before becoming an actor. The other Dylan's were moderately successful. The short version is that Cate Blanchett was extraordinary, Heath Ledger was wildly inappropriate, while the other Dylan's were average (though Christian Bale's version of Dylan in his Jesus phase was fascinating).

If you know don't much about Dylan's career and life this could be a hard film to follow. Some of it was based nearly word for word on real life interviews, especially some of Blanchett's scenes. Some bits seem to have very little basis in Dylan's life, such as his marriage to Louise (perhaps the details were changed more there than elsewhere for legal reasons). Dylan obviously never became a Christian minister, though he did go through a religious phase that he has never completely renounced. A good deal of the content was supplied by myth. For instance, when Dylan plugged in at the Newport Folk Festival (the New England Folk Festival in the film), he was greeted with far less anger than many have stated (and it is borne out by concert recordings). Not all booed. And Pete Seeger denies that he tried to cut an electrical cable with an ax (though he does say he tried to get the volume turned down).

The film creates elaborate fantasies about Dylan's early life, but that at least is similar to lies Dylan told upon first going to New York, telling people he was an orphan and that he had spent time riding the rails. Many of his closest friends where shocked when his parents turned up to hear him perform, just as they were astonished to learn that he was Jewish and from Minnesota. One can understand the temptation to create a film breaking down the Dylan mythos. Walt Whitman said of himself "I embrace multitudes." This is certainly true of Dylan as well. We can recognize the fragments of these myths by the various incarnations of his personal in this film, while still denying that the film always -- or even often -- does a good job of either "getting it right" or making much of a point when it does.

So, do I recommend this movie? To fans of Dylan, yes. If you know enough to argue with it and know where you need to deny or resist it, it can be -- at times -- fascinating. But if you are not terribly familiar with Dylan, check out Martin Scorsese's BOB DYLAN: NO DIRECTION HOME instead. That film doesn't delve into all the myths, but does focus brilliantly on one: Dylan's move from folk to electric music. Because the music that Dylan produced on albums like HIGHWAY 61 REVISITED and BLONDE ON BLONDE changed the face of music -- just about every important musical performer of the time, from the Beatles, the Rolling Stones, the Who, Otis Redding, Sam Cooke, the Motown stable of writers, the Kinks, the Beach Boys, and just about anyone else you care to name, completely rethought their writing, and especially the lyrical content of their songs, in response to Dylan. Every musician from the time of Dylan's electric turn has either been directly inspired by Dylan, or inspired by people upon whom Dylan was a major if not the major influence. But one will not get much of that from this film.

As an individual with a noted Dylan obsession I was fascinated by this film. Every moment on screen is so meticulously constructed to reference so many events, aspects, and subtleties the film could easily be analyzed a hundred times over and not be completely checked through.

This film seeks to and without a doubt accomplishes the essence of Dylan and his work not only in content but also by its means. I'm Not There is as much about being Dylan-esque as Dylan himself is, and therein perhaps lies the mystique of the piece itself, much like the man it portrays, ever changing.

For some people this will translate to pretentious filmic wandering. Others of us will be revisiting this masterful film for the rest of our lives.