Todd Haynes' "I'm Not There"

[Lynch]

I am really looking forward to seeing this, but my wife is not a big Dylan fan, so judging from what I have been reading she may be a little lost.

[MattZ]

I wonder if this movie will translate well to home viewing on DVD. So much of what was so wonderful about the movie was the music. I don't have one of those crazy surround sound systems. Just a tv and a dvd player...

[LouieB]

I am really looking forward to seeing this, but my wife is not a big Dylan fan, so judging from what I have been reading she may be a little lost.

Leave her home....she will be totally lost....its bad enough for those of us who know a thing or too...

 

LouieB

[TheMaker]

Finally saw this (there's a DVD rip of it on the internet........).

 

And a big shout-out to whoever risked life and limb - well, okay, maybe not, but certainly an aspect of their career - to get it online. I don't know about other people, but I'm fucking sick of being treated like a cultural pagan simply because I don't live in a crowded, smelly megagoogoltopia of a city. Note to Hollywood: maybe you're losing money because people, whether they consciously realize it or not, want to watch movies that are worth seeing rather than the overbudgeted sequels and limp adaptations you release to thousands of theatres across the world!

 

Anyway...

 

As a Dylanphile, I enjoyed the music, of course, and it mostly worked for me on an academic level... but it left me feeling strangely cold. I can't say why, exactly, but I couldn't seem to sink my teeth into it the way I'd expected to. Some of the visual metaphors were a little too on-the-nose (Bruce Greenwood during "Thin Man?" Oh gawwwd, no, really, spare me), but others were a delight (the Newport imagery involving Tommy guns made me explode into a huge grin).

 

P.S., This movie is unquestionably for Dylan fans only. I'd be shocked if even a casual listener, or perhaps even an avid one who hasn't delved deep into Dylan's life beyond his music, could take away anything of value from the film besides a very general appreciation of its technical merits. The entire time I was watching it, I felt as if Haynes made it for himself, music message board dorks like us, Greil Marcus and precisely nobody else.

[Beltmann]

I don't know about other people, but I'm fucking sick of being treated like a cultural pagan simply because I don't live in a crowded, smelly megagoogoltopia of a city.

Exactly. To distributors, those of us who don't live in the big city are considered second-class consumers of art.

 

P.S., This movie is unquestionably for Dylan fans only. I'd be shocked if even a casual listener, or perhaps even an avid one who hasn't delved deep into Dylan's life beyond his music, could take away anything of value from the film besides a very general appreciation of its technical merits.

I dunno. I'm a fan but no Dylan expert, so I'm sure some of the allusions went over my head--I imagine a more hardcore fan would have much more fun unpacking the clues and puzzle pieces than I did--but it didn't matter. As I mentioned to Lou a while back, I don't think a viewer needs to be familiar with Dylan's history to see what Haynes is up to. In fact, a lack of knowledge might even help, because it seems that many Dylan fans are so preoccupied with their preconceptions and hopes for the film, and the details of the Dylan mythology, that it prevents them from seeing what the movie is actually trying to do. Too many people get caught up in whether the movie is good biography or poor biography, when the answer is neither. Dylan is not really the subject; his life is used as a catalyst for getting at what really interests Haynes, which are issues of identity, celebrity, and how we go about shaping our lives. Dylan's public lives, of course, are a familiar and natural starting place for that investigation, but the movie probably could have chosen any number of entertainers--Madonna comes to mind--and ended up with a similar and equally fascinating exercise. To enjoy I'm Not There, I suspect that a familiarity with Dylan helps, but is less essential than a willingness to find pleasure in semiotic adventures.

[LouieB]

Exactly. To distributors, those of us who don't live in the big city are considered second-class consumers of art.

 

 

I dunno. I'm a fan but no Dylan expert, so I'm sure some of the allusions went over my head--I imagine a more hardcore fan would have much more fun unpacking the clues and puzzle pieces than I did--but it didn't matter. As I mentioned to Lou a while back, I don't think a viewer needs to be familiar with Dylan's history to see what Haynes is up to. In fact, a lack of knowledge might even help, because it seems that many Dylan fans are so preoccupied with their preconceptions and hopes for the film, and the details of the Dylan mythology, that it prevents them from seeing what the movie is actually trying to do. Too many people get caught up in whether the movie is good biography or poor biography, when the answer is neither. Dylan is not really the subject; his life is used as a catalyst for getting at what really interests Haynes, which are issues of identity, celebrity, and how we go about shaping our lives. Dylan's public lives, of course, are a familiar and natural starting place for that investigation, but the movie probably could have chosen any number of entertainers--Madonna comes to mind--and ended up with a similar and equally fascinating exercise. To enjoy I'm Not There, I suspect that a familiarity with Dylan helps, but is less essential than a willingness to find pleasure in semiotic adventures.

Those of us who DO live in big cities are also second class citizens......this movie opened at only a few theaters, wasn't heavily promoted and didn't stick around very long...we get the same shit with such movies as Persepolis and Honeydripper which are hardly running anywhere and will probably disappear in a week or so (the Sayles movie is at the Music Box, so you know it will disappear quickly.)

 

And certainly I'm not There is is not a Dylan biography so little will be gained by the casual viewer regarding his actual life. Someone watching the movie who isn't interested in the semiotic adventure and doesn't even know what semiology is will be even more in the dark. I think one really needs to want to get caught up in the imagery if they know little about Dylan, to enjoy this movie (and/or maybe just wants to hear some great music for a couple hours), otherwise many viewers will come away from this sort of confused. I can't wait to see this again when it comes out on DVD.

 

I am slowly working my way through the Dylan interview book that came out a few years back. Many of the interviews are infuriatingly confusing taken as a whole. If Haynes got anything right (and he got alot right), it is the constant shifting of perspective that Dylan has promlegated over the years as to his own identity and purpose as a songwriter. Even though the movie takes the religious conversion to the the limit, there is more truth to that than there was to the rather tenuous Black Panther allusions (grounded in a 60s sensibility that many can't relate to anymore) that resulted in the turning the machine guns on the audience at "Newport". And the weakest scenes as noted by most critics, the ones with Richard Gere (how come Kristopherson wasn't tapped for this role, a giant missed opportunity..) to me resinated very strongly since the basement tapes are some of the most playful and sloppy music made in Dylan's entire career. The "Woody Guthrie" scenes resonate so strongly, because the idea of the wandering singer during the Depression is such a strong and vital image in general, as is the downtown NY art scene of the Cate Blanchett scenes, some of which are wonderful and some of which are just sort of stupid, but her dead on rendering of that Dylan is rightfully the highlight of the movie.

 

And although no one cares about this but me, Charlotte Gainsbourgh is a dead on stand in for Patti Smith, both in her apperance and her purpose in the film. The further from viewing this I get the stronger

that impression is. So I agree that the symbols in this movie are the main purpose for it's interest, but without the desire to unpack them, the journey can be a giant drag...,

 

(it is Sunday morning and my spelling is worse than usual....sorry.)

 

LouieB

[TheMaker]

At least you have the option of seeing these movies, Lou. I'm new to downloading (movie) torrents, and I feel like a heel every time I snag one, even though supporting these films with my wallet is no longer a viable option. (Could I get a posse of friends together and waste two hours on a round driving trip to see these flicks? Probably. Ain't gonna happen, though, I'll tell you that.) Once upon a time, when there were more theatres in my city of 140,000 (which I feel compelled to point out is by no means a flyspeck on the map in terms of demographics), I'd have been able to see movies like The Darjeeling Limited and I'm Not There theatrically, if only for a single weekend or Friday night.

 

It seems to me as though Hollywood's natural and bewilderingly counterintuitive response to allegedly dwindling audiences is much the same as the RIAA's vis-

[W(TF)]

I thought that, while far from perfect, the film was a great achievement. It feels like a direct extension of Dylan's attitudes toward the media and toward his audience. People who like things to fit nice and linear in a little box will be infuriated. Those who get that he's 'not there' will appreciate it for what it is. A raucous mess of a story, full of contradictions, dead ends, and unlikely humor. I loved it. Those still looking for "insights" into the artist should keep looking.

 

To be fair, I wasn't very impressed by the first act, when it seemed like this would be a spoof on No Direction Home. Which as a concept isn't very interesting..my expectations were much higher. It all tied together beautifully by the end though. Many films, many Dylans. Brilliant work--this film relied heavily on post-editing, and by the result it's obvious Todd Haynes had a grand vision, and I thought he executed it really well.

[LouieB]

At least you have the option of seeing these movies, Lou. I'm new to downloading (movie) torrents, and I feel like a heel every time I snag one, even though supporting these films with my wallet is no longer a viable option. (Could I get a posse of friends together and waste two hours on a round driving trip to see these flicks? Probably. Ain't gonna happen, though, I'll tell you that.) Once upon a time, when there were more theatres in my city of 140,000 (which I feel compelled to point out is by no means a flyspeck on the map in terms of demographics), I'd have been able to see movies like The Darjeeling Limited and I'm Not There theatrically, if only for a single weekend or Friday night.

 

It seems to me as though Hollywood's natural and bewilderingly counterintuitive response to allegedly dwindling audiences is much the same as the RIAA's vis-

[W(TF)]

Again I think the most confounding part of the film was the Richard Gere section, since it really has the least relation to Dylan's life and is the most fanciful.

 

The scenes seemed to be set in the civil war era, and I related this to Dylan's well known fascination with early newspapers and American history and poetry - from which a considerable part of his songwriting is cribbed. The connecting theme was of "not belonging", thus the Gere character eventually hops on the same freight train. I really liked those scenes, though I can't really explain why. This part of the film may have been depicting a dream.

 

There were times during the marriage break-up scenes that I couldn't figure out what was going on either, regarding Dylan himself,

 

Yep.....and for those of us who have been through it, that's exactly what it feels like.

[Dreamin']

As "good" as this movie is, I do think there is still plenty of room for a real Dylan bio pic sometime in the future. Frankly the story of the young Zimmerman stuck in Hibbing (and again a trip to see the place says alot and don't forget to visit the mine...), heading out to Minneapolis, interning in NYC, changing the face of popular music, turning to religion, facing irrellevance, resurging in later life, etc. etc. is a pretty damn good story.

I don't think it's possible to make a bio pic because Bob Dylan does not exist. Knowing the most esoteric details of his life story tells us very little about the man himself... and he's (wisely) not telling.

 

One of the reasons I love I'm Not There so much is because it's like a Dylan song: fact, fantasy, and folklore all rolled into one crazy trip. I think Haynes portrayed Dylan's shape-shifting brilliantly.

 

Neil Young had 'missing' Dylan track

It's not enough that Neil's hording a bunch of his own rarities.

[LouieB]

I don't think it's possible to make a bio pic because Bob Dylan does not exist. Knowing the most esoteric details of his life story tells us very little about the man himself... and he's (wisely) not telling.

That;s interesting because I have seen Bob Dylan in concert a few times, so I know he exists.

 

I used to work with some handicapped adults and one of them used to talk about there being three Elvis Presleys, one who sang, one who was in movies and one who did concerts.

 

Actually there is plenty of interesting information on the "real" Bob Dylan, some of it even made it into I'm Not There. The rest has been relentlessly chronicaled in bios and articles as well as Dyaln's own book. Sure, every person in the world is a combination of many aspects of their life.

 

LouieB