Like Bob Dylan himself, the new biopic A Complete Unknown has generated a lot of controversy. So I had to go see it yesterday, sitting in a comfy seat in a Dorchester movie theatre surrounded by hundreds of Dylan fans.

OK, I lied a bit.

But only a bit. Everything in the first paragraph is true, except that there was actually only one other customer, not hundreds, at the matinee performance. The moral is that you should always go to the first performance of the day if you want to avoid crowds. (Generalizing from a single example is a useful practice, BTW.)

Anyhow, now that I’ve managed to bury the lede, I should say that I liked this movie a lot. It really resonated with me. The key is that you should arrange to have been born in the ’40s or ’50s, and that you should firmly accept that a biopic is not a historical documentary. If you were born in 1970, like the Globe’s Odie Henderson, who panned it, you’re apparently not in the target demographic. If you demand historical accuracy, like certain other reviewers, you are bound to be disappointed. If you expect a comprehensive exploration of Dylan’s life, you’re watching the wrong movie. That’s not what A Complete Unknown is all about. As Harvard classicist Richard F. Thomas put it, “it’s made to depict a lifetime, or just a slice of a lifetime of the genius of our age, in terms of use of the English language in song.” Yes, I know that that’s not what most of those who watch the movie expect, but remember that we’re talking about a Nobelist here — a winner of the Nobel Prize in literature, not music. I learned to appreciate that point of view in 1993, when I had the privilege of hearing a lecture by Christopher Ricks, a Boston University English professor who admires Dylan as a great poet of the English language. Although that was well before Dylan won the Nobel, Ricks’s argument has stuck with me ever since.

A few more random observations:

• I am struck by some similarities between Bob Dylan and Leonard Cohen. Both come from north of here, both were brought up Jewish, both experimented with Christianity and Eastern religions before returning to Judaism, and both were primarily poets though of course became better known for their music.
• Dylan’s song “Don’t think twice, it’s all right” has unusual resonance for me and appears appropriately in the movie. Back in 1963 my grandmother and I were listening to the LP that it’s on, and she remarked that it was the saddest song she knew.
• The entire movie is bracketed with scenes of Woody Guthrie as a patient at Greystone Park Hospital. Yes, the scenes are fictional, but Woody was really there. If you don’t know why, you can look it up.
• Some people are bothered by Timothée Chalamet’s portrayal of Dylan as something of a jerk. Or they use a different word, beginning with an “a.” And maybe they should be blaming the screenwriter/director, James Mangold, not the actor. But there’s no blame there, as those may be the same people who complain about historical inaccuracy, when apparently the characterization they dislike is actually accurate. Dylan can be both a great artist and a flawed human being; our heroes can have feet of clay.

Anyway, you should definitely go see this movie, even if you’re in the “wrong” demographic.

Categories: Movies & (occasionally) TV