An integral part of New York is the film world there. It was often spoofed in shows like Seinfeld:

Sadly, that’s the best example I could find, but I assume just about everyone has seen those characters waiting on line for the movies.

So, upon my return to New York, I have started to once again take in the movies at a blistering pace, having seen Beowulf, Lars and the Real Girl, The Golden Compass, Walk Hard: The Dewey Cox Story, National Treasure: Book of Secrets, The Savages, No Country for Old Men, and finally I’m Not There..

The last of these, which I suppose I am lucky to see because New York provides so many different venues (and where I live in Lower Manhattan you can literally see different movies at different theaters), really stands as perhaps the most unique and experimental of that sizeable list of films.

I’m Not There really speaks for itself better than any one person would. The set of vignettes portray both fictionalized and real events in the life of Bob Dylan, accompanied by his music, which is performed by various bands and recordings by the singer himself. This fragmentation of his music and life is made even more complicated by the fact that first and foremost Dylan is never named, but given pseudonyms such as “Jude Quinn.” Furthermore, and perhaps most obvious, is that different people play Dylan throughout the movie.

I think that you can find plenty of reviews on the film. Many particularly point out the performance of Kate Blanchett as being particularly unique. Blanchett, in addition to being the only female form of Dylan, represents the time when Dylan went electric, a seminal change in the star. However, Blanchett’s Dylan is particularly narcissistic and “in your face.”

I think that the film itself is quite unique. Among other things, the vignettes intertwine, which makes the flow of the movie wonderfully disjointed. You don’t know which Dylan you are going to see when and though there is a rough chronology, it’s nicely interrupted by one Dylan or another.

However, for those looking for a Dylan biopic, I would not recommend this movie. It’s more like ekphrastic poetry. Dylan’s life and music inspire the characters and events of the story, which then can veer and interpret said music/events in their world by their own terms.

I wonder if Dylan as a general inspires these feelings over other musicians. I did my own ekphrastic interpretation of Dylan’s “All Along the Watchtower” in about 9th grade when I was feeling particularly precocious (fear not, it will find it’s way onto the site), and I can’t help but think that perhaps the reason Dylan was considered such a good poet was our ability to empathize with him, the nerdy kid trying to rethink himself and aspiring to the story he was creating for himself. I am not a huge fan of Dylan’s musical chops, but it seems that even there he managed to create a unique sotry for himself (going electric, etc.). It’s something to think about.

Also, how rare is it to see ekphrasis in the form of film. I mean, referencing films is one thing, but is usually less obvious than when we quote in word or song. Those who like the classical music probably are very common with this kind of work and most of us have at very least read Fan Fiction, perhaps the most ubiquitous form of ekphrasis today. However, I just don’t know of many ekphrastic films, and few that are so blatant.

However, it is nice to be back in New York and to see this favored form of experimentation