Film Review: Martin Scorsese’s New Dylan Film Is Both A Mess And A Lie!

Netflix premiered director Martin Scorsese’s new Dylan “documentary” based on 1975’s Rolling Thunder Revue. Here’s what The 13^th Floor’s Marty Duda think about it.

The name of Scorsese’s film is: Rolling Thunder Revue: A Bob Dylan Story. The key word in the title is “story”. Those who think that they are getting a relatively straightforward documentary about Dylan’s legendary Rolling Thunder Revue will probably be shocked and disappointed after viewing the nearly two and a half hour film.

Don’t get me wrong, I think its worth watching if only for the performance footage alone. Dylan is at the top of his game on stage and you can’t take your eyes off of him as he spits out the lyrics to The Lonesome Death Of Hattie Carroll or Hurricane.

But, as a film, Scorsese, and to some extent, Dylan, have a lot to answer for. There will be spoilers in this review, so be warned.

The first spoiler is Scorsese himself. There’s no doubt that he is a great filmmaker, but I have always believed that his understanding and connection to music has been grossly over-rated. His musical roots are in the Italian doo-wop groups of New York City in the 1950s. But his knowledge and appreciation don’t go much further. As proof, read Levon Helm’s autobiography, This Wheel’s On Fire. Helm is scathing in his comments about Scorsese and working with him on The Last Waltz, particularly when it comes to the filmmaker’s treatment of Muddy Waters.

But hey, Martin Scorsese is considered on of the greatest film directors alive, and so why wouldn’t Dylan or The Stones or George Harrison want him to document them? But Scorsese’s strength is the way he integrates music into his dramas such as The Departed or Mean Streets, not as a documentarian.

And this Rolling Thunder film is proof perfect.

The film begins with scenes of New York City and the Statue Of Liberty as America is preparing to celebrate the bicentennial, which occurred on July 4^th, 1976. Keep in mind the Dylan tour began in October of 1975, but Scorsese seems to be determined to link Rolling Thunder with some sort of political undercurrent, eventually splicing in footage of Nixon, Ford and Jimmy Carter, along with “congressman” Jack Tanner.

I use speech marks around congressman because (spoiler alert) as it turns out, Jack Tanner never existed. Its actually actor Michael Murphy, although there is no indication that this little story is completely made up.

The same is true regarding extended segments revolving around a teenage Sharon Stone supposedly attending a show. The real Sharon Stone is on camera, “reminiscing”, and Dylan is along for the ride, talking about her in the newly-shot interview segments with him.

The film is rife with these manufactured “facts”. Others include “filmmaker” Stefan Van Dorp, who supposedly shot the original footage and concert promoter Jim Gianopulos…both played by actors.

Each of these four fabrications is given plenty of screen time and as a fan and audience member you find yourself wondering “why?” throughout the film. Then, realizing that none of it is “real” only makes one feel stupid and duped.

The first scene where we see the contemporary Dylan trying to sum up what Rolling Thunder was all about finds him uncharacteristically lost for words. Finally, exasperated, he looks off camera and claims, “It’s about nothing…it’s just something that happened 40 years ago.”

Both Dylan and Scorsese miss the point. The story behind Rolling Thunder was the music. It was terrific. Not only was Dylan in top form, but the musicians around him are a revelation. Just watching Scarlet Rivera playing her violin alongside Dylan was enough for me…she is totally entrancing.

Then there’s Mick Ronson’s guitar playing, 19-year-old David Mansfield’s pedal steel and mandolin and bassist Rob Stoner as the musical director.

But these folks and others such as T Bone Burnett, Steve Soles and Howie Wyeth barely rate a mention.

I know that Stoner has expressed his frustration about the film as he was interviewed for it, but none of the footage was used.

Despite all that, there are plenty of reasons to watch this.

As I said, the performance footage is amazing, and much of it gives us songs such as Oh Sister, One More Cup Of Coffee and The Lonesome Death Of Hattie Carroll in full. Although one of the most frustrating moments is when Scorsese cuts away from Dylan’s fiery performance of Hurricane for some inconsequential interview clip.

Other highlights include footage of Joni Mitchell jamming with Dylan and Roger McGuinn backstage on Coyote, a young Patti Smith nervously sharing a photo of Rimbaud with Dylan and a staged scene, taken from Renaldo And Clara between Dylan and former lover Joan Baez where they come to terms with why each married someone else.

Given the amount of stunning footage shot back in ’75 and the access Scorsese had to Dylan, Baez, McGuinn and many of the other surviving participants, this could have been an incredible documentary.

Instead, it is something much less.

Watch it…but be warned.

Marty Duda