Scorsese's 'Rolling Thunder' Documentary Confirmed for 2019

So we get all the NET dates listed at the end. I wonder if that is a hint that in a way the Revue continues?

Tim

 

Wasn't he famously NOT invited to join the Rolling Thunder Revue?

 

I don't believe that either.

 

I agree with previous posts that the falsehoods in the film don’t work. I just don’t see the point. If it was funny, that might make it worthwhile. But is it funny? Should it be funny?

More live footage and interviews would be welcome instead. That certainly worked well on NDH. Why did Dylan and Scorsese decide to mess with us on this one? It’s a shame that future generations will be misled by this foolishness.

 

Ugh.

 

I have to say I'm not at all a fan of the "is it fact or fiction" approach to biographies and documentaries. Dylan did that with his book and it lessened the value to me. Same with this movie. There is some great archival footage. But as for the narrative, who knows what's real and what's made up for...for no reason at all as far I can tell.

 

Maybe. To me it was telling the viewers that Bob continued to stay on the road year after year, still chasing whatever it was that he is looking for...

 

Interesting. I believe historical accuracy on Dylan is ultimately Dylan's decision. Besides there are plenty of other sources for... historians and history nuts.

 

Naw I love and respect the original artists creations. They should never bend over to the will of the masses.

Look at pop music today. That’s a result of Kissing the asses of the masses.

 

Just watched this on a rainy afternoon, hadn't read anyone's thoughts until just now. Honestly it was a nice companion to R&C, from what I remember. The mix of characters, real and imagined, the live footage popping up here and there, but with the live/background ratio being almost the reverse of a typical concert film. As far as the mythmaking and lie-telling, well it did say "A Bob Dylan Story" right at the beginning. Was it all amusing, frankly yes.

If you were watching it for some kind of historical document, you missed the point they were making. It wasn't a typical tour, and it isn't a typical film. Maybe I could have done without Sharon Stone, but when "Jack Tanner" showed up I thought that was hilarious.

So I enjoyed it. Of course I had no real issues with the GoT finale either. People need to have their expectations shattered once in a while.

 

The fake stuff is both unnecessary and so mundane. Why invent a fictitious Congressman just to address Jimmy Carter's interest in, or appropriation of, Dylan at the time? Why have Sharon Stone on to offer a tall tale about joining the entourage? Is the point of the KISS sweatshirt story just supposed to be a clue that Dylan's story about seeing KISS in concert is also fake? Did they have to invent a tour groupie who caught Dylan's eye because they couldn't find any women who actually did work backstage or had just come along for the ride? They really had to invent a tour promoter, because Bill Graham is dead, to tell some generic stories about what the job entails? Louie Kemp wouldn't talk? And what purpose did Von Dorp serve?

They're all just devices to help Scorsese introduce subjects or figures because he couldn't get, or couldn't be bothered to get, real people to talk. But if he couldn't get Jimmy Carter or an old Carter aide, or Louie Kemp, or if Dylan didn't want to talk about making Renaldo & Clara... that's too bad, really, but all that Scorsese's solution has done is make me think about what's missing. It would've been better just to leave it and put in another 15 minutes of performance and backstage footage.

 

I don't understand your post.
The will of the masses?
I have no idea what you're talking about.
The original creation -- 1975 concerts and film footage -- is what I respect here.

 

My feeling is--and I can't believe I am saying this, because I hate this practice as well--that they would have better served using one of the talking heads with no connection to the events that find their way into so many documentaries than what they did do, which is make up stuff. Give me Sheryl Crow or Whoopi Goldberg discussing the importance over this.

Wow. Did I just say that?

 

I’m referring to the new film and documentary on Netflix by Scorsese and Dylan.

The film they wanted to make. The film they actually made

 

Is there stuff in Chronicles that you know to be fabricated? I love that book.

 

I really don't get all the hand wringing over "is it fact or is fiction?" and the desire for "historical accuracy". I'd rather have Bob Dylan focus on creative output than attempt to be a historian. There's thousands of historians but there's only one Bob Dylan.

If he had set it up as a historically accurate document, then ok it would be misleading and a bit annoying, but he literally says at the beginning he can't remember a thing about it, starts with a conjuring trick and calls it "A Bob Dylan story"

Maybe people were suckered into expecting "NDH 2"by the inclusion of Martin Scorsese? If so, then well played Bob, well played.

 

I wasn’t suckered. I was gonna watch it anyway, no matter who directed. I do think it would have been funny if it was all fiction though.

Even better, one real version and one fake.

 

If you can get hold of the second Ian Bell Dylan book.There is a whole chapter about the fabrications in the book.
I love the book but it is another Bob Dylan story rather than an autobiography.

 

if you all are aware of dylan's approch to his art, why does it still bug you so much? its not like he hasn't been doing this kind of thing since 1961. it seems odd to me that people are offended by artifice in bob dylan of all people.

 

I could be wrong, but I sort of picture Dylan at this point as just a lonely old man. If this is how he gets his jollies, oh well...

 

I'll own it! Love both of these guys...

 

Of course neither of us know, but if he's lonely he's got a giant family to keep him busy when not on tour.

 

I loved it. If you want someone to conform to your expectations, go listen to James Taylor, Billy Joel or Jimmy Buffett.

 

See what I mean?

I want to see the Rolling Thunder Revue concerts that give this special its title,
not be lied to by imposters, and not be exposed to a sick exercise in sophistry
setting up fallacious arguments such as "if you want someone to conform to
your expectations, go listen to" somebody else.

 

Ever since I watched the movie, I have been listening to Hejira.