No Direction Home: Bob Dylan
No Direction Home: Bob Dylan
| 26 September 2005 (USA)
SEASON & EPISODES
  • 1
  • Reviews
    Tockinit not horrible nor great
    Cissy Évelyne It really made me laugh, but for some moments I was tearing up because I could relate so much.
    Scotty Burke It is interesting even when nothing much happens, which is for most of its 3-hour running time. Read full review
    Jenni Devyn Worth seeing just to witness how winsome it is.
    Rainey Dawn This is one documentary and biography that fans of Bob Dylan do not want to miss. If you are a fan and have not seen it I highly recommend you to beg, borrow or buy (not steal lol) a copy of the film to view because you will enjoy it highly.Great music history within this film. I actually believe that those who are not a fan of Dylan but enjoy music history will really dig this film. It is highly informative on many artists not just Dylan - but the main focus is on Bob of course.You will view the world as it was - a lot of it through the eyes of Dylan. The things that were going on in the world and not just in music. Lots of explanations within the film.Well thought out - worth watching.10/10
    tieman64 In the 1920s, right through to the 1950s, the FBI began suppressing both the history of politically engaged early 20th century writing, and radical artists themselves. Only art which managed to evade repression tended to squeeze through. Historian Claire Cullen says that this resulted in a "version of modernism that was apolitical and stylistically abstruse". During this period, countless famous artists (Hemingway, Brecht, Richard Wright, Joyce, Jean Renoir, John Galbraith, Norman Mailer, Ginsberg, Faulkner, Steinbeck, Sandburg, Dreiser, Pearl Buck, Dorothy Parker, Thomas Wolfe, Georgia O'Keeffe, Tennessee Williams etc) were also monitored, as well as radical singers like Pete Seeger and Woody Guthrie.In the 1960s, the FBI's Counterintelligence Program began focusing on musicians and artists whom they dubbed, quote, "domestic enemies", "advocates of new lifestyles" and "apostles of non-violence and racial harmony". These supposedly dangerous artists (the Rolling Stones, Hendrix, Elvis, Charlie Chaplin, John Lennon, Bob Marley etc) were, in the eyes of the state, "subversive", "anti-American", "members of the New Left", "pacifists", "communists", "dangerous intellectuals" and "progenitors of cultural revolution". Other declassified papers would refer to them as "highly political and unfavourable to the administration". Between 1968 and 77, most had died.One who survived, and one of the last active connections to that era, is singer/song-writer Bob Dylan, the subject of "No Direction Home", a documentary by Martin Scorsese. Scorsese's film is divided into two parts. In the first, we move from the mid 1950s to 1963. Here we watch as Dylan grows up in a Minnesotan mining town and begins to get hooked on music. Dylan's many influences (Pete Seeger, Woody Guthrie, Tommy Makem, Huddie Ledbetter, Chuck Berry, Little Richard etc) are touched upon, but only superficially. This is understandable. Part high modernist and part postmodernist, Dylan's influences are almost too boundless to map, his songs (he's written over five hundred) drawing extensively from poetry, literature, religion, cinema, history, early blues, rock, folk, country, gospel and jazz.The film's second half focuses on a roughly six year period, starting in 1960. Here we watch as Dylan becomes a popular political/folk singer and becomes swept up in various civil rights movements. During this period, some of Dylan's best political material was written, most notably "Masters of War", "When The Ships Come In", "Blowing in the Wind", "Chimes of Freedom", "The Times They are Changing", "Hard Rain's Gonna Fall", "With God on Your Side", "Maggie's Farm" and "Talking WW3 Blues". Meanwhile, songs like "Oxford Town", "Only a Pawn in Their Game", "Death of Emmett Till" and "The Lonesome Death of Hattie Carroll" focused on the plights of African Americans, whilst others ("Motorpsycho Nightmare", "John Birch Paranoid Blues") poked fun at anti-communist hysteria. Funny, apocalyptic, ambitious and angry, all these songs were perceived as new sounds. Dylan himself, though, began to distance himself from politics. Though he went to the southern states with Pete Seeger in support of black voter rights, and sang next to Martin Luther King during the March on Washington, he only rarely got involved in public political action.Scorsese, though, doesn't care about politics at all. He ignores Dyan's political roots, ignores Dylan's life in the bohemian Greenwich Village and ignores Dylan's relationship with 19 year old Suze Rotolo, a communist and daughter to prominent communist/activist parents. During this period, Dylan filtered many of his songs through Suze. Scorsese's film then watches as Dylan rejects his fan-base and moves from political-folk to electric, rock and country ballads. Why Dylan rejects them is made clear: they're looking for a leader, a voice, a messiah, an Answer. But Dylan refuses to comply. His 1964 masterpiece, "My Back Pages", would mark the point at which he openly breaks ties with civil rights movements. Scorsese, though, offers Dylan's May 1965 Newport Folk Festival appearance, where he "went electric", as the precise moment in which Dylan turned Judas. Betrayer. Regardless, to folk fans and even artists like Seeger, Dylan's switch to electric was an admittance that he now refused to pen protest songs. To them, Dylan was now a reactionary. A sell out (though he'd occasionally still release protest songs, from the 1970s onwards Dylan primarily offered a mix of esoteric folk, country and blues). Ironically, even Guthrie was accused of similar things, co-opted by the Roosevelt government to promote the New Deal, and paid by the state to sing in towns and villages which were about to be destroyed to make way for hydro-electric schemes.Elsewhere Scorsese attempts to chronicle Dylan's impact on 20th century American popular music - Dylan politicised pop and brought both folk and complex/ambiguous lyrics and song structures into the mainstream - but the results are again superficial. Scorsese's suggestion that Dylan needed to move away from topical songwriting to be able to reach the heights of "Bringing It All Back Home" and "Highway 61 Revisted" is likewise dubious, and the director seems uninterested in examining the relationship of art and artists to questions of social liberation."No Direction Home" is at its best when it offers us glimpses of concert footage. Later Scorsese clumsily attempts to convey a simple theme. In Scorsese's hands, Dylan is just a guy who "refuses to be pinned down". Like the chorus of his 1965 classic, "Like a Rolling Stone", Scorsese's Dylan is a constantly shifting stone without direction (also the thesis of Todd Haynes' "Im Not There"). None of these statements are true. Dylan may be nasally, his words may be vague, he may have constantly changing, weird inflections, and no two live performances of his songs are ever the same, but the idea that he has been a cryptic chameleon has never been true. If anything, Dylan's a one man archive of a very specific type of American mythology. He represents a kind of shared nostalgia, an interactive museum whose malleable lyrics allow listeners to tap into a vanishing America.7.5/10 – See "Don't Look Back" (1967) and "Bound for Glory" (1976).
    davidgarnes This is an utterly fascinating film that focuses on a critical period in Dylan's early professional life (early 1960s). In addition to the wonderful footage of circa 2005 Dylan talking directly on camera, there are great comments and recollections by not only Joan Baez but also people I'd hadn't heard talk about Dylan before: Allen Ginsburg, Dave Van Ronk (both of them died before the film came out, I believe); Mike Bloomfield; and one of my favorites whom we don't see enough of, Maria Muldaur. There is also generous footage of Dylan performing, particularly during the "acoustic to electric" period, and, specifically, of performances in Britain. What is absolutely fascinating is to see and hear the very young and incredibly confident Dylan, and then the extensive comments the mature, more introspective Dylan makes about this early period in his life.
    lmayer2 If you don't appreciate Dylan, you can appreciate him as a multi-talented musicians because that's what he is and that's what he set out to be. Bob Dylan is modern-day and back in the day marvel. He is a living legend. He can sing, play the guitar and the harmonica all at once! No one even comes close to him with his many talents. And Scorsese, with his unparalleled directing abilities, couldn't have put this chronicle of Bob Dylan any better. A five-star biography, if you will and a remembrance of the greatest folk singer out there and quite possibly thee greatest musician. Bob Dylan is a monumentous poet/musician/whatever you want to call him and it was only fitting that Scorsese took on this behemoth. Great job, five-star. Simply astonishing and beautiful!