Reviews & Ratings for
Dont Look Back More at IMDbPro »

Filter:

Best Chronological Prolific Authors Loved It Hated It Hide Spoilers:

Page 1 of 4:

[1] [2] [3] [4]

Index

34 reviews in total

---

28 out of 32 people found the following review useful:
hypnotic..., 31 March 2002

Author: cousteau

Before it became necessary to narrate documentaries (with rare exceptions, a sign that they truly SUCK) this one was dialogue-free. It was a floating camera that followed Bob going from venue to auditorium, from speaking to reporters to meeting ...Donovan.

Right from the start you can tell Dylan is sick of being on tour, either that ir he's sick of people(note how he rolls his eyes in the very beginning when he explains to a woman why he's carrying a lightbulb) so we become accustomed to the way he answers questions; sometimes rude but always originally, many times hilariously. He was afterall, still a very young guy in a foreign country. It didn't matter how he spoke with people, though, because he communicated enough-as we can see in Don't Look Back through his music.

When you watch him play, it's amazing to see the stillness in the audience, the entranced eyes, fixed in concentration, minds in fear that they may miss a word of one of Dylan's songs. I love how, right at the beginning when he gets asked "When did you know you wanted to become a performer?" and he seems to think for a minute...and it cuts to: Dylan about 6-8 years prior..playing in a field surrounded by a bunch of African Americans...seemingly singing about (an)African-American...and when the camera pans close to his face, you can see tears rolling down his cheeks! It made me cry...........

The good thing about it is you see a little bit of everything...Dylan on stage in his element, Dylan f*ked up;), w/his pals, p***ed off, and Englanders...

We also get to see a very young Joan Baez( whose voice I had never even heard before watching this)- an innocent, beautiful woman who despite this had morals and a voice that would also be heard....like Dylan she was way ahead of her time.

In short, I cannot say enough about this documentary-it gets better everytime I see it, and I don't say that about a lot. I still cannot hear enough of his music or his lyrics...

Long live Dylan and Baez... -Heidi

---

27 out of 34 people found the following review useful:
Brave portrait, 20 June 2001
Author: Schlockmeister from Midnight Movie Land

The documentary starts off well enough, Bob's famous alley video of "Subterranean Homesick Blues" in which beat poet Allen Ginsberg is seen gesticulating in the background. Then we see Bob and company arriving at Heathrow airport in London, prophetically singing "London Bridges falling Down" as they walk in. During this scene we see the first contradiction of the movie's main character. A passer-by who lights one of Bob's smokes asks him about what is different about him this tour, why is he so popular this time around in England. Bob brushes it off by indicating that he has no idea he is so popular and sort of indicating that he does not keep up with those mundane things. He then spends a lot of time in the film doing exactly that, stopping conversation to ask where he is placed in the charts and in reading his press.

It's hard to know how to take Bob Dylan in this documentary. Many of the interviews shown are ones given on the fly just before he goes on stage, and a certain amount of pre-show jitters and nervous reaction is probably to be expected. I would not want to interview a musician just before they are set to perform on strange stages in a foreign country. His interviews come across as a person who has been doing way too much of what we, in fact, see Bob doing all through the film, reading his own press clippings and being very impressed with what he finds. He comes across as a person who thinks he understands all, but is too deep to be understood in turn. So deep, in fact, that mere mortal reporters are not even worth taking the time to explain things to. He wastes the reporter's and the film audience's time playing verbal games, quibbling over choics of words in questions and in general coming across as far more self-important than he really is. This can be seen as anti-establishment, it can also be seen as being a plain old pain in the butt just because you can, to entertain your buddies.

Donovan is there, and is a presence from the start of the film. Bob is very aware of him, has been told that Donovan plays better than he does. Donovan was the British version of Bob and, at times, sold better than Bob did. They finally meet and trade songs, Bob sarcastically choosing to sing "It's All Over Now, Baby Blue" right at Donovan. Joan Baez is there for a portion of the movie, beautiful and ignored by Bob and his entourage. Albert Grossman comes across as a bull in a China shop in England where the genteel older gentlemen who still handled promotion were absolutely no match for Grossman's New York tough guy ways. We see him on the phones, milking every last dollar he can from promoters.

Highly recommended documentary. For what it is worth, besides his music, this is about as close as anyone ever got to Bob Dylan. The film makers were wise in not asking any questions or directing anything, but just in letting Bob talk.

---

19 out of 20 people found the following review useful:
Mean-spirited and brilliant, 16 October 1999

Author: Christopher Miroslaw from Kalamazoo, MI

Perhaps I'm biased -- Bob Dylan is quite possibly my favourite performing artist in the world. This very cinema-verite look at Dylan's 1965 tour of England offers both a serious justification of the man's genius and a very unflattering look at the costs and results of that genius. This was clearly not a happy time for Dylan, who rushes through most of the songs included here like a man who clearly wishes he were somewhere else. Not that the performances are poor (quite the contrary) but the heart and sincerity are quite obviously missing (note how "The Times they are a-Changin'" speeds up gradually but unmistakably throughout the film). The backstage material (the bulk of the film) shows Dylan being generally nasty to everyone around him, including Joan Baez (well, he's not nasty precisely, but he never really even acknowledges her presence), a newspaper reporter (the "science student") and basically anyone he comes in contact with.

In other words, this is not a portrait of the artist that I happen to like, but it is the truth (or at least it was at that time). In addition, Albert Grossman, Dylan's manager, is shown in possibly the least flattering light possible. A bonus is that the film begins with the brilliant 1965 promotional clip for "Subterranean Homesick Blues", and watch for the scene in a hotel room when Dylan and Bob Neuwirth sing "Lost Highway" - it's worth the price of admission.

---

19 out of 24 people found the following review useful:
one of the best rock documentaries ever made, 20 July 2005

Author: mcshortfilm from United States

This is the documentary that gave meaning to the term "cinema-verite";

a term used to describe films that looked as if they were happening in real time. This is one of those films. It is a gritty black and white documentary that follows the legendary Bob Dylan during a tour in England. This is not a conventional rock documentary where we are shown endless concert footage and interviews with musicians talking about their philosophies and the meanings of their songs. Instead, the camera follows Dylan in a frenzy capturing every detail of social interaction with his fans, entourage, and the press. Dylan appears arrogant but it is no surprise when Pennebaker allows us to see the hypocrisy and greed of the outside world. A memorable moment in the film involves a fan whose invited himself backstage to meet Bob Dylan. He asks him absurd questions such as "what is your attitude on life?" Dylan decides to tease him and the conversation gets pretty ugly. Nevertheless, it is an important scene to the film because it shows us how difficult it is for a superstar such a Dylan to keep a smile and act nice to everyone. Do we gain sympathy for Dylan? We do because we see how alienated he feels among even his closest friends. We also feel a sense of envy for his ability to be so unapologetic and rebellious about his attitude. He is honest but he also has to protect himself from the public. After a Time magazine reporter asks him whether or not he cares what he's saying . Dylan attacks him and then tries to give him a straight answer . "Do you think anyone who comes to these concerts is looking for anything other then entertainment?" The next day, Dylan hears a quote from the papers that describes him as an anarchist. The sequence of these events show clearly how Dylan is at a loss with the public's perception of him. He can't just be himself. He wants to come across as a guy like anyone else but his sarcastic and meaningless interaction with the press only makes things worse. The film also includes appearances with Joan Baez, Donovan, Allen Ginsberg, and Dylan's sleazy manager Albert Grossman. I've seen this film dozens of times and I still see something new with every viewing. It is a true masterpiece.

---

9 out of 11 people found the following review useful:
Anomalously acute., 19 June 2004

Author: Richard Tasgal (tasgal) from Beer-Sheva, Israel

Amidst the morass of irrationality, antinomianism, and sanctimony that is The Sixties (celebrated, for example, in "Hair" and "A Hard Day's Night"), "Don't Look Back" is refreshingly, almost cathartically, lucid and morally serious. There isn't a conversation that isn't intelligent on at least one side. Dylan's discussions with and about musicians and poets sparkle with a thirst for poetic and musical expression. The music is passionate, serious, and enjoyable.

About the competitive and business aspects of music, Dylan is game and reasonable. His manager, without screaming or hostility, tries to hold the BBC to, apparently, previously implied promises they are backing away from on the grounds of a contrary general policy. There are no implausible pretenses to asceticism.

Dylan never attacks anyone weak or who does not deserve it. Members of Dylan's entourage who do things that are dangerous or wantonly destructive, such as throwing a glass out the window, are sought out for reprimand. A hanger-on who tries to coopt Dylan to the idea that the two of them are superior for, well, I'm not sure for what, is well flustered by Dylan's Socratic questioning of that superiority. Young fans are put at ease, treated gently, and, in a way that obviates their awe, probed for reactions to his music.

Two instances reflect badly on Dylan. He is suddenly hostile to a Time magazine reporter, and insists that he should not be called a folk singer. The reporter is taken aback and exasperated (notwithstanding that the claim is accurate for sufficiently narrow definitions of "folk"). He doesn't argue, but behind the eyes you can see a quick mental retrenchment. The reporter gingerly tries a new tack, and salvages interesting and perceptive impressions. Talk about a bravura performance. More troubling is a member of the Animals going uncriticized for opening a bottle with a hotel piano. Does Dylan let pass from a star what he would justly rebuke in an ordinary person? It happened behind Dylan's back. Maybe he was unaware of it.

---

9 out of 13 people found the following review useful:
Dylan's Art Defined, 4 September 2006

Author: djrdemers from Montreal, Canada

Don't Look Back is one film that will go down in the canon of groundbreaking documentaries. But while there are many interpretations of what D.A. Pennebaker attempted to accomplish (besides an experiment in early cinema-verité and initiating the 'rockumentary' genre), it would be a grave mistake to watch this film and come to any conclusions about Dylan without considering his entire musical body of work. Truly this film is less about Dylan the person and more about his art. Don't Look Back demonstrates how all the factors of Dylan's life came together to form his stylistic influences, and specifically to defend his departure from folk music and his sequential embrace of electric rock.

Dylan's artistic motivations were not so much the social issues of his time, as many believe. It is worth noting here that Martin Scorcese's excellent follow-up documentary No Direction Home demonstrates this clearly: in one British press conference, a reporter asks Dylan if he'll be attending some widely publicized protest later in the week. Dylan replies coyly, "I think I'll be busy that day." Rather, his musical influences, his poetic abilities and the nature of folk music were a natural musical direction for Dylan to explore. But Dylan saw himself as more than just a musician – he much preferred to be considered an artist. In Don't Look Back, Dylan even lashes out at one reporter (albeit unfairly) for branding him a folk musician. He also claims not to have the answers to social problems that people desperately wanted him to provide: he repeatedly goes into tirades throughout the film about there being "no truth" and that he is merely "painting portraits" of life.

Dylan's relationship with Joan Baez is another indication of the aforementioned. She's ever disapproving of his disregard for the issues she believes are important. In future interviews, Baez admitted that she couldn't get Dylan to see the value of correcting the social ills which Dylan arguably could have done, considering the almost divine influence he had over the masses, but Dylan merely ignores her. He even allows her to be ridiculed by his band mates without coming to her defense. It might be warranted as cruel on Dylan's part, but the truth was that he cared about other things more: his art.

These clips help Pennebaker demonstrate why Dylan abandoned folk music. He became weary of the negative press during his British tour and is impressed with alternate forms of music he hears along the way. His band mates Michael Bloomfield and Al Kooper opened Dylan's eyes and ears to the beauty and intricateness of electric rock. Many other clips demonstrate this throughout the film: Dylan's complete awe with the electric guitars in the window of an instrument shop; the piano improv from Alan Price (a former member of The Animals), etc. One telling scene is the final clip of Dylan leaving the tour in a limo while Albert Grossman reads aloud a recent article accusing Dylan of being an anarchist for presenting problems in society but not providing solutions. Dylan's parting words trail into the credits as he stares out the window: "It can't be good to be an anarchist…" If there was ever one defining moment when Dylan made the decision to allow his art to evolve, this may be it.

One might also argue that Dylan's obvious apprehension to Donovan was due to a mix of jealousy and disgust, ultimately because Donovan was really just another Dylan. Had Dylan truly cared about the message rather than the medium, he'd be content with Donovan's solidarity to help get that message to the people. Instead, Dylan saw Donovan as an artistic competitor and hated that many compared the two. Many Brits at the time even gave Donovan more credit as a guitarist, a title that was destroyed after Dylan turned to electric rock and developed his style as an improv guitarist. He even takes a shot at Donovan on stage during a song ("I looked in the closet/there was Donovan"). It was likely a reference to Donovan's attempt to emulate Dylan's musical style, though it may even be a jab at Donovan's masculinity – or lack thereof.

One final note: Dylan may claim in the film that he doesn't care about what the media thinks of his work, but like most historical artists, he undeniably did. He ribs into reporters (both justly and otherwise) and tries to laugh off his rudeness to others in an attempt to make up for it. Had he been passionate about fixing the world, it should not have mattered to him what others thought. In the end Dylan never cared much for the issues, but about the music.

And as with any artist, his work would evolve – for the better or for the worse. Watch No Direction Home to see a wonderful clip of Dylan and his band showing up at the Annual Folk Festival and shocking the crowd with a frenzied version of "I Ain't Gonna Work on Maggie's Farm No More." There's no better display of Dylan's total disregard to folk music, insulting the entire genre and its fans by declaring his estrangement to the 'music of the people.'

When the entire tour experience was over, Dylan left Britain with a new perspective on his style – and much to the chagrin of his early fans, he didn't look back.

---

4 out of 4 people found the following review useful:
Iconic and unforgettable portrait, 12 April 2008

Author: Chris_Docker from Scotland, United Kingdom

Do you know that feeling when a song captures you completely? One minute there's all these thoughts running around in your head and the next minute someone switches the radio on and it's kinda like it screams, STOP!

You can feel it. You let your whole being be absorbed by it. You're on a high. Then you catch your breath . . .

Bob Dylan, as depicted in Don't Look Back, is the kind of megastar that can grip you emotionally and intellectually. While their neighbours joined screaming mobs that bayed at the Beatles, Bob Dylan fans listen in rapt silence, taking in every word.

"How many times must the cannon balls fly - Before they're forever banned? The answer, my friend, is blowin' in the wind, The answer is blowin' in the wind."

He inhabits a hallowed quality. Anti-war protesters, educated and disenchanted youth, all see him as their hero. An emblem of hope. Dylan inspired people. Made them feel they could make a difference. Somehow make it a better world.

It was also the Swinging Sixties. Music videos hadn't been invented. In cinema, TV commercials director Richard Lester had kicked off a style of pop musical with the Beatles in A Hard Day's Night (1964). Andy Warhol projected live footage of a band to heighten a live performance (The Velvet Underground and Nico, 1966). Whereas for the opening scene of D.A. Pennebaker's film, Don't Look Back, a deadpan Dylan simply discards one large white card after another. They contain random words from the overlaid soundtrack song, Subterranean Homesick Blues.

That scene has been copied and parodied. Like the kiss-on-the-beach-at-the-edge-of-the-waves in From Here To Eternity, far more people know of and recognise the scene than have ever seen the film. Words are deliberately misspelt. Alan Ginsberg haunts the background as if he's wandered in from another film lot. The scene became one of the first 'music videos'. And the film became one of the early examples of fly-on-the-wall cinema.

Don't Look Back is one of the important movies of the decade for its development of cinema verité, a documentary style with many offshoots but at that point made possible with the new lightweight cameras and sound recorders. These were less intrusive and meant that events could be recorded in a way less staged, the filmmakers having opportunity to follow subjects down corridors or seemingly eavesdrop on conversations.

Don't Look Back follows Bob Dylan through his most iconic phase, dark glasses and leather jacket, on his 1965 UK tour at the height of his fame. (He is about to dispense with a rustic folksy style and upset fans by embracing rock and roll and electric guitars.) It is the Bob Dylan so cryptically emulated by Cate Blanchett in I'm Not There. This is the legend. And the man who became a legend in his own lifetime, constantly reinventing his poetry. He would one day be awarded a special Pulitzer Prize for his "profound impact on popular music and American culture, marked by lyrical compositions of extraordinary poetic power." Not to mention an honorary degree from the prestigious St Andrews University in Scotland.

The follow-the-tour format is a little like In Bed With Madonna. But the immediacy of the film foreshadow movies like Control. Stark black and white photography and a personality that dominates the screen without even trying. Joan Baez (who was near the end of an affair with Dylan) is singing in a hotel room. Dylan looks up with rapt attention (and obvious admiration) for the shy young folk singer Donovan. And clips from his sell-out Albert Hall concert. Throughout – and in sharp contrast to almost everyone else captured in all their bygone sixties primness – Dylan still looks cool and self-assured in his own skin even by 21st century standards. Somehow his image hasn't aged.

There was something almost mystical about Dylan at the time. Press conferences in the film (that would also be re-staged later in I'm Not There) show journalists nonplussed by the youngsters response. News stories marvel at how thousands of well-behaved youngsters are packing concert halls – in essence to listen to several hours of one man's poetry. His lyrics, ranging from poignant stories to stream-of-consciousness collections, were emotionally resonant with metaphors and phrases that could be appropriated to every person's private suffering, every cry of pain behind anti-establishment (and particularly anti-war) sentiments. Dylan never claimed to be any other than a poet and a guitarist. "I got nothing to say about these things I write – I just write them . . . I don't write them for any reason. There's no message." His almost angry 1960s disclaimer in the film will still be uttered almost 40 years later at great length in his Chronicles biography. No-one wanted to believe he was only interested in writing poetry. But his openness and honesty in facing down critics is disarming.

For non-music fans and people not specifically interested in the period, the film has slightly less to offer. Poor definition on many hand-held shots gives a lack of visual elegance. The lack of any voice-over means the viewer has to work out many details themselves. And, while it is a remarkable and very vibrant portrait of an esteemed artists at one of the most famous and influential periods of his career, there are maybe too few songs for fans.

Dylan would go on to win Grammy, Golden Globe and Academy Awards and receive several Nobel Prize nominations for literature. The film stops long before he had achieved such mainstream critical acclaim. It never features him singing the credits song, Subterranean Homesick Blues, or the song from which the title is taken. Ironically, it looks back to a period he himself had abandoned by the time the film was released.

---

5 out of 6 people found the following review useful:
Check out the DVD if you have the opportunity, 8 February 2000

Author: rommiej from Tampa, FL

If you're a Bob Dylan fan, do yourself a favor and rent the DVD version of "Don't Look Back." It includes an optional audio track of commentary from director D.A. Pennebaker and Bob Neuwirth, Dylan's pal and "tour manager" who was along for the ride on the '65 tour of England this film documents. Their thoughts are interesting, often insightful, occasionally hilarious and shed some light on the movie's more esoteric moments. For example, I never realized the extended hotel room scene of Dylan playing the piano was Bob actually _writing_ a piece of music. You'll probably learn something even if you've read all the books (Benson, Heylin, etc.). Oh, and it turns out Albert Grossman _loves_ the way he's portrayed in the movie, according to Pennebaker. Plus there's a fun alternate version of the "Subterranean Homesick Blues" video (which, for the kids out there, was copied in the '80s by INXS for their "Mediate" video) that was shot in a park somewhere, in which Dylan has even less control of the cards than he does in the final cut. Ginsberg is in the background of this one, too.

---

4 out of 6 people found the following review useful:
Masterpiece, 15 March 2009
Author: Michael_Elliott from Louisville, KY

Don't Look Back (1967)

**** (out of 4)

Marvelous and landmark documentary covering Bob Dylan on his 1965 tour of England, which would turn out to be the last time people would see the legend in 100% folk as the next year would see the singer strap on an electric guitar. Since the film was released there's always been some debate on how much of the persona of Dylan here was made up and how much was real. In the interviews I've seen and just knowing as much about him from this period I'd guess that the majority of what goes on here is made up. It seems to me that Dylan is giving a (very good) performance as what a rock star is as we get countless great sequences with the man screaming and shouting but also having fun. The film and Dylan's attitude here has upset a lot of people including Roger Ebert who held a grudge against Dylan up until the Martin Scorsese documentary was released. Many people object to Dylan's treatment of a Time Magazine reporter but I personally don't see anything wrong with it. Reporters were always trying to challenge Dylan so why shouldn't he challenge them right back? Some might even object to Dylan putting down other musicians like Donovan but to me this sequence is just Dylan showing off his humor. The comeback Dylan gives when the reporter asks about Dylan just makes me break down laughing each time I hear it. Not only do we get Donovan here but there's also Joan Baez, Alan Price, Albert Grossman, Bob Neuwirth and Allen Ginsberg of course. As for musical numbers we get quite a few great ones including a passionate performance of "It's All Over Now, Baby Blue" with Dylan jamming away in his hotel room. We get Dylan and Baez doing duets to two Hank Williams songs, archival footage of Dylan's "Only a Pawn in Their Game" and several songs from his shows at the Royal Albert Hall. Perhaps the greatest and most famous sequence is the very first sequence in the movie as we're treated to Dylan dropping the title cards to his "Subterranean Homesick Blues". I think even non-Dylan fans would get a kick out of this if they are wanting to learn some history about music back in this era. Pennebaker does a remarkable job of just sitting back and letting his camera pick up the action.

---

2 out of 3 people found the following review useful:
One of the quintessential rock-umentaries, 11 September 2005

Author: jake4974

It is my understanding this is one of the first, and in my opinion easily one of the best rock-umentaries ever made. This film is about, possibly the most brilliant and enigmatic pop icon in the last 100 years, during one of the bravest and most dynamic phases of his career. An absolutely wonderful film. I understand that every frame needed Dylan's approval before being released. I applaud him too, as this is not the most flattering portrayal I've ever seen. Actually at times he comes off as a genuine jerk, and I am a monstrous (bordering on irrational) Dylan fan. This is an honest look at a brilliant man, without descending into simple glorification or spin-doctoring. The film has the same sort of "this is how it is, take it or leave it" sensibility that I find Dylan to exemplify. An unrefined gem about an unrefined gem.

---

---

Page 1 of 4:

[1] [2] [3] [4]

Add another review

---

Related Links

Plot summary	Amazon.com summary	Ratings
Awards	External reviews	Official site
Plot keywords	Main details	Your user reviews
Your vote history