I'm · Not · There

Since 2004 the original working title of the film was I'm Not There: Suppositions on a Film Concerning Dylan.

Of course using the word 'supposition' is an acknowledgment of the impossibility of making any sort of definitive film on Dylan and the filmmaker is saying that right up front. Caveat spectator.

This impossibility is exactly the sort of thing people think when they hear about the project - How can they pull this off? Who would play Dylan? - and yet most audiences will expect a typical bio anyway and fault the film when it does not resemble recent musical biopics like Walk the Line or Ray.

The most controversial aspect of the film is that Haynes has cast 6 actors to portray various aspects of Dylan's personality and/or eras of his life. [When he announced this idea back in 2002 Palindromes and Lennon The Musical hadn't been released.] This unconventional approach to casting has gotten the film quite a bit of advance buzz as well as criticism on both movie and Dylan internet forums.

Haynes fans, on the other hand, are looking forward to what he is going to do with this material. If Superstar: The Karen Carpenter Story and Velvet Goldmine are any indication, it's going to defy expectations and take us on a trip.

And unlike his two previous music-centered bios, Haynes has the full cooperation of the subject and rights to the music.

Then there is the "I'm Not There" part. This is the title of a Dylan song. The lyric from the chorus is, But I'm not there, I'm gone.

As the title of the film, it has multiple meanings and stands alone, even with out the 'suppositions' part, as all but a disclaimer that Bob Dylan will not be found in this endeavor.

Just the name of the film, then, has not one but two statements admitting to the impossibility of the project.

It's as if the title disarms criticism with a preemptive strike. Right away we know that Haynes' intention is to explore the various ideas about Bob Dylan that have currency in popular culture and yet he is not willing to commit to being able to do more than speculate about them.

This is true of anything - a film, a book, a painting - 'about' anything really. But specifically, there is no definitive in this film because there is not a definitive Bob Dylan. Even if we break him down into the clichés or archetypes, there are just too many contradictory Dylans. Like young, sexy blue suede shoe Elvis and old white jumpsuit Elvis, both are somehow the real Elvis that negates the other version of him.