For four of the five members of A Complete Unknown’s Oscar-winning sound team, the first true biopic of Bob Dylan was a reunion with the film’s director, James Mangold. Supervising Sound Editor Donald Sylvester, Supervising Music Editor Ted Caplan, and Re-Recording Mixers David Giammarco and Paul Massey had all worked with Mangold on multiple films. Only Sound Mixer Tod A. Maitland was new to the crew.
To say this is a distinguished sound crew is to traffic in understatement. The five of them have eighteen total Oscar nominations and two wins (Sylvester for Ford vs. Ferrari and Massey for Bohemian Rhapsody) among them. Still, biting off the early years of Bob Dylan’s rise to fame and then controversial switch to electric instruments was no small feast. The expectations fans have around a film of Dylan notwithstanding, the film covers the seminal years of Dylan’s career. Everything that came after was impacted by his 1965 performance at The Newport Folk Festival, an event committed to traditional versions of folk music (mostly covers and absolutely no electric guitar). Dylan, standing up to his audience, giving them what they didn’t want, and refusing to comport with the traditions of his heroes speaks to his character and his many contradictions.
Speaking with the five freshly minted nominees, we discussed working with Mangold, the challenge of getting Dylan’s sound right and mastering the film’s chaotic climax at Newport in ‘65.
The Contending: Todd, I will get to you in the second part of this question, but for the rest of you, you all have worked with James Mangold numerous times. What is it that keeps bringing you back to his work? Other than him asking. (laughs).
Ted Caplan: Other than him asking, that does help.
Paul Massey: I think we all love working with him. He changes genre in every single film he does, which is fantastic. Yes, this is similar to Walk the Line, but Ford v Ferrari, Logan, 3:10 to Yuma, they’re all so different. Jim’s a great storyteller and I think that’s one of the big reasons why he can change genres and be so successful. For us, when he takes us along the ride, he’s looking for our input and he’s also looking for spontaneity in the mixes and in editorial so that we can come up with all kinds of different ideas. Nothing ever really gets truly locked down until very close to the end of the process for us. And it’s very creative. He allows us to experiment. It’s always a lot of fun with different types of material.
Ted Caplan: I think one thing is that we understand his aesthetic, and luckily, it aligns with all of us. The first music gig I did with him was 3:10 to Yuma. I also worked on Walk the Line, but on 3:10 to Yuma, thankfully, our tastes couldn’t have been more aligned. We were simpatico and lucky for me because he makes such great things. Every movie has been a challenge and has been so different, but there’s still a guiding principle. Generally, the guiding principle is no bullshit, authenticity, grittiness, texture, character. On the music side, we’ll spend hours talking about a guitar, not about how perfect it is, but about the guitar’s buzz and character and making it feel like it’s played by digging into it. All the words that he uses aren’t about it being perfect, but about it having a voice and having character. That’s been what’s exciting working with him. And I think we all are tuned to that after all these years.
Don Sylvester: I like Jim because he’s the best-looking director out there, and he’s the nicest guy, and he gives me a bottle of scotch every Christmas. (Laughs). That’s why I keep coming back. But another reason is that from the very beginning, he challenged me to be better. He’s one of a kind. There are very few directors, maybe there are I just haven’t worked with them, that actually listen to what you’re doing and actually have an idea in their head of what they want to hear. James will challenge you to create that sound that he hears, but also that tickles his ears. He’s said that many times, “I want something to tickle my ear.” It gives us a moment to actually go beyond what we think is the right sound with a couple of other layers of surprises that make us better editors. He’s always got an opinion on sound. He always has a solution to all the sound problems. They may not be the ultimate solution. He’s just challenging enough that I’m always doing my best, stopping and saying. why does that suck, and do I need something better or something more, or something extra. I do that now, as a matter of course. I just think his aesthetic is really good…And he’s good-looking. (Laughs).
David Giammarco: He’s a great filmmaker. He loves sound, and he definitely pushes us to do great work, better work, all the time. Like Don, it’s the mindset when we’re cutting–what else would help this moment? What helps this scene? On a big movie, a big effects movie, like Ford v Ferrari or 3:10 to Yuma, it can be obvious, but on a movie like this, it’s just as important but in a different way. In 3:10 to Yuma, when the cowboys walk across the street, those feet have to have a gritty character. Then, Johnny Cash and the Tennessee Three walk onto the stage, and Bob Dylan watches them. He wanted those guys to be like cowboys, strong, powerful, walking on stage, and he’s taking that in because it served a purpose to the story. I love working with him for those kinds of reasons. He explains that, too, and everything is about storytelling that’s going on, and sound is so important to that.
The Contending: Todd, this was your first time working with James. Do you concur with these folks, or are they all making this up? (Laughs).
Tod A. Maitland: They just want to do the next one with him, that’s all. (Laughs). I love working with strong directors. I always have. And I find that, exactly as Don said, they make you better. You put in 110%. When you know that you’re working with somebody who has the full grasp of the reins and the direction that they’re steering the ship you believe in, you are going to give everything you can possibly give. Jim is very good about that. And he is so focused on sound. I’ve never had anybody focus on my mix. So when I’m recording on set, I’m capturing all of the isolated mics that we have, and sometimes we had up to 40 of them on this film, but I’m doing that one single track mix that’s going to stay with the movie until these guys have to get their hands on it. That’s what producers are going to see. That’s what the studio is going to see. That’s what everybody’s going to see through dailies and that.
My father taught me in the old analog days when you did have to mix, whatever you captured on that two-track analog was what ended up in the movie. My father taught me that you live and die by dailies. So I learned how to do really good mixes on the fly, which is one thing I think is lost to the younger generation because you can get away without doing it now. But Jim would always comment on my mixes. He would ask for more. I want to hear a little bit more of this. I’ve never had a director steer me in my mixes and give me input. And 99 percent of the time, he was right. He was dead on. I don’t know how he has the bandwidth because he’s watching the actors, he’s watching the camera, he’s watching all the extras. I’ve never seen a director so focused on extras before. But he’s got a huge bandwidth, and he stays on top of it, and he’s very succinct. He’ll tell you exactly what it is and then move on, which is great. I love that.
The Contending: I first discovered James Mangold with his first movie, Heavy, which I adore. You would never watch Heavy and think that would be the guy who would direct Ford v Ferrari, A Complete Unknown, or Logan, right? I think he gets labeled, and I think it’s unfair, with this journeyman tag. Cop Land‘s not a movie made by a journeyman for Pete’s sake. I find that he is the professional director who serves the material, not somebody who tries to turn the material into a reflection of him.
Ted Caplan: 100%.
Paul Massey: Very much.
Ted Caplan: And yet, I would also say the movies are a representation of him, what they’re about and the way that they are straightforward, direct. They’re about people. They’re not about shiny things. They’re not about overstimulation. They’re about grit and story. That’s him. So yes, there aren’t swooping camera moves and crazy visual effects and creatures. He doesn’t care. That’s not what he’s interested in. He is so focused on the faces of the actors, getting those performances, and having us connect to people. Not to things or landscapes but to people. That’s why he’s invisible in those movies; he wants to show off his actors. He wants to show off the story. He wants to show off character. That’s what he’s desperately interested in.
Paul Massey: I remember being on a Q&A panel with him during Ford v Ferrari and someone in the audience said you must really love car racing. Tell us about that. And Jim was like, no, I find it boring, actually. I’m watching it on TV, and there’s the red one, it’s gone into the pits. We’re not quite sure why; it’ll come back out. The white one’s in the lead now. And now, here comes the green one. 9Laughs). It’s all about storytelling and being character-driven for Jim, which is what makes his films memorable and makes them resonate with audiences.
Don Sylvester: I also think it’s interesting what he doesn’t include in some of the films, things that he’ll shoot, which become repetitive. He cuts out all the bulk. He doesn’t have to have a punchline at the end of a scene. When the scene’s over, it’s over, whatever. No one leaves the end of the scene saying, ” oh, that will leave a mark. He’s got the ability to just cut through the bullshit. I spend a lot of hours with him in the ADR stage with his actors, and a lot of times the actors will come and start acting, and he’ll tell them just say it, and they’ll say, oh and they do, and it’s the essence of what he’s getting at. He doesn’t like hyperbole, nor do I. He’s good at telling the stories and not embellishing them, and the effect is cumulative throughout the movie. It gives people a chance to get invested because they’re not having it handed to them on a plate. They get more and more involved in the characters, and that’s how he does it.
Ted Caplan: He’s one of the last vestiges of the 70s filmmakers. You don’t think of Five Easy Pieces, Dog Day Afternoon, Hal Ashby’s movies, or Sidney Lumet movies; look at the style. We’ve gotten used to that being the imprinter of a great director, but there was an era where it was great stories, and I know that’s where his lineage is from and what he gets excited about.
Don Sylvester: I think it’s even obvious with his lens choices. You’ll never see him put a hundred-millimeter lens and shoot across the street to somebody. It’s never going to happen. He will be on the sidewalk with that person and not across the street, shooting through trees. It’s just not him.
Ted Caplan: No drone shots.
Don Sylvester: No establishing shots.
Ted Caplan: He does not care. Does not care–just about people.
The Contending: Was this at all a scary project? This is the only narrative movie ever done on Bob Dylan that wasn’t a documentary other than Todd Haynes’ I’m Not There. I love the movie, but it’s a unique pastiche. A Complete Unknown tries to mark the dates and times of Dylan’s becoming. To tell Dylan’s story over this seminal period of time, from finding his way to figuring out where he wanted to go, it would seem to me that it would carry a sizable amount of responsibility to get that story right. We’re talking about Bob Dylan.
Ted Caplan: I think the terrifying part of it was knowing Jim and how specific he is about music and what it should sound like and knowing how important it was to get Bob Dylan’s music right. I thought oh my god, how are we going to get this? I think it all starts with Timmy (Chalamet) learning to play the way he played and singing the way he sang. All of the character that’s in the movie starts with him doing all that work, getting it sounding right. When I heard Timmy playing and saw that he could do it, it was, okay, this isn’t going to be a huge problem. We’re not going to be fighting bad performances and trying to revoice and auto-tuning and all that stuff that goes with making something terrible. I got a little relieved. I thought maybe we could pull this off. Todd had his experience with him on set. I think we all started to see that this could actually work. But before we saw anything from Timmy, I think we were all thinking, I hope we can pull it off, and will Jim accept anything less than perfect. (Laughs).
Don Sylvester: That’s exactly what I said. We walked in and said how are we going to do this? How is this going to happen? Before they started shooting, we were like is this playback? Is this pre-recorded? Is this live? What’s gonna happen? That was foreboding in many ways. I could just see the problems. But, at the same time, we had just gotten off Indiana Jones, which was a massive endeavor. It was a big ship turning slowly. I felt that this film was better for Jim. I thought this was a better Jim Mangold movie. It clearly reminded me a lot of Walk the Line because of the subject matter. But also, I just thought that the scope was more in his realm, and I felt that he would be able to pull it off. I wasn’t worried about Jim or the story or anything. I was concerned about what Timmy would bring to it. I saw Wonka. I knew he could sing. I didn’t know he could sing like Dylan; nobody knew. But once we actually got the dailies back, I felt that we were in good hands.
Tod A. Maitland: I was there from the rehearsals in the very beginning and even before that. I agree with you. When you do a biopic, you really question how it will go because there are a lot of possible directions. We’ve all seen a lot of bad ones. The first time I read this script, it was one of the most in-depth, chock-full scripts that I’ve read. It was so jam-packed and so well written. It’s an incredibly well-written script. And then came the idea of actually recording it. When the idea came up to really do it all live, it was not scary. It was exciting because we got to record an album, and not just any album. It’s a historic album. It’s a 40-song album that you never expected to do. On every music-based movie that I’ve done before–I’ve done 16 of them–I’ve never done one without playback. I’ve never done one without earpieces or timing mechanisms, and the timing mechanisms translate all the way down through post. Now, they have to stitch all these things together. But Timmy was pretty amazing. He stayed within a couple of beats per minute, I’d say, almost every time. I don’t think he varied much. And just giving me that opportunity to be able to record that in a very complex movie, for me, was great because it really enabled me to use everything I’ve learned in my 45 years. I pulled every trick out of the hat to make this movie work and to give these guys as much material as possible so that they could then pull it all together and keep it for what we all wanted it to be: a real, raw, natural, gritty film. And they did an amazing job keeping it. It’s one of the best post mixes that I’ve heard.
David Giammarco: Like Todd, I was thrilled when I read the script. As a big Bob Dylan fan, I was excited, and in Jim’s hands, I was really excited. If there’s somebody who’s going to make an interesting film about Bob Dylan, it’s going to be Jim Mangold. I also knew that from a sound effects standpoint, even if it was a Bob Dylan movie with all of Bob Dylan’s music, there would be a lot of sound effects and detailed sound work. I was excited from the get-go.
Paul Massey: I wasn’t worried at all about the fact that Jim was taking on Bob Dylan. I mixed Wonka a couple of years ago, so my intrigue was how Timothee was going to change from Wokka into Bob Dylan, which just seemed so 180 degrees opposite. I was just very intrigued to see what he would do with that and how he would pull that off in Jim’s hands, with Jim’s direction, his creativity, and his uniqueness. So, I was never worried about the film per se. Then, when I saw the first cut, I was absolutely thrilled because the performances are amazing, and Jim put his stamp onto it, as I think we all knew he was going to do, as he always does.
The Contending: The climax of the film is the infamous Newport Folk Festival performance where Dylan plugs goes electric, and the chaos of that sequence and the explosive nature of the sound. What’s done fantastically is shown what the Newport Festival was before Bob Dylan plugged in. There’s also this belief that folk artists like Pete Seeger and Woody Guthrie, and the many folk artists that came before, see their music as revolutionary, but many of them were also stuck in tradition. Bob Dylan refused to be stuck. So when you’re doing the mix for this performance where he’s getting things thrown at him, he’s playing louder than at any point of the film, it’s really propulsive. What was that like for this group to flip that switch from acoustic to electric?
Tod A. Maitland: One of the things that Jim did for that scene to create that energy and that chaos was we shot that entire scene as one take. So we had cameras out in the audience, and shot it as one 23-minute take. From the beginning of the the railroad guys’ performance, all the way through the finale, was all one scene. It created that energy, and Jim let it go as if it were a live concert as if it were a performance piece. All of those elements that you were talking about, all that energy and all that chaos came from letting it go and not controlling it, not breaking it down. Of course, we went in to do coverage, but we had already built what the master was, and the master is what really guided it through. I think from post-sound is where they really built the sound. And I think Paul, this is where you really shone in taking and building that whole night up to the climax.
Paul Massey: It was very rewarding, first of all, but it was challenging in that obviously Jim wanted the first electric song to be the loudest thing, the biggest thing, the most impactful music that we’d had in the film up to that point, but I wanted to be careful that we didn’t actually get too loud with that first song so that we had somewhere to go with the next couple of songs that continued to be electric. They had to build. What I ended up doing was not just using level, but using more contrast, really more compression, more EQ, and letting the PA become a real character within the scene so that the colors within the songs actually became heightened and the low-frequency response increased. The songs became richer as they continued rather than just getting louder and louder. How the crowd interacted with that was key in telling how much the crowd was on Bob’s side or not. Fortunately, we all came to the conclusion we should mix that sequence out of order and do it early on in our mix schedule, which was, I think, a great decision so that we could have a go at it, put it to bed, go back to a couple of reels before it and then come back to it, having gone through the entire mix, knowing now where the rest of the mix stood and how we could embellish Newport 65 to be the most climactic sequence in the whole film.
The Contending: There’s an interesting choice that’s made during that scene. There’s a point right before “Like a Rolling Stone” plays. The band plays the first two songs and then Bob turns back to the band and he says, “Play it loud.” I love that line. What I thought was fascinating is I could picture a number of directors doing a closeup of the actor’s face, of him saying play it loud, turning up the volume on the voice and making it a money line. Was there the desire to make it just part of the authentic way that it happened?
Paul Massey: I think it was but again, after “play it loud,” I really did not want it just to get louder. I think a lot of directors would’ve pushed for that. For instance, after “play it loud,” the snare crack there has an insane amount of reverb and pre-delay and PA character to it to heighten the fact that Bob just said that to the band. You don’t need to continue that all the way through the song. It’s just for that moment. Then, putting some hard edges into the instrumentation that come up after that, but again, really trying to steer away from just making those songs get louder and harsher. I didn’t want to drive the film audience away.
Ted Caplan: To your point about it not being a movie moment, I think one of the biggest dangers in a biopic is to turn the film into this hallowed hero story about this genius. I think that was always the concern going in with Bob Dylan. Everyone knows he’s a complicated character. Are we going to treat him like a superhero? And I think, to the benefit of the movie, you could punch into a line like that, and make him seem better or more brilliant than he is. At that moment, he’s saying that, but he’s also conflicted. He wants them to like it. He’s frustrated. He’s not a one-dimensional person. By making him grounded and real, the same way that Joan calls him an asshole, and the way that he gets self-involved, and has arguments with the audience, all those things make the movie different than being some sort of Wikipedia look at all the great things he did, at the end of the movie, you get up and cheer. In the end, he’s conflicted, too. He drives off on his motorcycle, also still struggling with where to go.
A Complete Unknown is playing now, only in theaters.
