Instead, you get a movie that's enjoyable enough, but leaves you feeling like it could have been much, much more.

It’s not bad or unwatchable but despite the amplitude of the spectacle, the end result is underwhelming.

The joyful confection is coated in a sparkly gloss, bright enough to gleam from the darkest, most cynical corners.

Great story, amazing characters, superb action, enthralling cinematography. Yes, this is something I am glad I spent money on.

Six incarnations of Bob Dylan: an actor, a folk singer, Rimbaud, Billy the Kid, and Woody Guthrie. Put Dylan's music behind their adventures. Put each at a crossroads, the artist becoming someone else. Jack, the son of Ramblin' Jack Elliott, finds Jesus; handsome Robbie falls in love then abandons Claire. Woody, a lad escaped from foster care, hobos the U.S. singing. Despite the terrific cast that it has I'm Not There was a huge waste of time and talent, it was boring, dull and even the actors seemed bored out of their own mind definitely not a movie that i would never recommend to anyone to see in the end of the day especially if you loved Ledger's perfomance as Joker . (0/10)

As a disclaimer, I think it is important to say that I do not know a whole lot about Bob Dylan. I thought I knew enough when I started the film, and quickly learned I was wrong. "I'm Not There" excels as a work of art, and an anti-biopic – though it can be very enigmatic at times. The story tends to be hard to follow, as it jumps between characters and aspects of Dylan's work. This is most likely done on purpose, but it makes the narrative difficult to understand. This film is not one that allows the audience to sit back, an relax as they watch. It requires an attentive eye, and allows for an ambiguous definition, as the viewer must come to their own conclusion. After the movie has ended, you have to take the pieces of evidence given, much like pieces of a mosaic, and put them together yourself. In creating your own picture, you may find yourself missing a piece, not liking what you see, or wondering if you've put them together correctly. But that too is purposeful.

I'm not a spoiler type of guy, but i'll mention a lil bit of this and a lil bit of that. First of all the cast is spectacular with majestic performances, and if someone would ask me why i think this way, i have a suggestion... Please watch Scorsese's No direction home- Bob Dylan and watch closely, and then you can see why Cate Blanchett, Heath Ledger and Christian Bale did a fantastic job, pure art. You're not there, you are everywhere... That's exactly how i feel about Dylan. There were a lot of changes in his life, pure chaos, but many of us saw the beauty of that chaos, the spirit of Dylan's believes,lyrics, poetry. "I go where i please". Thank you, i loved it.

This was an audacious concept. Having Bob Dylan portrayed by half a dozen different actors assuming fictionalized personas. As if the real Bob Dylan wasn't full enough of terminal contradictions. But as the producers of this boring, pretentious mess could only paraphrase and not quote directly from any documented reality (what is reality?) except Dylan's songs, of course, the film looses itself in the meanders of absolute arbitrariness and sundry parallel universes in spite of the best efforts of some worthy actors and talents. I lived through the sixties and Dylan's rise to celebrity and I didn't recognize anything of my perceptions of him in this film, probably because either the film or Dylan himself (who knows, right?) is more preoccupied by the flotsam and jetsam of terminal hype, the fame game and/or celebrity rehab scenarios to actually care what a man's music is supposed to mean (if anything). If you ever saw anything worthy in Dylan's music, you'll think twice about his talent after seeing this film. If you always thought he was a fake and a flake, your opinion will not be seriously challenged by this delirious and wasteful Actors' Studio job-creating program.