Timothee Chalamet's Oscar-Nominated Biopic Has Found New Fans On Hulu's Top Charts

As some kid from Minnesota once sang, "the times, they are a-changin'." Following its initial theatrical release in December of 2024, Bob Dylan biopic "A Complete Unknown" became available on VOD at the end of February. Then, on March 27th, it was made available to stream on Hulu for subscribers to that service. As of this writing, the film is currently number one on Hulu's top charts, making it the most watched film on the service right now.

Generally, this shouldn't be too surprising at all. Hulu has long had ties with Disney and 20th Century Studios, the parent companies of Searchlight Pictures, which distributes "A Complete Unknown," and most 20th Century/Searchlight releases do well on the service as a result. In addition, the film was a very buzzworthy release, becoming a bit of a dark horse contender during this past awards season. This was especially the case for star Timothée Chalamet, who won Best Actor for his portrayal of Robert Allen Zimmerman aka Bob Dylan at the Screen Actor's Guild Awards (where he gave a heavily talked-about acceptance speech) and was nominated by several other awards bodies, including his second Oscar nomination. Given Chalamet's clout in pop culture, the film's deep bench ensemble cast, its biopic period piece appeal, and its central character being one of the most famous and venerated musicians of all time, it's a given that "A Complete Unknown" would be a big draw.

However, audiences only discovering it after the Hulu release reflects a shift in the industry and audience's watching habits, something which all of us are generally aware of, but is still a sore point. Although "A Complete Unknown" ended up doing fairly well for itself overall — it grossed $134.8 million against a budget of $50-70 million — it wasn't a box office hit, which is further proof that audiences aren't showing up in theaters for movies they eventually end up loving.

It's fair to say that probably no one, not even the filmmakers, thought or even hoped that "A Complete Unknown" would be an "Avengers"-style blockbuster. It wasn't designed to be, nor was it marketed as such. In fact, the marketing campaign it did receive was one that was based almost solely around its prestige and appeal to awards voters, which is an approach that does make sense, given how popular biopics tend to be with that group. Still, it feels like the bulk of discussion around "A Complete Unknown" concerned what the film could do for its cast and crew, and less about the content and appeal of the movie itself.

Perhaps that's the reason why "A Complete Unknown" failed to light up the box office during its initial theatrical release. While the film never outright tanked, it only barely cracked the top 5 during its run, debuting at #4 and never reaching a higher position than that. There are, of course, many elements that factor into such a performance — things that are plaguing the whole of the entertainment industry and are too complex to go into detail here. Suffice to say that, had audiences been better made aware of the film, there might have been more interest. Had there been more interest, the film might have received a bigger release (it only played in 2,835 theaters, just over half of the 4,100 theaters that Disney gave to "Mufasa: The Lion King") and perhaps would've been a bigger hit. 

The fact that "A Complete Unknown" appears to be a genuine hit on Hulu supports this hypothesis, just as it reconfirms a continually troubling truth: thanks to shrinking theatrical windows, audiences are being trained to wait for streaming instead of catching movies on the big screen.

Don't let me be a Dylan-esque contrarian, though. Overall, it's fantastic that more people are discovering "A Complete Unknown." The film is a sterling example of big studio Hollywood filmmaking, no caveat needed. Even though Searchlight Pictures (which, of course, was originally Fox Searchlight before being bought by Disney) is ostensibly the studio's arm for making and/or acquiring independent and speciality films, "A Complete Unknown" feels like the type of movie that classic Hollywood used to make. That might be partially intentional, as co-writer/director James Mangold embraces the 1960s period feel of the film.

Yet the movie isn't some surface-level stylistic exercise or retro tribute, especially when compared to Mangold's body of work. The filmmaker has demonstrated having a keen sense of craft right from his first few films like "Heavy" and "Cop Land," and even his genre work like "Identity" and "Logan" contain a grounded quality that keeps those films' more ridiculous aspects in check. The most concise way to demonstrate what makes "A Complete Unknown" so special is to compare it to Mangold's previous musician biopic, 2005's "Walk the Line." The latter movie, the story of Johnny Cash and June Carter, could be seen as the quintessential film of the '00s biopic trend, especially as it became the basis for Jake Kasdan's parody of the subgenre, "Walk Hard: The Dewey Cox Story." Despite the presence of Johnny Cash, "A Complete Unknown" doesn't particularly resemble "Walk the Line," which is as clear an indication as any that Mangold is a responsible filmmaker (see also: the difference in tone and aesthetics between "The Wolverine" and "Logan").

Despite some negative reviews dismissing it as a conventional biopic, the strengths of "A Complete Unknown" lie in its intelligent, well-crafted yet unobtrusive filmmaking. Mangold is the type of director who knows just where to put the camera when, and isn't one to impose a style on the movie which outshines the other aspects of the film (least of all the actors). In other words, he knows how to make everything work in concert. "A Complete Unknown" is a movie which quietly harbors some fantastic art in it, so while it's a shame that it wasn't a bigger hit upon its theatrical release, at least it's proving to be a movie that won't be quickly forgotten, either.