Screen Rant's Mae Abdulbaki reflected: "I could understand both women more clearly than Chalamet's Dylan. Behind his sunglasses and tight body language, Dylan remains elusive.
"The film is very much about an artist who doesn't explain himself, and I have immense respect for that, but it also creates an emotional disconnect in narrative form. It was as though I was watching a series of events that I couldn't bring myself to care about. That's what Mangold risks by keeping Dylan out of reach."
There was a rave review from the Guardian's Peter Bradshaw, who awarded the film five stars and praised Chalamet's "hilarious and seductive portrayal".
"Interestingly the story, despite the classic music-biopic tropes that Mangold did so much to popularise, does not conform to the classic rise-fall-learning-experience-comeback format," he said. It's all rise, but troubled and unclear."
The Times Kevin Maher was far less enthusiastic, awarding just two stars
"There will be audiences who will regard the recreation of Newport '65 as a monumental cinematic event. But for many it will land with a giant shrug of indifference," he noted.
"[Chalamet's] performance is an unhelpful study in blank-eyed lockjaw minimalism, while his singing voice is fine if, occasionally, close to parody (but all Dylan imitators sound like parody)."