Films/DVD Asylum

Posted by jamesgarvin (A) on January 22, 2005 at 09:32:53

In Reply to: Ken Burns documentary opinions please; the best and worst posted by grinagog on January 22, 2005 at 06:31:49:

I have seen The Civil War, Baseball, and Jazz. The Civil War was the best. Baseball was good. Jazz was okay. Ken Burns apparently feels a need to emphasize racial inequality in his pieces, and I think begins and ends the focus of his documetaries from that viewpoint. It worked in Civil War, because the war itself composed only a brief period in our history, which made covering it, and the racial issues, which were inexorably linked, easier to cover in a documentary.

I think that Baseball suffered from his focus, which was too large. Should he have spent time on the Negro leagues? Probably. But I think he spent too much time. The problem was that an entire documentary could have been devoted to the negro leagues. Covering both the history of baseball, both the white only and the negro leagues, was too much material for a documentary. The end result was that baseball after, say, Jackie Robinson, was not covered thoroughly, which is a shame because some great players and events were not covered.

Jazz was okay, because, again, there is just so much material to cover for a documentary. To his credit, I do not think that anyone could complete a documentary of the history of Jazz and satisfy everyone. Some performers will be overemphasized, others underemphasized. I felt that my favorite, Coleman Hawkins, was underempasized. But that is just me. I think that he was someone who was probably not familiar with the history of Jazz, and relied upon the knowledge those who would use the project to further their own prejudices. I think the individual has already been mentioned. But if you love Jazz, it is worth a view.