In Reply to: Re: Ken Burns documentary opinions please; the best and worst posted by jamesgarvin on January 24, 2005 at 08:18:13:
Can't say much bacause I'm at work, but this is my take.Baseball: too much Burns, not enough baseball. Commentary by experts, but much less from living exponents of the game. Example: Mickey Mantle was alive when it was made, but not included in the film. Does Burns know better than Mantle? I assure you that's not the only lapse, and of course any one lapse may have a legitimate explanation. Five minutes with any Burns film and you can tell he's an absolute control freak.
Jazz: why handle a jazz doc like a civil war doc like a baseball doc? And, if you presume to create the definitive treatment of a vast subject, which "Jazz" absolutely did, and reduce it to the points of view of a few, narrow commentators rather than trying to gather together the much less controllable and messy thoughts of many more creative people, then you have perhaps damaged your subject more than helped it. How much is something *reduced* before it largely disappers?
This is *especially* unforgivable when controversy has stormed for years about your commentator of choice and his unusually conservative notions about what jazz is and should be. It's an amateur level boo-boo.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Re: Ken Burns documentary opinions please; the best and worst - EBerlin 11:00:01 01/24/05 (1)
- Re: Ken Burns documentary opinions please; the best and worst - jamesgarvin 13:30:52 01/24/05 (0)