In Reply to: Re: Ken Burns documentary opinions please; the best and worst posted by EBerlin on January 24, 2005 at 11:00:01:
How to cover the entire history of baseball, with all the personalities, all the issues, such that the viewer actually undertands what happened? I suspect that a narrow focus, and tight control would be required. Hawking may be able to explain physics to me, but I would probably not understand a thing. Why did he not include Mantle? Don't know. I think that his intent was to draw people's attention to the Negro leagues, the quality of the player who played, and the white players who refused to play with black players. Mantle probably did not fit in that discussion. Clearly a lot of time was spent paralelling the two leagues. Which is why Baseball after Robinson felt rushed. But why blame him for that? I learned more about the negro leagues in that film that I knew previously. I was more concerned about content than style.I think that Burns' focus is to educate. Too many people have a problem with that, as though they are working so hard on style, that to make style a backseat to the educational value is wrong. Many complain that Jazz is a bunch of noise, players throwing notes together. Musical diarreah, I believe they call it. His movies are made for the masses, not for the erudite. If they enjoy them, and learn from them, so be it.
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 - jamesgarvin 13:30:52 01/24/05 (0)