Jazz - A Film by Ken Burns | Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Charles J. Correll

Jazz - A Film by Ken Burns | Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Charles J. Correll | What Do You Expect From Kenny-Boy?

vhs video:

Jazz - A Film by K...

	Jazz - A Film by Ken Burns Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Charles J. Correll Pbs Home Video, 2001 average customer review:based on 147 reviews view larger image
	for more information click here

The story, sound, and soul of a nation come together in the most American of art forms: Jazz. Ken Burns, who riveted the nation with The Civil War and Baseball, celebrates the music's soaring achievements, from its origins in blues and ragtime through swing, bebop, and fusion. Six years in the making, this "soundbreaking" series blends 75 interviews, more than 500 pieces of music, 2,400 still photographs, and over 2,000 rare and archival film clips. The 10-part musical journey spotlights many of America's most original, creative--and tragic--figures, including Louis Armstrong, Jelly Roll Morton, Duke Ellington, Benny Goodman, Billie Holiday, Charlie Parker, and Miles Davis.

for more information click here

It's not perfect, but its pretty much all we have

I will admit that this series has its shortcomings, however no one else has even attempted to produce anything better. I'm no great lover of Ken Burns, but he did at least attempt to bring the history of Jazz to the masses in some form or another. It's not perfect by any means, but if it can spur the interest of even one person to delve into the music itself then the doc and Burns have done their job. To all the naysayer's I propose that you shut your traps unless you yourselves are planning to raise the money, do the research, conduct the interviews, edit the material and produce a "more definitive" documentary on the history of America's only original art form? And to those morons that claim that this doc is somehow "racist" towards white, you should all just shut the f*** up!

for more information click here

What Do You Expect From Kenny-Boy?

Those people who panned this series, gave it only 1 or 2 stars are absolutley correct: Burns shows his limited, biased view of jazz by virtually ignoring everything that came after 1961.

But, acknowledging the truth of that grave shortcoming, the series still is, for what it is, well-done and entertaining. It's not anything near an objective, comprehensive or even "fair" history of jazz, but -- it's jazz -- and that's all the title says it is.

Consider, too, that the personalities Burns chose, the biographies and sociology of the times he chose to focus in on, all these things must have been very, very hard to resist. While there are many great jazz performers post-1961, do they and the times they lived in compare to the drama and poignancy of what jazz was prior to 1960? Are the personalities as magnetic or as relevant, not just from a musical point of view but from an historical/sociological point of view?

Also, let's not expect too much from Ken Burns in terms of insightful, courageous filmmaking. Far from it. He's PBS' boy: he's their piano player, he just works there -- for PBS and its many corporatist sponsors. So to the degree jazz is radical, subversive and a danger to the status quo, well, Ken Burns or PBS'll have no part of it. They play it safe. Why? Because as Willie Sutton would put it: "That's where the money is."

PBS knows exactly what they're going to get when they sign Burns on. And if you think that "Burns' America" is going to be anything but mythology, then you haven't been paying attention to what PBS has become.

PBS' charter, way back when it started in the late 1960s, specifically stated that it would offer programming not available on commercial television. Now, given that pledge they made back in the 70s, look at how pathetic PBS has become. ... Cary Grant movies. ... Music programs of washed-up rock and roll singers who couldn't get on commercial teeveee nowadays with a car full of gangsters and three brigades of agents ... Biographies of Mario Lanza, Bobby Darin and, get this, 70s talk show host Mike Douglas! (Talk about scraping the bottom of the barrel).

So Ken Burns knew just what he was doing. How wonderful it is for all these "cruise missile liberals" (not a radical bone in their body) talking about race way, WAY after it took any kind of real courage to talk about it. Oh, how they flock to tell us about *past* racial injustices; and how assiduously they ignore current political maladies.

No, Ken Burns in their boy, that's for sure. So, for sure, "Jazz" is highly entertaining, but do I expect Burns, in league with PBS, to do anything more than entertain? Of course not. Burns is a safe liberal and knowing how PBS has caved every time anyone has offered anything to the left of "safe liberalism," what he produces here is simply par for his course: entertaining, arbitrary, ingratiating and sacharrine.

for more information click here

Ken Burns didn't S#@8 about jazz when he did this and it shows

My main issue is that Wynton suggested after seeing Civil Wars and Baseball that Burns should do a series about the only truly American art for that being Jazz (or black music from field hollers to blues etc).Wynton is sort of neo-con about jazz and I am not into totally free jazz or commercial fusion or jazz light.I agree that the innovations after 1964 into atonal free jazz or more akin to avant garde classical like Schoeneberg or Cage.But when covering be-bop into the important "New Thing" that fit politics and culture of time iot was like "Coltrane and Miles had gone into modal jazz but newer ,younger players started an avant garde "New Thing....but wait in 1964 Louis Armstrong had his last big hit with "Hello Dolly".All of the critics were referred to Burns by Marsallis or the themes and emphasis were his own as Burns didn't know what to do but photo research.You've heard this I am sure but in case you haven't there it is.I think Armstrong (and actually Bechet before him to lesser degree) revolutionized everything with the solo in jazz and he and Ellington then Bird and Diz,Monk,and Miles and Trane were the main figures.But jazz is so rich from post beatles avante-garde,the Loft Scene,European players and critics that for as long as it was many voices were left out and that's a shame.
Peace
Chazz

for more information click here