Ken Burns turns focus to country music

I may be around long enough to get it!

 

Hopefully there will be a nice box set to accompany this series.

 

Too bad he didn't get Buck Owens or Hank Thompson. I hope Garth Brooks doesn't talk too much.

 

One problem I have with Burns is the implication his films are comprehensive and perfectly balanced. To call a documentary Jazz or the Civil War implies it's the be all and end all. And if you're going to affiliate yourself with public television you're already compromised. Plus he vacuums up grant money that could be better used by younger and more enterprising filmmakers.

 

Well, Buck Owens has been dead since 2006 so that might be a little tough to get him.

 

It's pretentious to call something 'Jazz' or 'Baseball' and then not be comprehensive. His docs are so long that they should feature a lot more variety than he offers. Many of his docs go for the human storyline and so he focuses on certain central characters over and over like with "Baseball" he had a few Hall of Famers covered and many of the best ever aren't included.

For the Civil War series he kept focus on the same generals over and over with just a few others mentioned barely while with the "Jazz" series he stops cold at 1970 like that was the end of the world. Then he mentioned some current jazz favs by putting some pics up with their name underneath. I went to see Burns speak and people asked why 'Jazz' ended in 1970 and left out over 30 years and he didn't really answer the question just kind of indicated that it was down in popularity at that point.

Just because jazz lost some popularity by 1970 doesn't mean the history was over. That's part of jazz's history. Anyway, I agree he should have more specific titles. -Don't expect any lost country music heroes being included. It will maybe the top 10 popular names of country only with brief mentions of others.

 

As Virginia Soul/R&B legend 'Mister Wiggles' once remarked: "Uh...son, you sound like an investor."

 

There is also a feature length series being planned by Burns on Henry David Thoreau.

 

No, I just like to think of my opinions as informed opinions.

 

Yeah, but this compromised "old" filmmaker will likely not present the comprehensive Henry David Thoreau story we would all expect and demand from a title like "Henry David Thoreau". For example, I bet it wont including any details regarding his stealing pies from Emerson's window sill. Just what I would a expect from a grant fund-vacuuming tool for PBS.

 

I am actually involved in a film project on Thoreau to be executive produced by Terrence Malick. But I don't want to steer the thread away ...

 

How many documentaries are truly "comprehensive and perfectly balanced?" Even long form ones?

Public TV is compromised. Um, ok. But all other forms of television aren't. Thanks! You learn something fake every day...

 

Jazz could have been 30 hours long, and some aspect of the music would have been given short shrift. It's a deep dive.

My gripe with it is that, with the cutoff being early 1970's, the guitarists who got me into jazz (Metheny, McLaughlin, Frisell, Towner, Scofield, etc.) were left out. In fact, guitarists are not much of a factor at all, if I recall, with not much mention of Charlie Christian, Wes, Jim Hall, Grant Green or many others. But then, some would argue that guitar is nowhere near as important in the music as sax, trumpet, or piano, and that would be a fair point.

Overall, I'd rather have Jazz than not. And I can't imagine anyone else who would have taken it on.

 

Well, in order for him to do it again, he’d had to have done it before.

 

Jazz was that earlier botch.

 

That's two problems.

 

IDK what you meant by fake, but I'll bypass the sarcasm to forward an honest discussion, which would probably be more appreciated by everyone on this thread: most docs focus on an individual or event or entity or are of a scope that can illuminating within the limitations of even a long form doc. I'd give Burns credit for, say, the National Parks doc. But then he takes on stuff like whole genres of music or a sport or, yes, a civil war and then gives his docs a one word title. That's foundational hubris, imo. As far as PBS, I could convey some of my issues with them, but it would become political and inappropriate. The info is out there if you care to look. I'll just say certainly not the venue for someone who professes to be objective and balanced. Mr Burns has created a machine that needs to be fed.

You might disagree with this, but the scepticism is growing and, imo, is justfied
Chronically Overrated: The Ken Burns Effect

Isn't it time for a new kind of documentary anyways? Maybe one that is more immersive, or comprising a timeline with all the interview footage and b roll?

 

I know what you were referring to.

 

Cool, I’ll check it out when I can

 

Yeah, not quite. It would be like cutting off the history of American film at 1990.

 

I thought The War would have had better music if it included Orange, Texas instead of Mobile, Alabama! Lots of Cajun and Texas Swing! As it was, it didn't use enough Country-Western music for me. Roy Acuff was so big that he was named in a Japanese battle charge cry! All I remember hearing was big band music. Loved the Artie Shaw piece!

Side note on The War. One of the featured towns was Waterbury, Connecticut, once the Brass Capital of America. We've stayed in Waterbury a couple of times on our way through to Maine and Canada, and it was sad to see what must have once been a bustling city just run down by industries moving away!

 

All documentaries are by nature opinion pieces of world events, history, or cultural circumstances. Their validity is dependent upon the balance between objective vs. subjective analysis, the degree of factual information, and the ultimate goals of the documentary producers.

I wouldn't try to argue that Ken Burns' work is not deserving of some criticism, but I would argue that his efforts are distinctly notable works of the genre.

Overall, I genuinely enjoy the style, approach, and chosen narratives of his documentaries. Frankly, for the most part, I think they're brilliant.

 

Nope.

It's just the same old "I'm too cool to buy into this" cynicism that tries to purvey an antagonistic response towards a popular phenomenon. The criticisms here are superficial at best.

 

Yet the Baseball Burns series was too centric on teams like the Yankees.