Rating: 
Summary: An impressive, in-depth course on jazz history!
Review: After several days of marathon video viewing, I'm happy (and relieved) that, despite some inevitable imperfections, JAZZ: A FILM BY KEN BURNS is an amazingly broad and detailed exam of the music's history. Despite having read many excellent jazz-related books, I think that video rather than the printed word is the preferred medium to get initial or even remedial exposure to the music, because here you have as the centerpiece the actual audio and video of the art and artists. If you read a book about jazz, you don't have that essential evidence of the music itself, but merely descriptions of it.Why buy the DVD? There is a minor amount of extra footage. More significantly, the program can be altered so that whenever a piece of music appears, one can display the discographical info. As such, one never has to wonder what they are listening to. Furthermore, the sharpness of the DVD video picture and clearness of the audio is a selling point, particularly when you're looking at vintage photos, videos, and audio that are often not in optimal condition. Plus, with the DVD you can watch the series at your own pace. I might have thought beforehand that a series which takes six hours just to get to Armstrong/Hines' 1928 landmark recording WEST END BLUES might be a little too obsessive. Yet I remained riveted to the television screen as jazz's history unfolded, from Buddy Bolden to Cassandra Wilson. Jazz has a VERY compelling history on many levels--emotionally for one given the periodic mist in my eyes. I would have preferred a bit less commentary over the clips of jazz's great artists, but occasionally Burns does let the music speak for itself. I was impressed that we get to know a lot of the primary artists in a fair amount of detail. The likes of Armstrong and Ellington (but surprisingly not Miles Davis) are followed from the beginning to the end of their lives. My first significant exposure to jazz was in the 1970s, and I believe that if this series has an achilles heel, it is that jazz's impact on contemporary popular music could have been examined, which would have provided younger generations a logical entry point that we can relate to, irregardless of our prior degree of exposure to jazz. Instead, the impression-by-omission left here is that jazz has virtually no ties to contemporary pop culture, which I strongly dispute. I think the majority of the viewers of this program are ultimately going to be those who reached adulthood in the 1970s or later, and there is so much that could have been exposed to these generations to indicate that jazz is not a museum piece, but has significant links to contemporary popular culture. For example, I hear a considerable jazz influence on artists as diverse as Stevie Wonder, Sade, various "acid jazz" artists (particularly in Japan--one of many indications of jazz's global influence), early Earth Wind & Fire, Joni Mitchell, Steely Dan, and countless others. Many will compile their list of JAZZ's omissions (Toshiko Akiyoshi would lead mine). Yet even with these relatively minor quibbles, Ken Burns has done the music a great service with this project. I wouldn't be surprised if this series ignites a substantial increase in interest in the music by consumers who otherwise might have never given jazz music much thought.
Rating:
Summary: clarification to my earlier post
Review: Episodes One and Five are 90 minutes each, Episode Six is 105 minutes, the remaining episodes are 120 minutes each... Enjoy!
Rating:
Summary: "Jazz.. is the soundtrack of America"
Review: A sumptuously rich bite of jazz American pie. Ken Burns succeeds in documenting this impossibly large subject. Both audio and video thoughout the DVD version are beautifully rendered, the aspect ratio is standard TV format. Episode One is 90 minutes in length, the remaining nine episodes are 120 minutes each. Add generous bonus features on each disc and you realize this documentary is a real treasure. A true gold standard, this IS the jazz event of 2001 and will be remembered for many years to come. Enjoy the music!
Rating:
Summary: truly excellent
Review: Having been fortunate enough to be the interactive designer who worked on this particular DVD (the DVD, not the film), I can only say that this documentary is truly excellent. While I already had some interest in jazz, watching this film opened up plenty of new doors and really brought the history of this American music to life for me. Jazz is exciting to watch, informative, and completely engaging, and I would recommend it to anyone who had even a passing interest in jazz music. It's been a great honor for me to have had a part in bringing this great film to DVD. Don't pass this one by.
Rating:
Summary: ken burn's Jazz
Review: I do not like jazz, but this is simply fabulous. It has extra footage that is not in the show. If you love music and/or American History, you must own this.
Rating: 
Summary: An Introduction to Jazz
Review: Ken Burns' epic "Jazz" series, though a great introduction to the music of Jazz, is not ideal for completists looking to see a broad scope of Jazz. It's primary focus is on the giants:Armstrong, Ellington, as well as Billie Holiday, and though the series briefly mentions others, the documentary revolves around these three icons. "Jazz",though great at describing the beginnings up into the be-bop era, skips about two decades worth of Jazz and ends abruptly with the unofficial Messiah of the show, Wynton Marsalis. Burns doesn't describe the fusion era of jazz (i.e. Herbie Hancock and the Headhunters)nor does he describe international forms of jazz such as an all important Latin Jazz. Instead, we mainly view the Jazz scene in New York from the early 1900's to mid 1900's. Brief anecdotes are given by artists who have played with other legendary musicians, scholars and musicologists who try to define the term jazz, and an almost superfluous amount of metaphors from Marsalis. After watching the end of the series, I had felt that Burns represented Jazz in a way that it is almost exclusively an African-American art form and that the only great Jazz musicians are African-American. I feel that this could have created some sort of bias that contradicts the artform, because yes, there is life for Jazz beyond Harlem. Despite some of these flaws, "Jazz" provides a great adventure into the past and it introduces mainstream audiences into an artform that is often overlooked.
Rating: 
Summary: A fine documentary
Review: Contrary to the naysayers, "Jazz" is a fine social history of the music. It is not by any means a dangerous or destructive film. Intelligent people are not likely to be brainwashed by Mr. Marsalis or Ossie Davis, et. al., or to assume that Ken Burns is telling his tale the only possible way it can be told. The sheer effort involved in making this monster of a film, broadcast FOR FREE over public television, deserves the public's approbation. The music is almost endless and affecting, even when you can't hear it very well over the observations of Burns' various talking heads, most of whom have interesting and insightful views to share with us, whether they're "correct" or not. The central episodes focus on the Swing Era, when jazz was nearest to being America's "popular music," and that structural point suggests that "Jazz" should be viewed as a social history of the music, not as a strict history of jazz music. There is a place for serious work of exactly the sort "Jazz" represents, alongside the musicological studies that are already available to interested people. "Jazz" is both entertaining and educational, and deserves at least one attentive viewing by anyone who makes a habit of watching television. Others will probably enjoy it more, and often.
Rating:
Summary: Could have been so much better
Review: I guess it says something that I have gone back and watched Burns' "Civil War" documentary more than a dozen times since I first saw it, and have only watch "Jazz" once since the first time. The Civil War documentary certainly is rife with factual inaccuracies but by & large gets the essential story of the conflict right. "Jazz," on the other hand, treats its subject as though the last 40-50 years never happened. It is as though the Civil War documentary would have lingered over the years 1861-1863 incessantly, then sped through the last two years ("Oh yeah, there were a couple of battles, Atlanta burned, Lee surrendered, the war was over. The end." Something like that) as though they didn't matter. As I found the documentary going into its umpteenth hour and we STILL weren't out of the 1930's yet, I had a bad feeling about where this was going. You would have thought that Louis Armstrong had been annointed as the Jazz Pope and he ruled over the world of jazz for 40 years. In his proper context, Armstrong is very important, but Burns seems positively fixated on him. He dwells on every facet of Armstrong's upbringing & early career. Unless he planned on making a 60-hour documentary, there was no way Burns could hope to do justice to the more recent history of the genre, and sure enough he basically hits the fast forward button once the be-bop era is coming to a close. Personally, I cannot stand fushion jazz, but nonetheless some mention needs to made of a style that was dominant in jazz for almost as long as the swing style, for crying out loud. Also, relying almost exculsively on Wynton Marsalis (doing his best impression of a crochety old man on his front porch, railing at a world that has passed him by) really was not a good idea & imbues the entire documentary with a hopelessly retrograde flavor. I watched it once, and came away disappointed. I watched it a second time, hoping that I could find more to appreciate, but only found that it continued to disappoint. I don't know if it merits any future viewings, and that is indeed a shame, because it is a subject that deserves better treatment than this.
Rating:
Summary: A great visual history for dedicated fan or neophyte
Review: Ken Burns is a man who loves to tell a good story, and his stories always have heroes, tragedies, and reveal something about the heart of the American experience. Just as in his other epic made-for-TV epics THE CIVIL WAR and BASEBALL, as well as a host of shorter projects, JAZZ is a narrative that tells vividly the viewer something crucial about this nation. My conception of patriotism has little to do with the uncritical, jingoistic, flag-waving fanaticism that delusionally imagines that God somehow favors the United States above all other nations (an attitude that drove John Adams stark raving angry). My idea of a patriot is someone who can look at their country truly and accurate, not ignore the shameful episodes, not falsely embellish our virtues, and yet truly see the wonderful things we contribute. Burns is, for me, the consummate patriot. In all of his work he obviously grieves over the shameful racial legacy of our nation, but he exults over what has been achieved despite this.
This is a history of Jazz in America, with a qualification. "Jazz" for Burns means acoustic jazz, as opposed to jazz produced with electric, as opposed to merely amplified, instruments. If one is a fan of fusion or even electric guitar, one is going to find virtually nothing in this series. In fact, the ten two-hour episodes dispense with electric jazz in less than five minutes, and then as what is seen as a lamentable downturn in Miles Davis's career.
JAZZ chronicles the history of jazz from its birth in New Orleans roughly a century ago through its earliest stages to it maturation in Chicago and New York in the twenties and thirties to its influence on the birth of swing through the various Kansas City influences (whether Count Basie's own brand of swing to Charlie Parker) to its eventual breakdown into a host of schools of jazz. The heroes are the obvious ones. Above all, the series follows the story of Louis Armstrong and Duke Ellington, who emerge as the twin magisterial figures of jazz: Armstrong the supreme instrumentalist and vocalist, whose influenced the performing style of everyone who followed, and Ellington who is portrayed not merely as the great jazz composer but also the great American composer (a contention that others besides Burns makes). Nearly as important are a host of other iconic individuals such as the immortal Billie Holliday, innovators like Charlie Parker and Dizzy Gillepsie, the irrepressible Chick Webb, the tragic Bix Beiderbecke, pioneers like Sidney Bechet and Coleman Hawkins, and the marvelous Lester Young. Literally dozens of major and minor jazz figures have their stories told through a wonderful combination of still photography, recordings, readings by actors, and film footage.
The best thing about JAZZ is that it can serve either as a visual treat to established fans of jazz, or as a primer and introduction to those who know nothing about it. Though everyone will in the end have wished that there might have been a bit less on this or that figure, or a bit more on this one or that (surely they could have found a few more minutes for Sarah Vaughan? Or many more minutes for John Coltrane?), no one can say that Burns and his team didn't try.
One of the strengths of Burns's series is his great group of commentators. The single thing that made THE CIVIL WAR so exciting was Shelby Foote's extraordinary contributions. JAZZ also benefits by some great verbal assistance by a first rate group of people. Gary Giddens enlightens nearly everyone he reflects on, as does Nat Hentoff and Stanley Crouch. But the best comments by far, especially in the early years, are those by Wynton Marsalis. He invigorates the series partly through his enormous love of the music, partly by his extensive knowledge of its history, partly through his wonderfully engaging personality and the wise things he has to say, and partly through his ability to illustrate his comments by playing his trumpet. There are also a few interviews with some major jazz figures, though tragically there were far fewer great surviving figures for the filming of this series than when Burns did his baseball series. The only figure from the thirties was Artie Shaw, but as always he provides such intelligent testimony that his contribution was especially desirable. Dave Brubeck contributed, as did Herbie Hancock, but few of their ilk were able to contribute.
It really doesn't matter if you like jazz or not. If you are a patriot in the best and not the worse sense of the word, you will want to see this in order to appreciate better one of the things that makes this nation a great one. I hope that Burns has a few more like JAZZ, BASEBALL, and THE CIVIL war up his sleeve. No one tells the American story better than he does. Here's hoping he is able to tell it for a very long time indeed.
Rating:
Summary: A View from Outside
Review:
I knew nothing about jazz.
Zero. Zip. Nada.
I had heard the word "jazz", of course; and, when my parents forced me to play the electric organ, I (with great difficulty) had to play "In the Mood" for a music exam. In the back of the music book was a piece called "Watermelon Man" by this guy called Hancock; there was something by someone called Duke, I can't remember what it was.
When this series came on, I, as a history student, was aware of Ken Burns' "The Civil War", which had moved me powerfully (probably, again, because I knew almost nothing about that particular war at the time). I therefore tried watching an episode or two.
What I remember most about this series is that it is a drama. That's all there is to it. It is not an attempt to summarise the music. It is as subtly crafted a drama as "The Civil War" was. It is possible to make any subject seem dull - even jazz and the American Civil War. But to make it seem interesting - nay, interesting enough that it remains in the mind as a supreme moviegoing experience - now that is difficult.
One thing I remember from the series is, in one episode, this guy saying that he had bought a Louis Armstrong disc when he was a kid, and listened just to one side over and over for six months straight. Then he turned the disc over - and the first thing on the other side was West End Blues. Which was a masterpiece beyond anything else on the disc, which he didnt know then. (Immediately the viewer is made interested). Then he describes taking it to a music professor, I can't remember where, and he says he played West End Blues for him. The professor said to play it again. He played it again. Then there was a long silence; and the professor says "I think that was the most perfect three minutes of music I ever heard". (By now the audience is gawking: wow!)
BUT - the ingenious thing is: Cut to an image of an old 78 player. What is this? Cut to a closer image of it. Can it be? And YES - we can read the label: WEST END BLUES. Holy Cow!!! Then a hand looms into the frame...the disc begins to spin...a stylus is lowered...
And the entire three minutes of West End Blues is played!!!
Yes indeed - this is truly dramatic bliss. Ken Burns builds up to this point over the preceding couple of shots, in order to bring the viewer almost to a fever pitch.
There is another moment, a little more personal here. I had watched about five episodes of the series, with very little interest in the music, frankly - even in Louis Armstrong - and by the time the swing era came I was drifting - I wasn't paying attention...
Then in the last scene of the last swing episode...an image of an atom bomb (Nagasaki, I think) comes up on the screen...And over the top of this horrible image is a sound I've never heard before - a sound that immediately caught my attention after hour after hour of corny swing tunes. I had never heard anything like this. Images begin to come up on the screen of small nightclubs and saxophone players. The name Charlie Parker is mentioned - never heard the name. A guy called Dizzy looks like a beatnik. The narrator describes in awed tones a great *revolution* happening in jazz. The audience is leaning forward. The sounds grow weirder - hard to define for someone untutored in music - the rhythms are all weird, and harmonies are all over the place. The sound of a saxophone is almost overwhelmingly fast and witty. What is this??!!
And the episode ends. To be continued.
The following week, I waited feverishly for the next episode. A word is mentioned; Bebop. Never even heard of it. But this is the episode that turned me on to jazz. The way it is made, the way the drama is created, and the newness of the sounds - new to ME, too, after hearing bland dance music for the preceding episodes - was stunning. I was in exactly the same position as the people in the 40s. All the jazz I had ever heard was contained in the preceding episodes. It was astoundingly powerful - I could *hear* the revolution, myself, in my lounge room.
I found a new obsession.
To people who already know about jazz, this series is filled with flaws - perhaps even fatal flaws. But to an untutored Australian, who knew zero about the music, it seemed like a pretty darned dramatic experience. In fact, I would be prepared to call it powerful. Maybe even great. I have rarely been so interested in a historical documentary, or so eager to see the next episode. I was humming St Thomas by Sonny Rollins for two weeks straight; I am now obsessively listening to Coltranes "My Favourite Things"; I am now a certifiable jazz fan.
Jazz is such a bitchy and divisive art form nowadays, that any documentary like this is bound to offend 75% of fans. Admittedly, too, I haven't seen the last episode, which supposedly dismisses everything anyone has done since 1967 including Herbie Hancock and Miles Davis' later works. That's a bit off.
But from all that I have seen of the series, I'd like to recommend this series to anyone who knows nothing about jazz; particularly the bebop episodes.
|
