Rating: 
Summary: A Burns-Eye View
Review: There is a wonderful collection of archival footage, vintage recordings, and rare photgraphs in this series, enough to overcome Burns' ponderous, pendantic approach to the subject matter. Unlike others, I relished the inclusion of Wynton Marsalis: sure, he's no historian, and when he relates stories about Armstrong, Ellington, and Bechet, you can't help but feel that Stanley Crouch is standing off camera, telling him what to say, but his joy for the music and his technical appreciation of the performances are unmatched. His enthusiasm is infectious and lively: much like Shelby Foote or Buck Leonard in earlier Burns efforts, Marsalis brings life and light to the proceedings. It's interesting that Burns singles out John Hammond for an unflattering depiction, since, like Hammond, he approaches the subject matter as a self-appointed impressario: the "Ken Burns Discovers Jazz" attitude rankles. I also have a problem with a guy who lives in New Hampshire, the whitest state in the union, deciding that he is uniquely qualified to comment (and comment ad naseum) on race issues in America. There's a real Margaret Mead "Hello Pygmies!" tone in his writing and production. It's far more enlightening to listen to the music and the musicians comment on race (and everything else) than to endure the self-important Burns script. The great moments come when the disembodied voice shuts up, and the music plays. There is a beauty and a brilliance in this music -- as Ossie Davis so eloquently asks, how can anyone who has heard the music of Duke Ellington suspect for a moment that Blacks are an inferior race? -- that cannot be denied. Burns has a great talent for choosing photos that beautifully match the music. That felicitous combination more than makes up for the forced feel of the narration.
Rating:
Summary: BURNS GOES BUST...IT AIN'T BASEBALL!
Review: JAZZ is a huge disappointment...a gelatinous monument to inexperience and quivering reliance on pure research. There is, however, some tremendous historical footage throughout documenting the life and times of 20th Century America. After the completely absorbing qualities of Burns' first two works, one has come to expect better than this. He states at the outset that he doesn't know much about Jazz Music. It shows...and he picked some sadly biased "experts" with strangely slanted viewpoints upon which to rely. While Winton Marsalis performs admirably trying to describe musical motivation it's ironic that, like so many contemporary artists, Marsalis is a flawless technician but lacks the depth of soul of the very people he is trying to explain. As one musician pointed out, "If you don't make any mistakes your not doing the best you can 'cause you're not pushing the edge of the envelope". The series might better have been called "The Rise of the Holy Black Empire According to Ken". Many of the musicians interviewed stated that skin color just didn't matter since the bonds fostered by the music transcended mere pigmentation. Yet, Burns continually plays the race card (in this case note) as if intentionally looking to add to the divisiveness which was already so omnipresent in the piece! His misinformation and omissions are staggering! As one who has been strongly involved with Jazz for more than 40 years, I can say with some authority that Louis Armstrong (pronounced "Louie" not "Lewis") was, in fact, a great entertainer but only a fair trumpet player and interesting song stylist - NOT "The most important, influential figure in the history of Jazz". St. Louis is a town...not a musician! How can one discuss Jazz and innovation without mentioning the likes of Stan Kenton, Bill Evans and in terms of dedication to spreading the music, the great pianist Dr. Billy Taylor? What happened to the incredible Blue Note sound created by Alfred Lion and primarily engineered by Rudy VanGelder between the mid 50s and late 60s? While Burns focused his lens on scenes of chaos and turmoil...feeling threatened by the likes of The Beatles...he missed some terrific musicians and a lot of really great music! Jazz didn't die during the 70s...it evolved and Burns ran out of reference material! Throughout the series, he seeks to promote a number of comparatively mediocre players along with The Greats while managing to ignore some of the even Greater! By the way, while Frank Sinatra was not technically a Jazz singer, Jazz did form his roots. How can he be summarily dismissed with a brief honorable mention as "That skinny singer from the Tommy Dorsey Band?" Are you kidding? Like him or not, Frank became bigger than any other name their production geniuses came up with during the whole 19 hours! Burns should have stuck with a topic he DOES know about. Anyone want to buy my JAZZ DVD set?
Rating: 
Summary: Let's not get too serious, and enjoy this for what it is.
Review: I don't claim to be an educated Jazz fan, nor a fan or critic of Ken Burns. I like music, I admire musicians, I appreciate history. This series takes you into a world that your average college jazz appreciation class would not. Open your ears and mind to a time we won't soon re-visit. Discover the life stories, the mood, the dedication, the real people. I thought this was a great documentary, I learned more than I had ever expected. Maybe some folk were left out, maybe Wynton M. is not your Phd. of Jazz. Still, this is a great road trip and tribute to pioneers of all that is music today.
Rating:
Summary: Pleasantly surprised
Review: Although I am a Jazz-Rock fusion fan, and have been since discovering jazz in college, I was pleasantly surprised by the series up to now. Even though I've only seen the series up to Episode 5(I don't own the DVD set)the rich history and background of Ken Burns Jazz has made me aware of the importance of and significance of Jazz to American History and Americans, period. Jazz before the BE-bop era has been a unknown entity to me, you know, some stuff my parents listened to. But since viewing the Jazz series, heck, I think I'll go out and buy some Artie Shaw and Benny Goodman CDS!And this is coming from a hardcore fusion fan(MAHAVISHNU, WEATHER REPORT, RETURN TO FOREVER, TRIBAL TECH, PAT METHENY). Why am I only giving this series four stars? Well,Ken and Wynton only gave a small mention of the modern era(I read about the subjects covered in other articles)and they left a lot of important people(Stan Kenton, Eric Dolphy etc.)out of the series. But, what the heck, maybe somebody else can fill in the gaps. It would have been nice to see 1 or 2 Episodes devoted to jazz-Rock. But, anyway, thanks, Ken and Wynton(even though I disagree strongly with Wynton's opinions about jazz-rock).
Rating: 
Summary: Another disappointment
Review: Jazz is a truly American art form and an important part of our culture. Internationally, jazz helps to tell the world who we are as Americans. Ken Burns' Jazz is the first attempt I know of to provide a comprehensive view of the development of the art form and its place in our history. But Ken Burns marches to his own drummer, and this program is what resulted. Too "nicely" done, highly selective, fawning, etc. The viewer is left with an incomplete picture, a serious defect in a documentary. Burns had to have ignored a significant number of rich sources. I had hoped, for example, to see something of the New York jazz of the 20s and early 30s. And while I did not expect Burns to make a documentary just for me, I still feel that too mush important background was left out. Louis Armstrong and Duke Ellington are two among many of the really great pioneers, and among my very favorites. Yet, in attempting to deify them, Burns came close to trivializing them. Nevertheless, there is a lot of good material for the viewer. And Marsalis is personable as narrator, even if not a historian. Its hard to recommend, so I have given it two stars for "caveat emptor"
Rating: 
Summary: Major disappointment
Review: The reason I got this on DVD was because I thought the viewer would be able to turn off the annoying commentary and just listen to the music. As far as I can tell there is no way to do this. Almost every time a song begins, some critic begins talking OVER IT, explaining why the song or artist is important. Much of what they say is common knowledge, and even the most interesting comments really only need to heard once. The whole point of getting a DVD is that you can play it over & over again. And DVDs also allow several versions of a film to co-exist on one disc. How hard would it have been for Burns to make a narration-free version? The music is nearly non-stop anyway, and all he'd have to do is linger on the photos/videos (which are amazing) instead of cutting away to the talking heads. Then you would have an uninterrupted series of some of the greatest jazz songs ever ---- a priceless jazz-video collection, instead of this annoying waste of DVD space.
Rating:
Summary: stupid
Review: Jazz documentaries usually fumble regarding the past 40 years, but at least they try. Ken Burns doesn't even bother. He leads the jazz hungry masses down a long, boring and twisted road. 9 out of 10 people will say, "Sure, I love jazz, I just don't know much about it." Is this documentary is supposed to guide them? What a flop! All of the "products" that go along are even worse.
Rating: 
Summary: A perfect piece of American History.
Review: Ken Burns' Jazz is wonderful although many other reviewers had complained about the omissions of certain artists and the last episode which covers the last 40 years in jazz. Well, these accusations are true. Some artists are omitted, and the last 40 years is compressed into one single episode. But before one starts criticizing, one has to understand what Mr. Burns is trying to do with this film. JAZZ is not a documentry of jazz the great art form. It's more of the story of how this art form was born in America, and how this art form affected America. It's a study of post-Civil War American history through the artists, through the bittersweet sounds, through the unforgettable performances. And let's face it, although jazz progressed in the last 40 years, it's social importance and impact had certainly diminished. The sound of America during the last 40 years was not jazz anymore.. rock and pop took over as the mainstream culture. And I believe that's why Burns spent only 1 episode on those years. If you like American history, this is a must-have. If you like jazz, you will find this film incredible as well.
Rating:
Summary: Well-made and interesting, but I didn't need to buy it
Review: I really enjoyed watching this documentary all the way through. It's very interesting and I learned a lot about jazz figures I only had a vague idea about in the past. However, I don't think anyone but hard-core jazz fans needs to OWN this documentary. I bought the series, thinking I'd probably return to it again and, as I have to the Ric Burns "New York" documentary, but I don't feel that level of connection to it. It's certainly worth seeing for everyone interested in jazz, history, race relations, or larger-than-life personalities but I'd make it a rental.
Rating:
Summary: fascinating but incomplete
Review: This was a great but flawed documentary. The primary person being interviewed throughout the documentary is Wynton Marsalis. Strangely enough, according to this documentary Marsalis (or one of his former sidemen) are the only jazz artists to emerge in the last thirty years worth mentioning in any detail as doing anything significant in jazz. Apparently the great fusion pioneers like Chick Corea, Pat Metheny, Weather Report, Michael Brecker are of no significance. Even more traditional jazz artists like Freddie Hubbard and McCoy Tyner get no mention at all. And sorry Arturro Sandoval. Cuban jazz doesn't count either. And apparently big band died after the forties. All the progressive big band sounds of the seventies from Toshiko Akiyoshi and Stan Kenton don't even get a whisper. And sorry Dianne Krall. If you weren't a side man for Ellington or Marsalis, your not in the club either despite the significant popular appeal you are gaining for the art form. I respect and admire Wynton Marsalis but I don't consider him the last word on Jazz history. Obviously Ken Burns does. I still recommend this film however despite its bias if you are interested in music and American history. Just don't expect too much from it on the history of jazz past 1960.
|
