I watched about an hour and a half of Ken Burns tome to World War II, The War, on my local PBS station last night.
It was good. I learned more about the war and the home front. It was well made. Solid.
But I also felt like I had seen it before, perhaps only with slightly less artistry, on about every WWII documentary I’ve ever sceen on the History Channel. And at least those shows had a few breaks so I could go to the bathroom or get a pop from the refrigerator.
I mean, I wanted to love the show. It seemed like the patriotic thing to do. But I could only bring myself to like it.
As I thought about it, I began to figure out why it wasn’t the masterpiece that Burns’ The Civil War was:
- While most of us didn’t live through WWII, we all know someone who did–a father, grandfather, mother, grandmother, uncle or aunt.
We can still talk to The Greatest Generation about their experience.
While nearly 60 years in the past, it is still within the lifetimes of people we know. Compare this to the Civil War, where the last surviors of that time passed in the 1960s or maybe into the 1970s. WWII is still too close in time for myth; the Civil War is not.
- The musical scoring doesn’t fit.
Wynton Marsalis is a wonderful musician and arranger. But his reliance on what seems to be Charlie Parker inspired “cool” jazz just doesn’t work for me. I don’t think jazz when I think about WWII.
I think Big Band.Further, unlike the scoring to the Burns’ The Civil War, the music does not have the same emotional wallop. When you heard the theme to the Civil War, you knew the show was on, that you were going to be moved to tears at times, and that you were in for an emtional hour or two. The scoring to The War is emotionally flat.
- The War has no Shelby Foote to be our guide like in The Civil War.
While the interiews I saw were lusciously shot with interesting and compelling participants both famous and unknown, there was no one on screen like Foote to tie it all together in a historical and cultural context.
The War just seems to bounce from one story to another without any kind of “big picture” of what it all means.
- The War is only telling one side of the tale.
While Japanese and German stories of bravery, cruelty, and suffering are told, it is always in a narrative and not with the use of survivors or even letters.
The Civil War added dramatic conflict by telling the story of the War Between the States from both sides. This tended to humanize the South. We have no such counterpoint in The War. War is hell on everyone–even our enemies.
I suppose this is all nitpicking. The Civil War was a masterpiece of storytelling. Almost anything in comparison–even from Ken Burns–is likely to fall short of that lofty accomplishment. The Civil War was an A++; The War is a B+, excellent by any standards except what we expect from Ken Burns.
Top: Chambois Sector of France. October 1944.
Middle: Director Ken Burns arrives at the “War” Premiere at the Museum of Modern Art on September 17, 2007 in New York City.
Bottom: Rows of airplane propellors, ready for shipment from a Hartford, CT plant. Sign in the background reads “Every Minute Counts.�
[tags] Ken Burns, The War, PBS, World War II, WWII, The Civil War, Shelby Foote, Wynton Marsalis [/tags]