njmollo Thomas Jefferson by Ken Burns is a reverential documentary but never out of ones mind is that this man of "extraordinary intelligence" deemed the black inferior to the white.This question, probably the most important, is exposed but left unresolved. The only historian to put Jefferson's attitude into any context is a black one.The white historians list Jefferson's many qualities and his desire for "a pursuit of happiness" but each positive quality they list can be juxtaposition with the word "slave".Almost presented as religious scripture, the life of Thomas Jefferson and his ideals are quoted from his documents and letters but it is often forgotten that this man was a politician first and foremost and being so, could easily be classed as a man of malleable and corrupt principles. Is there one politician through out history that was not in some way corrupt?What must be remembered is that when Jefferson uses the word "people"; he is not including the African American. For historians to presume that his carefully crafted words apply to all is a mistake. I for one cannot reconcile the man and his beliefs. To state high principles in published prose yet live the life of a slave owner does not sit easily. His words become far less principled in light of the man's example. Do as I say not as I do.

P Carr First, let me preface my review...Thomas Jefferson was a man that I admired as a kid. When I was young, I read many of his biographies and loved all that he did, particularly the articulate ways the Renaissance Man expressed the nation's desire for freedom and equality. He was my favorite Founding Father. I still remember when I first learned that he owned hundreds slaves, in direct contradiction to his written words. It was shocking, as I discovered that one of my patriotic heroes had such a double standard in his life. Having said all that, I hoped that this documentary would accomplish two things: Unearth the truth, and dive deeper into this intriguing man's life. Both goals were met.Using narration and the perspective of multiple historians, the documentary covers virtually every significant aspect and passion of Jefferson's life, including both common knowledge stories and lesser known events. Among the more interesting lore are his early political years, the vastness of his knowledge, and his late-life correspondence with erstwhile rival John Adams. Controversial issues such as Jefferson's alleged affair and illegitimate children are addressed in a fair way. No definitive conclusion is stated, but all opinions are given, and those thoughts match up with the information I have found. The only thing lacking was a snapshot of Jefferson's religious beliefs. To my knowledge, he was a Deist rather than a true Christian. That point was alluded to, but never elaborated upon.A theme of the documentary was the contradiction that seemed to run through Jefferson's life. The primary instance was his duplicity in being a champion for freedom and equality, yet simultaneously owning hundreds of slaves. To compound matters, Jefferson also harbored complex racist tendencies, although not in a malicious way. Given his time period, I don't know that these pitfalls taint his reputation, but they definitely tint it a darker hue.I won't elaborate on all of the other stories told, but many were new and fascinating. History such as his battle to be elected president, and stories like the fact that his tombstone contains no mention of his presidency, or his financial troubles late in life. All of this information adds up to paint what appears to be an unbiased and accurate portrait of one of the country's great yet flawed men.If you've seen any of Ken Burns's work (Baseball, The Civil War, etc.), then you are familiar with his trademark style of filmmaking that is present here. He once again utilizes the panning of still photographs and paintings, often accompanied by the appropriate sound effects. A slight twist is that Burns also uses many beautiful shots, both still and action, of modern-day Monticello and other places. This is a wise choice, as those pictures, which are recent but also period, add a vivacity to the film. The music was also standard Ken Burns. He picked a handful of tunes, including hymns and patriotic songs, then had them played in a variety of ways to provide a suitable soundtrack. His choice of the hymn "Be Thou My Vision" as a primary theme did strike me as odd though, considering Jefferson's strong Deist beliefs that contradicted traditional Christianity. Aside from the three-hour documentary, there are two short featurettes on the DVD. The first is an eight-minute glimpse inside Burns's filmmaking world. The second is a ten-minute conversation with Burns about his work. Both are definitely worth watching if you like any of his films, as they provide good insight into his processes. If anything, the two featurettes are too short, but worthwhile nonetheless.The downside to this doc was that it didn't suck you in. It felt more like reading a good history textbook. Interesting stuff, but occasionally I zoned out. If you don't have an interest in Jefferson or early American history, then you will probably find the film dry and boring.Even if you are a history buff, I don't know that you need to purchase this DVD. It's good stuff, but I don't feel it can be viewed multiple times. I borrowed it from the library, and that (or a rental) is my recommended route.Bottom Line: This is for history buffs and for people interested in Thomas Jefferson. 8 of 10 from one who had that interest. Others will probably be bored.

ivan-22 Ken Burns and company do an excellent job of giving us the whole Jefferson, warts and all. But one begins to wonder why they didn't do a documentary about someone else of the times, someone who didn't own slaves, didn't deport all Eastern Indians to the West, didn't build a museum for his personal abode, didn't praise the French Revolution in the most immoderate terms and didn't sink deep into debt. Whether he impregnated slave Sally is almost tangential and immaterial. He "did" so many other things! It is often said, one shouldn't judge a historical figure by today's exacting standards. Yet it is also said, by those same people, that time must pass to allow us to objectively evaluate today's leaders. And as if this weren't enough, one also hears these souls denounce "moral relativism". Go figure. But one needn't judge Jefferson by today's "politically correct" standards. One can be content with judging him by his own time's and, indeed, by his very own standards. And, one can emulate his own extremely harsh judgments of fellow founding father Alexander Hamilton. It's disrespectful to the founding fathers not to judge them. They judged each other, and they wanted to be judged. This good documentary is marred by interruptions from overexposed, self-important pundits from all corners of the vaunted political spectrum, a common documentary flaw. Interpretation and opinion should be served on a separate plate - please! A little more verve and humor would have added spice and made for a less reverential opus. Jefferson wrote so many letters. There should have been more quotations from the horse's mouth.

Howard Sauertieg I am a fan of Ken Burns films, but "Thomas Jefferson" is probably the nadir of the talking-head living-history documentary style he favors. In many respects "Thomas Jefferson" is a beautiful film, and it is clearly the work of intelligent people. Ultimately it inspires me to visit Monticello, which is admirably photographed. It fails to answer the question it poses at the outset - whether Jefferson the lover of Liberty can be reconciled with Jefferson the Master of Slaves - and by default suggests that raising this question is the film's chief contribution to Jeffersonian discourse. It's a timely question, but it isn't new. The mood of the film is outrageously depressive, a sedate musical score of American chestnuts underscoring lethargic readings from Jefferson's writings, and images of Monticello, slaves, Jefferson (portrait), historically significant parchments, John Adams (portrait), George Washington (portrait), etc. If this film is anything specific, it is a memorial service for the myth of Jefferson. I don't like it, but I appreciate the film maker's effort and the contributions of scholars involved in the project. A related Ken Burns biographical film, "Lewis and Clark," is similar in tone but less confused and more forthright in its storytelling. See it.