Plot so thin, it passes unnoticed.

not horrible nor great

Brilliant and touching

It really made me laugh, but for some moments I was tearing up because I could relate so much.

This is not so much a history of Blue Note Records or even a history of jazz in the Blue Note era, but actually a love note to one man never shown in this documentary for more than a moment or two until the end: Alfred Lion, a German expatriate who left his home, eventually came to New York and co-founded Blue Note in 1939 and ran the label until 1967.True enough, people talk about other things: about the history and venues of jazz, about Thelonius Monk, whom Lion championed despite being told that he had no technique and no technical training (I happen to admire Monk without being able to enjoy him, so I agree with the majority opinion at the beginning). But even when they seem to be talking about other things -- like Kareen Abdul Jabar talking about basketball teams -- it all leads back to Lion.

Do you like Herbie Hancock? How about Ornette Coleman or Thelonius Monk? If these musicians appeal to you, then you will definitely enjoy listening to this film. This documentary is about the record label Blue Note, which recorded some of the most popular modern jazz musicians in America. It's about a white man's ability to sense talent in a black musician. It's about immigration, running a business, and most of all... Jazz! However, it's a pretty boring film, if you're not into jazz music. Visually, it consists of still photos of the musicians and label owners inter cut with talking head interviews of people who had some connection with the label, it's musicians, or the music. But since it's a made for t.v. doc, I guess its main purpose is to be education.In that case, I guess it is successful.

i can't agree with the previous comments. this isn't a concert film it's a documentary of blue note records, its aims, its history and accomplishments, its genesis, its impact, the milieu, and even the nuts and bolts.the idea that people would rather talk about music than play it is silly, are the two mutually exclusive? jazz is played on the radio on at least hundreds of stations at all hours of the day, every day, as well as live at clubs every night. yet there are only a handful of documentary films about it. is there really an annoying glut of jazz docs? does it really crowd out the actual music itself? of course people should listen to the music itself, but a film like this just adds rich context, behind the scenes history, & insight into the characters on the scene that you don't get from listening to the music alone. it can only add to ones appreciation. i thought it was beautiful

A bizarrely and sadly incoherent collection of fascinating clips and interviews, with few whole performances (Cassandra Wilson's appearance an exception for some reason.) The music is wonderful, if frustratingly edited, and the visuals are all over the place with historical and recreated film footage. Why do film makers (and public radio poobahs) prefer talking about music to playing it? If you're fascinated with this great period of American artistic creation (and you should be) do watch it in spite of itself. If you're hoping to learn about it, spend your money on CDs. Better yet, haunt the used record stores and find those original LPs with brilliant cover art and the best liner notes ever.