Ken Burns says the PBS version of his latest documentary, “Central Park Five,” won’t differ much from the version now in theaters.
“There’s a little nip and tuck here and there to get us down [for time] and for obscenities to be removed,” Burns told The Post. “You’d be hard-pressed . . . to tell me what’s missing [from the theatrical version].”
He also said that PBS, which premieres “Central Park Five” on April 16, is putting on a full-court promotional press.
“PBS never has millions to promote anything . . . but they’ve committed a significant amount of paid media resources to this,” he says. “They have a modest media budget and they have been extremely supportive.”
Burns was referring to Tuesday’s court ruling, in which a federal judge blocked New York City attorneys from getting unused footage from “Central Park Five,” which documents the infamous 1989 Central Park Jogger case.
City attorneys wanted the footage as part of their defense in a $250 million civil suit filed by the five men wrongfully imprisoned in 1990 for raping and brutally beating a 28-year-old investment banker in Central Park. “I think we were surprised and obviously very pleased,” Burns said. “I was mystified by the city’s [original] response . . . we contacted them regularly for their comments.”
Burns disputed city attorney Celeste Koeleveld’s assertion that the documentary “is a one-sided advocacy piece.”
“We spent many years contacting [city officials] regularly for their comments,” Burns said. “This is the first film of mine that has no narration, just a handful of internal title cards — which was our way of not being advocates of any kind.
“We bent over backwards to honor the other point of view,” Burns said. “What you’re doing is seeing a group of people crying over spilled milk. Perhaps it was flawed strategy on their part not to give us an interview . . . they hid behind the skirts of an ongoing civil suit.”
The five men convicted in the case had their sentences overturned in 2002, when they were cleared through DNA testing which matched another inmate who confessed to the crime.
“This [documentary] was an attempt to answer two really important questions,” Burns said.
“How could this have happened, and who were these five men who had their humanity denied by leaks to the press about [incidents] we now know were not true.”