Intolerance

I borrowed "Intolerance" from the library first, since it's rather pricey, at least compared to my other DVDs. Don't even BOTHER with the cheaper versions. The one put out by Image Entertainment is far superior to them, both in image and sound quality (I know, I got a cheaper one by mistake, then got the Image Entertainment one, just like the library DVD).It is most spectacularly done. Here are, literally, casts of thousands. The depiction of Babylon is particularly striking. D W Griffith had an actual 300 foot high wall built,and there are enough people around to make Babylon look brought back to life. You really feel as if you are there. Some of the battle scenes are startlingly gory. You can almost taste the pall of smoke hanging over the city. There is a subplot of a young woman with a crush on the king, who goes into battle as an archer just for him, ending tragically. All very well acted. Breathtaking stuff, here, done in the days when there were no special effects or digitized ANYTHING, in the days before actors unions and monolithic studios.The story of Jesus is equally well done, with some attention to small details. Never before have I seen Jesus look pained at the Pharisees turning away when He greeted them, but they show it here,along with the joy of the newly wed couple when the water is turned to wine, the joy of the forgiven adulteress, and other things. Again, you feel as if you were there, with all the period costumes and authentic looking sets. The acting is also fine here, and the actor chosen to play Jesus is tall, strong looking and carries himself erect, but is neither strikingly handsome nor effeminate of face, so seems more like the "not comely, that man should desire him" Savior spoken of in the Bible. Excellent acting, again.The modern story is well done, too,with enough plot twists to keep you guessing,and the last few minutes are VERY suspenseful. The characters are easy to relate to. I must admit that Griffith's referring to a young man's incarceration (he WAS framed) as being "intolerated away in a jail" as a bit silly, though.The story of the Huguenots is well done, too. The royal court is lavishly decorated, which just shows the more plainly the contrast between the opulent royal lifestyles and the way the Huguenots lived, in their very plain, unadorned houses with plain wood chairs instead of velvet cushioned ones. The slaughter of them is heart breaking, with the implied killing of a baby in its grandmother's arms.Some critics say that not all the stories depicted even SHOW intolerance, but I think they're mistaken. In my opinion, the "modern" story clearly shows the misery brought upon other people by the greed of the "reformer" group, who show blatant intolerance towards people who aren't as "upright" as they are. They are especially opposed to drinking and dancing, and managed to put a stop to both, locally, then open a children's home, where they place the babies and children that they legally snatch from non-upright mothers. The financial needs of the group get so great that their chief benefactor goes to her wealthy brother, who owns an industry, and he cuts ALL wages 10 percent so he can continue to give the group the money they need. This leads to a strike,quite naturally, which is violently put down, leaving some workers dead, and others leave the plant to work elsewhere and slide into poverty. So the intolerance of the "upright" group leaves everyone but them worse off.The story of Jesus,of course, points to the intolerance of the Jewish leaders towards this young, perfect Upstart, and nothing will satisfy them but His death.The Babylonian story shows how the intolerance of one passionate high priest towards others of other religions (including his own king) leads him to treasonously aid and abet a rival king in getting into the city of Babylon and overthrowing it. And the story of the Protestant French Huguenots under an intolerant Catholic king,and queen mother,of course shows their intolerance for the Huguenots, leading to them being slaughtered by the French Catholic soldiers.It's nearly 3 hours long, but well worth it as terrific,well done escapism and historical drama (which most of it is).

D.W. Griffith's "The Birth Of A Nation," filmed the year before "Intolerance," is a much better-known film, but this depiction of four stories, illustrating the intolerance of people for those unlike them throughout history, cuts a wider swath. In many ways it is one of the most remarkable films ever made. I believe that the oft-repeated bromide that Griffith made "Intolerance" to "atone" for the perceived anti-black prejudice and glorification of the Ku Klux Klan in "The Birth Of A Nation" is simply wishful thinking on the part of many liberals. Griffith in fact saw nothing inaccurate or unfair about the earlier film, and made the 1916 blockbuster as an answer to what he perceived as the intolerance of his critics. The acting in "Intolerance" is, of course, somewhat dated (affer all, the film is 91 years old), but the movie nevertheless packs an emotional wallop. Most visually appealing is the Babylonian story, with sets that are jaw-droppingly huge and impressive representing the walls of the ancient city, and various statutes and other structures. The actors in those scenes literally look like ants in the master shots, totally dwarfed by the sets which rival the tall buildings existing today in many cities. As a matter of fact, the Babylonian sequence alone would justify the colorization of this film. It would have to be done with great care, of course, to guarantee that copies of the original black and white work were preserved. But re-photographing every frame of the film to produce a brand-new negative has been done before on other movies. It would be quite a job, but it would be possible. The Babylonian scenes are awe-inspiring in black and white. In color, done properly, and with the new negative cleaned digitally to remove dirt and scratches showing from the old prints, it would be of almost unbelievable grandeur. I hope someone undertakes this project. The world's viewing public deserves it.

(This is a review of the 2002 Kino edition of Intolerance.)This is my first Amazon review ever. In my opinion, which means next to nothing, this is by far the most baffling and awe inspiring silent film ever made. I felt compelled to gloat over the incredible film spectacle at random. A complex melodrama, epic in scope, startling in originality, D. W. Griffith's Intolerance is to cinema as James Joyce's Finnegans Wake is to literature. Fritz Lang's Metropolis was my all time favorite silent and that has now changed. I would highly recommend it to anyone interested in film history or silent cinema. Orson Welles' introduction was stimulating and illuminating. My only gripes are with the transfer quality and the score is a tad dull. Proper care and treatment of this film could make it the greatest piece of film art of the 20th century.

The DVD cover says "Colossal Spectacle" and, if anything, it is an understatement. Films if this type simply aren't made any more at 2 and 3/4 hours it examines the deep subject of man's intolerance to his fellow man through time in four historic settings (Babylon, 1st century Judea, 16th century Paris and "Boom" America in the early 1900's.)The cinematography is excellent and often sumptuous especially Babylon, the largest film set ever constructed and it's staggering "zoom in" sequences. It isn't so much a "Movie" as a moving (in both senses) work of art! Some of the acting, especially Paris and the US is a little "hammy" while some of the performances are tender and full of sentiment, seen well in the many close up shots all of which add to the piece.This version is of good , if not brilliant quality, sometimes the (sub?)titles are barely visible, especially the white on "book background" ones (more expensive "re-conitioned" versions are availible, but in my opinion, a little "rawness with age" is no bad thing and adds context and a certain authenticity.) Overall detail and context are still clear enough but at the very reasonable price paid, one cannot quibble! This staggering masterpiece should be watched by all fans of modern cinema with it's "same old" computer generated effects and formula "acting" and see how it should be done, and how it indeed was done in 1916. The Babylon sequences are simply stunning.

This is one of the great films of history (and I can say that having seen it in film shown on screen by William K. Everson in New York in the 1960s). However, this is a "cheapo" unrestored print, a flickery and often damaged print in which the music bears next to no relation to what is happening on screen at the time. It is better than nothing, but can never be a real substitute for a fully restored version of it. Elstree Hill, as several reviewers have remarked, have done little here. Better this than nothing; however, if a decent restoration were to be found (as with "Birth of a Nation") than I would gladly donate this to Oxfam.

There's a reason why this is so cheap and that is the truly awful quality of the transfer. Companies which ruin films like this should be struck off. This is the third of three Elstree Hill releases I was foolish enough to buy. Do not be suckered in as I was. I also wish Amazon.com would show reviews that pertain only to the product as pictured. The more people avoid these cheapo companies, the more they will buy the quality releases from companies such as Eureka!/Masters of Cinema. These may be expensive, but believe me, they are worth it!

The picture quality left a little to be desired but considering the age and the fact that Hollywood used old films to start fires in some scenes as in the latter part of 'Gone with the wind' it's a wonder it survived at all.

Imagine that Steven Spielberg was no longer directing movies and that WAR OF THE WORLDS would be the one film he is remembered for. Would that be a fair assessment of his career? Absolutely not but that is what has happened to cinema pioneer D.W. Griffith. The film he is remembered for today is the 1915 BIRTH OF A NATION which was the first important American epic. Unfortunately its source material THE CLANSMAN (the film's original title) is a Southern view of the Civil War which glorifies the Ku Klux Klan and is extremely racist (although toned down considerably from the book by Thomas Dixon). Griffith made 34 feature films and over 400 shorts between 1908 and 1931. In the overwhelming majority of these he is a social progressive tackling such issues as poverty, political corruption, worker exploitation and interracial romance. He even made an anti-Klan film THE ROSE OF KENTUCKY back in 1912. I mention all of this because in this current climate of political correctness Griffith is being judged and censured on the basis of one film as opposed to his whole body of work and the damage being done to his reputation is still going on. In the recent Oscar nominated film JUNEBUG, one of the characters is a Southern racist Civil War painter who happens to be named David Wark (the D.W. in Griffith's name).INTOLERANCE, the follow-up to NATION, was the most ambitious and expensive film ever made up to that point (1916) and forever changed the way that movies would be made after it. Because of the lifesize sets of Ancient Babylon and the thousands of extras employed, the movie would cost over $500 million to remake today. Its central theme shows how intolerance through the ages breeds anger, anger then breeds repression and repression breeds more intolerance. Set in four different historical time periods (including then present day 1916), the film shifts back and forth from story to story with ever increasing frequency until it reaches its dramatic climax followed by a fanciful epilogue of what the world would be like if we could only banish our fear and hatred. Virtually every visual film technique you can think of appeared in this film inspiring filmmakers around the world who quickly followed suit. After 90 years it still remains a wonder to be seen. There are several different versions of INTOLERANCE currently available on DVD. This Eureka edition follows Griffith's reissue wishes for the film and has the added bonus of allowing you to separate the four stories so they can be viewed by themselves. AVOID at all costs all the low budget DVDs of this cinematic milestone as they are of inferior visual quality and have uncoordinated sound accompaniment. It's time once again to give D.W. Griffith his due and this is the place to start. Follow this up with his BIOGRAPH shorts and then some of his features such as BROKEN BLOSSOMS or SALLY OF THE SAWDUST and see just what he was capable of. Griffith's wheel of fortune has come full circle a number of times and will continue to do so. That is the measure of a true artist.