Intolerance
|
List Price: Our Price: $16.21 You Save: $13.74 (46%) Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days Buy Used: from $15.75 (click here) Category: DVD See more DVD releases |
|---|
Buy this DVD movie at online store in your country
Canada
Canada
Movie Reviews of Intolerance
Movie Review: More theory than quality
Summary: 4 Stars
`Intolerance' is made up of four stories: 2 feature length (The Modern Tale and The Babylonian Tale) and 2 shorts (The Nazarene and French Tale). The only story of any worth though is The Modern Tale, which has some truly great images. The remaining tales are all about set and costume design and nothing else. Clearly we can see this would go on to influence other epic picture directors like Cecil B. DeMille. It would be hard to imagine films like `The Ten Commandments' (1956, DeMille); `Lawrence Of Arabia' (1962, Lean); `Cleopatra' (1963, Mankiewicz) or even Lord Of The Rings and Star Wars without it, but because you do it first doesn't necessarily make it good.
What `Intolerance' is remembered for is it's cross-cutting between the four tales. This was a new idea because it's cutting between events thousands of years apart in order to show parallel thematic ideas and not to parallel events. The cutting towards the end speeds up dramatically. All this of course would have a huge influence Soviet montage directors like Eisenstein as well as Pudovkin and Dovzhenko. Welles, Godard and Coppola could also be said to draw ideas from `Intolerance': just see films like Citizen Kane (1941) and The Godfather II (1974), which freely cuts between different periods.
The best thing about this film is the Modern Tale and it's structure, the rest is just epic film-making of gargantuan proportions. The problem I had is that I failed to see how the title `Intolerance' applied to the film. Griffith would have been better to re-release `Birth Of A Nation' (1915) with this title because the previous film clearly had an intolerant message. All Griffith is doing here is trying to dig himself out of a moral hole. So I believe that this is an important film in terms of the development of narrative structure, and therefore a must-see for film students, but not necessarily a good film.
Movie Review: Great..yes...but....
Summary: 4 Stars
Is "Intolerance " a great film ? Of course...who would dare to say otherwise...? But..I found it very hard going to sit through..and I am a fan of silent films. Can anyone please just slap "the dear one"..viewing a film with the devine Clara Bow just 10 years later makes you realize how far women progressed in the mind of film makers...what a breath of fresh air!
Anyway....for all its spectacle and artistic invention the message film "Intolerance" is a big bulky piece of furniture in the living room of movie history...not really enjoyable but "de rigeur" for every film fan worth that name. For all its political incorrectness(that's putting it mildly) "Birth of a nation " is, surprisingly, still a far more enjoyable film than "intolerance"...drenched in reprehensible racism but it still works as an involving story , and so it is much more accesible to modern audiences.
I do know that watching a silent film asks of modern audiences an effort of mind and concentration..but the rewards are many ...at its best it is like enjoying a heavenly piece of classical music or a fine painting....but it can also be escapist fun in truly gorgeous sepia tones.
"Intolerance " however is a sermon....and a long and heavy one at that...you will find the cathedral it is given in vast and overwelming but ultimately uninvolving and cold.
If you are already experienced in viewing silent movies it is a must see film at any rate.
If this is going to be your first silent movie : think again....it may put you off from ever seeing one again. Better start with Clara Bow, Douglas Fairbanks or even a lovely Erich Von Stroheim monstrosity !
Movie Review: A Contradictory Landmark
Summary: 4 Stars
D. W. Griffith established the parameters of success and failure in commercial cinema. If "The Birth of a Nation" represented the pioneering director's breakthrough, "Intolerance" (1916) was his undoing - a costly epic with limited box-office appeal. Griffith's flawed masterpiece influenced the Russian cinema of Eisenstein and Pudovkin through its innovative use of editing and montage, yet unknowingly paved the way for Hollywood filmmakers to create their own "delusions of grandeur." Though uneven, "Intolerance" proved a visually stunning and, at times, fascinating achievement. In terms of spectacle, "The Fall of Babylon" segment was a work of art. "The Mother and the Law" also succeeded as a contemporary, humanistic drama reminiscent of "A Corner in Wheat." If Griffith focused solely on the two stories, "Intolerance" might have surpassed "The Birth of the Nation." Unfortunately, he did not comprehend that less is more. The undeveloped Christ and Huguenot segments could have been jettisoned, thus resulting in a tighter and more controlled drama. Worse still, the director's unnecessary reliance on pretentious, flowery title cards hindered the narrative flow and upset the film's visual rhythm. Griffith now seemed out of touch with his initial audience, who were lukewarm in their response. The contradictory landmark of "Intolerance" encompassed the ambition, excess, folly and occasional triumph that became Hollywood.Movie Review: A larger than life epic
Summary: 4 Stars
This epic film is larger than life. The film maker D. W. Griffith was trying to make a major statement about the human condition. How successful was he? Each viewer will have to decide for himself or herself. This movie came out after the well-know "Birth of a Nation," which put a positive face on the Ku Klux Klan and exhibits racist sentiments. This movie has a far different orientation, suggesting that intolerance has been the bane of human existence from early on.
He attempts to support this claim by juxtaposing four distinct episodes, in each of which intolerance is at the heart of conflict. The earliest (chronologically) is set in Jerusalem and focuses on the crucifixion of Jesus; next was a stunning portrayal focusing on ancient Babylon (one can scarcely imagine the lavish sets constructed for this scene); persecution of the Huguenots in 16th century Paris; the most recent episode occurs in his era and focuses on labor-management strife.
The scenes are separate, but he cuts between them. Sometimes this can be confusing; sometimes it is powerful.
Intolerance tends to win out more often than not, but the emotional impact of the various stories is considerable.
This is a sprawling story, somewhat overblown, probably too optimistic about defeating intolerance. But, all of that said, it is a powerful cinematic statement by D. W. Griffith.
Movie Review: Worth a Watch
Summary: 3 Stars
This movie is long. I'll say it...it's like Titanic long, but without all the glitz and glam of Titanic. Well it did have the glitz and glam, but not in the same manner. Griffth's work is the answer to the critics who critized his most well known worth Birth of a Nation.
Intolerance follows four different story lines. A modern one concerning "do-gooders" and the poor, the fall of Babylon, The St. Bartholomew's Day massacre, and the trial and crucifixtion of Jesus. All of these based somehow on the theme of intolerance for something, most notably that of religious differences.
This movie is not for those who need a lot of plot to keep them interested. It's fairly straightforward. And since it's a silent silm many may be bored by it. But it's something to give a change. It's a classic that shouldn't be missed.