Intolerance

This year marks the 100^th Anniversary of D.W. Griffith’s silent film “Intolerance,” which is oddly enough, the oldest movie I have ever seen. I had never heard of this movie, but I would like to talk about how I found out about it.

One of my former college professors is, like me, a huge film addict. I do admit that he knows “way” more than I do, which would make sense since he is a professor and I am not. I’m not sure if he taught any film courses, but I wouldn’t be surprised if he did. One day, he gave everyone some easy extra credit points by saying to stay back on campus one evening since my college’s theater was going to show this movie. Since it’s a silent film, they actually had a band sitting on stage and playing music while the movie was on. I’m not sure what the original movie was like since I have never gone back to see this movie after that one night. I stayed back since it was an easy extra credit option to get. Now that I have stated that, let’s go on to the review.

“Intolerance,” released in 1916, showcases the incredible work of the great D.W. Griffith, since it didn’t really need so much of sincere art to make sure he combines actors, animals, gymnast and dancers in a combination end result of a classic movie.

It tries to tell four different stories simultaneously, which you could say Griffith pulled off with the assistance of flashbacks, fade-outs and fade-ins. The four stories are made to show that intolerance in different ways have always been around since the beginning of time.

Variety said in there review, “Three of the exemplifications are based upon historical fact, the fourth visualized by a modern melodrama that hits a powerful blow at the hypocrisy of certain forms of up-to-date philanthropy.” The medieval time showcases France when it was under the rule of Charles IX (Frank Bennett), with the fright of being attacked by Catherine de Medici (Josephine Crowell), Jerusalem at the start of the Christian time period, with one or two biblical stories of Jesus Christ’s life, and an idea of the Crucifixion.

Variety mentioned that, “The martial visualizations confined principally to the Babylonian period (about 500 B.C.), when Belshazzar’s (Alfred Paget) army was defeated by the Persians under the military direction of Cyrus (George Sigmann). Words cannot do justice to the stupendousness of these battle scenes or feasts.”

Even though I know that this is a silent movie, it’s actually a great piece of work from one of the best directors of all time. I like how all of the stories intertwine with one another to showcase intolerance throughout time. Griffith really showcased how intolerance still exists to this day, and sadly, that is true. However, it doesn’t mean that we cannot change ourselves to make sure that intolerance can diminish. One person could make a difference.

If you are the type of person who would like to see old movies, particularly ones from the silent era, then you should see this one. It’s a classic, and if I ever get the chance to see this again, I probably would. I give this a recommendation.

Thanks for tuning in on my review of the silent movie that has officially turned a century old this month, even though I missed the actual date it was released. Well, better late than never, as they all say. I’m only a few days late, at least I didn’t review this “really late.” Alright, enough of that, check in this Friday for the next installment of “Jason Bourne Month.”