Film Review: Intolerance (1916)

Film Review: Intolerance (1916) | Ecency

(source: tmdb.org)

In 1915 D.W. Griffith wrote the new chapter in history of cinema with The Birth of a Nation. The film, which was the very first true epic in history of Hollywood, was enormous commercial success and is now recognised as groundbreaking achievement that paved the way for further development of film as an art. But it also caused controversies that last to this day, starting with accusations for inflaming racial hatred and condoning violence. Griffith never distanced himself from The Birth of a Nation, but nevertheless felt compelled to answer his critics. He did it in the best and the most effective way he could – by making a film that explicitly preached the cause of peace and tolerance. The result was Intolerance, another great epic that would become the legend of the silent era.

Intolerance is in its form very close to anthology film. It is made of four separate stories spanning roughly two and half millennia in history, each with a subject of tolerance and each connected with scenes depicting Eternal Motherhood (played by Lilian Gish) rocking a cradle, thus symbolising passing of generations. The first story is set in 539 BC Babylon, great ancient city ruled by Prince Belshazzar (played by Alfred Paget); the city is divided between followers of goddess Ishtar and god Bel-Marduk, the latter led by High Priest (played by Tully Marshall) who would betray his ruler and people to Persian army led by Cyrus the Great (played by George Siegmann); one of High Priest’s unwitting helper is young poet Rhapsode (played by Elmer Clifton) who falls in love with The Mountain Girl (played by Constance Talmadge). Second story, set in Palestine 33 AD, recounts the biblical tale of Jesus of Nazareth (played by Howard Gaye) from the Wedding at Cana to Crucifixion. Third story, set in 1572 Paris shows how French Queen Mother Catherine de Medici (played by Josephine Crowell), champion of intolerant Catholic party, talks her son, King Charles IX (played by Frank Bennet) to order to massacre of Protestant Huguenots that would take place at Night of St. Bartholomew; as it happens, Brown Eyes (played by Margery Wilson), beautiful young woman from Huguenot family is to be wed to Prosper Latour (played by Eugene Pallette), while being object of lust by mercenary soldier (played by Allan Sears) who would take part in massacre. The fourth story is set in modern-day America and begins when spinster woman Mary T. Jenkins (played by Vera Lewis) talks her wealthy brother Arthur Jenkins (played by Sam De Grasse) into financially support her “reform”-minded charity organisation; as a result, he cuts salaries of workers in his factory, leading to bloodily suppressed strike during which both The Boy (played by Robert Harron) and The Dear One (played by Mae Marsh) lose their parents and homes and are forced to seek fortune in another city; two of them later marry, but The Boy gets mixed up with gang boss nicknamed Muskeeter of the Slums (played by Walter Long); when Muskeeter gets accidentally killed by his girlfriend The Friendless One (played by Miriam Cooper), The Boy is falsely accused and later sentenced to death for that crime.

Intolerance was unusual film for its time, and not only because of its length (originally around three and half hours, although most versions preserved today are usually half an hour shorter). Griffith offered audience four stories that were separate, but still connected and he underlined it by moving away from conventional linear narration. The plot begins with Modern era segment and then alternates between different segments, with each scene relying on previous one. One example is depiction of hypocritical Pharisees in Jesus segment with depiction of reformist Uplifters in Modern segment, and another can be found near the end, when the race between Mountain Girl’s chariot and Persian army in Babylon segment mimics the dramatic race between train and motor car in Modern segment. The audience was probably unaccustomed for such experiments in 1916, but viewers with modern experience would easily understand it, even without Griffith’s inter titles with author’s commentary that explicitly states how some things haven’t changed through centuries and how some struggles people are facing look the same. Griffith is, however, more effective with clever editing, especially during melodramatic finale.

However, not all segments of Intolerance are of the same quality. Jesus segment is the shortest and the most didactic, introduced probably to silence some of Griffith’s critics by pointing on author’s Christianity. St. Bartholomew’s Day Massacre features fine historic reconstruction, but the story is weak and serves no purpose other than for Griffith to revisit one of the most infamous incidents of religious intolerance in Western history and pay homage to his own Huguenot ancestors. Babylon and Modern segment are much more interesting. Modern segment was clearly inspired by real events in America; Jenkins is modelled after Rockefeller and brutal suppression of strike is inspired by infamous 1914 Ludlow Massacre. In this segment Griffith also used opportunity for social commentary and biting criticism of “reformist” social policies, especially when promoted by women who happen to be old, unattractive and frustrated, in other words, Karens of their day. Griffith in his film explicitly condemns attempts to fight “immorality” with bans of dancing and alcohol, stating that they would in the long run create more harm then good, a view that experience with Prohibition in 1920s proved to be right.

Babylon segment is, however, the most attractive and spectacular part of Intolerance and it is what this film is usually known for. A year after reconstructing tragic tale of US Civil War Griffith has pushed still young Hollywood industry to its limit by recreating distant past in the most spectacular fashion which is still awe-inspiring today and that would have been fantastic to the audience more than century ago. Griffith has built set so enormous that he had to wait years for it to rot away before being able to tear it down in sensible viable way. He used 3000 extras for mass scenes at the streets of ancient city. The battle scenes are even more impressive and unusually brutal for early Hollywood standards, including some decapitations. On the other hand, Intolerance, in tradition that would later be embraced by many sword and sandal epics, uses looser pre-Christian standards of morality as an excuse to plenty of scantily clad or semi-nude nubile women, like in the scenes featuring Belshazzar’s harem.

Babylon segment made Intolerance legendary, but it was also incredibly expensive. There are claims that the budget was 2 or even 8 million US$, which was inconceivably high sum for early Hollywood; most serious film historians think that the sum was significantly lower but it nevertheless created a lot of financial problems for Griffith and his studio. Intolerance is often described as one of first big flops in Hollywood history, but this is a myth. The film actually had very good box office and it managed to pay itself after few years of distribution, with Griffith re-editing film and showing it in separate parts in order to bring audience still unwilling to sit in theatre for more than three hours. Griffith would continue his career and remain one of the most respected and highly influential personalities of world cinema well into 1920s. Intolerance later became his magnum opus, unburdened by political controversies of his previous film and, as such, was recognised in 1952 in first Sight & Sound poll as one of the 13 best films ever made. All cinephiles who truly appreciate art of cinema and its history are likely to agree with such decision.

RATING: 7/10 (+++)