D.W. Griffith Showdown - The Birth of a Nation vs. Intolerance

[ApertureScience 5]

At some point, one of you mentioned the idea of doing D.W. Griffith's "The Birth of a Nation" vs the Nazi propaganda film "Triumph of the Will."

 

While this would be an interesting episode, I think that a more interesting discussion would be a show-down between Griffith's two epics from the 1910s - "The Birth of a Nation" vs. "Intolerance"

 

That would be a lot of "Homework" though - about 7 hours of pre-episode film watching.

[NathanGordon 1096]

Not much of a fight, Intolerance is better in every regard, and a towering achievement in film.

[Marsellus_H 118]

Not much of a fight, Intolerance is better in every regard, and a towering achievement in film.

 

Yup. End of story. Although, that racist portrayal of Abraham Lincoln has its own charms.

[Ryan L 57]

One might be a better film, but one most assuredly had a far bigger impact on history - and not only in film.

[Philly Cheesesteak 92]

Both films pioneered filmmaking techniques we take for granted today. They both have their place in history, I would think, both merit a conversation. Yes, one's uncomfortably racist, but then remember when Devin went to great lengths to justify the over the top racism of Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom? Maybe he'd be on form to argue in defence of Birth of a Nation's inclusion into the Canon purely on the grounds of historical importance and contributions to the art of cinema.

 

That something makes us uncomfortable to our modern sensibilities now should not necessarily be an argument against something's inclusion. Lovecraft was the crowned king of xenophobes back in the day and his views fuelled the very thing we would come to call "Lovecraftian horror," yes, but would you disqualify the works and contributions of Guillermo del Toro, Stephen King and Junji Ito for their being influenced by the man and his body of work?