D.W. GRIFFITH in Favorite Directors Forum

RSS
Email

0 Points

D.W. GRIFFITH

Author	Comment
son of metaldams	D.W. GRIFFITH	Lead	[-]
Posts: 54 Nov 3 04 10:16 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Tags : None Unless I overlooked it, I couldn't find a thread about D.W. Griffith, and I'm quite surprised by this. To this very day, he remains a controversial figure. As recent as a few months ago, the NAACP were successful in thwarting off a public screening of Griffith's highly controversial BIRTH OF A NATION. 89 years later, BOAN still brings out intense emotions from all different people. Of course, Griffith did much more than BIRTH OF A NATION and unquestionably was a highly influential figure of the movies, perhaps THE most influential. What works have you seen of David Wark Griffith, and what are your opinions of them? HOW OFTEN HAVE I TOLD YOU TO KEEP THE CATS FROM DESECRATING MY GRAVES?
	Remove this ad
Ken Hanke	Re: D.W. GRIFFITH	#1	[-]
Posts: 71323 Nov 4 04 3:04 AM Administrator Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	I'm the arch-blasphemer here. I don't like Griffith much. I've seen a bunch of the shorts, BIRTH OF A NATION, INTOLERANCE, BROKEN BLOSSOMS, WAY DOWN EAST, ONE EXCITING NIGHT, SALLY OF THE SAWDUST, THE SORROWS OF SATAN, and ABRAHAM LINCOLN. I was more impressed by the smaller films, especially SALLY and SORROWS than by the big ones. I admire the attempt of the scope of BIRTH and INTOLERANCE, but find the films amateurishly edited and dramatically wanting.
farnhamscott49	Re: D.W. GRIFFITH	#2	[-]
Posts: 3632 Nov 4 04 9:33 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Oh, Ken...
Ken Hanke	Re: D.W. GRIFFITH	#3	[-]
Posts: 71323 Nov 4 04 12:01 PM Administrator Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	I make no apologies, my dear. I think they're wildly overrated.
son of metaldams	Re: D.W. GRIFFITH	#4	[-]
Posts: 54 Nov 4 04 4:32 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	First, Griffith I've seen: BIRTH OF A NATION INTOLERANCE HEARTS OF THE WORLD BROKEN BLOSSOMS WAY DOWN EAST ORPHANS OF THE STORM About 30 Biograph shorts A lot of people these days do not care for Griffith. Some dismiss outright because BIRTH OF A NATION is undeniably racist, going as far as to not even give his other works, which usually don't approach race, a chance. Others find him to sentimental and highly Victorian, while others find his epics too long and boring. As for me, I love the epics, even BIRTH OF A NATION. Of course BOAN offends me, it actually infuriates me, yet there is no denying whenever I watch it, I am always interested in what I'm watching. Brilliantly staged, wonderful story telling, and great spectacle. INTOLERANCE is even better. For pure spectacle alone, nothing defeats the Babylonian sets and battles, perhaps even to this day. Griffith also got me emotionally involved enough with the modern day characters that I was literally on the edge of my seat upon the first viewing when I was questioning the fate of Robert Harron through that brilliantly edited chase scene. I felt the same kind of emotions towards the end of ORPHANS OF THE STORM. No other director's films have gotten me so emotionally involved like Griffith's. I also like Griffith's sentimental side, as old fashioned as it may be to some. The way Griffith can have lovers meet by mutual care of animals, like ducks or puppies, may seem corny to some, but I feel it's visual story telling that works so well in silent film. Ken, I'd be interested in knowing what you find amateurish about the editing and dramatic elements of Griffith's films. I think he's a wonderful storyteller and am quite impressed by his editing skills, especially in fast-paced chase moments. HOW OFTEN HAVE I TOLD YOU TO KEEP THE CATS FROM DESECRATING MY GRAVES?
Ken Hanke	Re: D.W. GRIFFITH	#5	[-]
Posts: 71323 Nov 4 04 5:38 PM Administrator Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	*Quote:* A lot of people these days do not care for Griffith. Some dismiss outright because BIRTH OF A NATION is undeniably racist My dislike of Griffith isn't grounded in this, though the film is quite appalling on thematic grounds. *Quote:* Ken, I'd be interested in knowing what you find amateurish about the editing and dramatic elements of Griffith's films. I think he's a wonderful storyteller and am quite impressed by his editing skills, especially in fast-paced chase moments. Since we're obviously getting very different things out of the films, I doubt anything I'd say would ring true for you. Some of the things you admire -- his quaintness -- are the very things I deplore. But the editing...well, I've yet to see a Griffith cut that felt precise to me. By that I mean, nearly every edit always seems to me to be something that could have occurred a few seconds earlier or a few seconds later and it would make no appreciable difference. At bottom, though, it comes down to this -- the films almost never engage me emotionally, aren't strong enough thematically to engage me intellectually, and finally rather bore me. The ones like SORROWS OF SATAN and SALLY OF THE SAWDUST where he's constrained by a more studio mentality actually work better for me. The pastoral scenes in SALLY are, for me, the best things I've seen him do and they are very fine.
John Stoskopf	Re: D.W. GRIFFITH	#6	[-]
Posts: 1240 Nov 11 04 6:28 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	When I saw this thread, I knew Ken would have comments. I think I understand where you coming from Ken. I've needed to watch again some of Griffith's films to try and understand them. And it's one of those things where I wonder if it's me that is having trouble understanding them or is it the storytelling? I've found that I'm not really a Griffith fan yet, like Chaplin, I believe he's got his positive place in film history and so I've been trying to catch most of his films. To me "Birth of a Nation" comes off in the first half as a basic attempt at reconstructing the story of the Civil war with some characters telling their story for added drama. Then in the second half, something happens and the story just skews off somewhere into the Twilight Zone and everything just becomes bizzare. I found it interesting from the bizzare point of view. I've gotten as far as "Hearts of the World" -1918- and I like it. "Intolerance" has been another one that I've had to let "grow on me". It helps to know that the entire idea of mixing four major stories into one big film was really just an afterthought and not some great revelation he had, because --it kind of looks that way to me. Don't get me wrong, I still love that tracking shot of Babylon. I'd bet, however, Ken would say one great tracking shot does not make a great film. I am looking forward to seeing some of those other titles that he did which are considered his classics. I still think he was a trailblazer of sorts. But, I too, had an impression that he was first at creating the epic, but one has to take a look at "Cabiria" from 1913 to see he wasn't the first to take a crack at it. In fact, I believe "Cabiria" was an inpiration for him to make something on the scale of "Birth of a Nation". Ken, by all means I'm interested in what you think about Griffith because I found I certainly didn't take to his style immediately. In fact I've found I've needed repeated viewings to help me through the films and that always, like I say, makes me wonder if when I feel I have to do that am I looking too deep? Or am I giving the artist more credit than he deserves by assuming there's more there than I'm seeing the first time around. Still I think he did some pretty cool stuff considering there weren't a lot before him to copy from.
farnhamscott49	Re: D.W. GRIFFITH	#7	[-]
Posts: 3632 Nov 12 04 8:32 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	If all he did -- and he did so much more -- was to bring Lillian Gish to the party that would be enough for me. BROKEN BLOSSOMS, ORPHANS OF THE STORM, WAY DOWN EAST are all gems. The fact that Griffith sought a naturalism to his actors work lifts his efforts high. I'm rather surprised that Ken doesn't respond to them; to me they are pure gold. D.W. Griffith (right) with Billy Bitzer and the little camera that shot his epic films.
Ken Hanke	Re: D.W. GRIFFITH	#8	[-]
Posts: 71323 Nov 12 04 12:22 PM Administrator Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Of all the things I don't think Griffith did so swell, getting good performances is one of them. I am much more impressed with performances given by Gish elsewhere. What is gold to you, my dear Farnham, is sheer torture to me.
son of metaldams	Re: D.W. GRIFFITH	#9	[-]
Posts: 54 Nov 12 04 2:20 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	I am of the thought that Griffith did get great performances from his actors, ESPECIALLY when compared to other feature length films of the era, like the previously mentioned Italian epics and some of the earlier Cecille B. Demille features like THE CHEAT and CARMEN (which each have one good performance, IMO). I think the first half hour of HEARTS OF THE WORLD contains some of the most brilliant acting and character development I've ever seen. Sure, the acting style and many of the sentiments in Griffith's films may be old fashioned, but that doesn't mean they aren't any good (minus the racist sentiment of BOAN, of course). It all boils down to taste, really. I freely admit lots of Griffith's material is very Victorian, and while several people find it nauseating, I find it charming. HOW OFTEN HAVE I TOLD YOU TO KEEP THE CATS FROM DESECRATING MY GRAVES?
Hawkboy	Re: D.W. GRIFFITH	#10	[-]
Posts: 3763 Nov 12 04 3:39 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	I purchased Birth of a Nation because it was $5.00 and I thought it would be very interesting to see it because it's such a first in many ways.... BUT I felt icky buying it at a local store with it's Klan Member front and center on Horse back for the DVD's cover. To make matters worse the check out person was black. I just felt awkward..... I have yet to watch the film. Gregg Check out My DVD collection
	Remove this ad
haevensnacht	Re: D.W. GRIFFITH	#11	[-]
Posts: 346 Nov 13 04 12:58 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	>>>BUT I felt icky buying it at a local store with it's Klan Member front and center on Horse back for the DVD's cover. To make matters worse the check out person was black. I just felt awkward... If you went through all that, the least you could do is watch it. Though, I doubt the score, if there is one, will help it. What did you tell the checkout guy?? "Research..."?
son of metaldams	Re: D.W. GRIFFITH	#12	[-]
Posts: 54 Nov 13 04 1:16 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	The problem with buying a $5 silent film is that you will also get an inferior print in addition to a weak score. The first time I saw Chaney's PHANTOM OF THE OPERA and NOSFERATU was the cheap Alpha DVD and I did not care for them at all due to print and score qualities. When I bought the more expensive Kino DVD's, the superior print quality, beautiful tinting, and good scores helped me to appreciate those films much more. For all you know, at such a cheap price, BOAN might also be run at the wrong speed. I do buy cheap movies from companies like Alpha and Madacy, but never silents. For silents, I buy from companies like Image, Kino, and Milestone. HOW OFTEN HAVE I TOLD YOU TO KEEP THE CATS FROM DESECRATING MY GRAVES?
farnhamscott49	Re: PHANTOM OF THE OPERA	#13	[-]
Posts: 3632 Nov 16 04 7:51 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	The Carl Davis score for PHANTOM is a delight. Earlier organ scores by Lee Irwin and Gaylord Carter are not bad. I prefer the Carter as he uses Gounod for the FAUST scenes, but the full orchestra on Davis' (on the Milestone Edition dvd, I think) is glorious.
haevensnacht	Re: PHANTOM OF THE OPERA	#14	[-]
Posts: 346 Nov 17 04 8:09 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	I decided to give Griffith's Abraham Lincoln another look, it's been awhile and while excruciatingly old-fashioned, I must admit it was an interesting curio. Perhaps because I have a few Lincoln books and a video out from the library (I'm starving for a great president), I found it more interesting than I did when I first saw it. For 1930 I was pretty impressed by the "epic" quality of it. There were some good miniatures and an excellent final shot of the Lincoln memorial. Griffith almost reminds me of a Spielberg. Very sentimental and he seems to direct to go for emotions. Is that a style? He certainly had skill with the camera, and some of the sound was well-attempted (a man being dubbed in the distance yelling orders from his horse comes to mind). The acting is very old-fashioned and protractedly slow. I'm easy on movies, I'll watch it according to style and while I certainly don't prefer this style, it was consistent in every scene. Good movie? 2 1/2 - 3 stars.
farnhamscott49	Re: Griffith	#15	[-]
Posts: 3632 Nov 17 04 8:48 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Well, you are more generous than I. A curio is a good word for it. I find it painfully slow even though I personally find Walter Huston one of the greatest of American actors at the time. (Don't miss the restored DEVIL AND DANIEL WEBSTER dvd this Thanksgiving, perfect Holiday viewing). No, I much prefer the earlier ground-breaker when that little Biograph Studio really was the birth of a new way to dream. I worked diligently on my own musical arrangement for INTOLERANCE because I was unhappy with the scope of what I had heard. I find sequences that have always stayed with me from the silents were often Griffith pieces: Lillian's hand in the water and Barthelmess racing across the ice in WAY DOWN EAST, Lillian turning in dementia while her brutish father beat down the closet door. Even across the span of time some if it still resonates powerfully. And some like AMERICA and ABRAHAM LINCOLN show how over the magic spell was. The torch was not gently passed but Griffith remains a towering figure in the development of flickers to film.
Ken Hanke	Re: Griffith	#16	[-]
Posts: 71323 Nov 18 04 3:55 AM Administrator Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	In all honesty, I like ABRAHAM LINCOLN more than most of Griffith's silents and wish he'd made more talkies. I think they enforced a discipline on him that -- given time -- would have only benefited him.
Erich Kuersten	Re: Griffith	#17	[-]
Posts: 1198 Dec 15 04 6:58 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Yeah, but have you seen the little seen picture... whats it called the one about alcoholism? That's a creepy mess... in a good way. The thing about D.W. was, despite the racist part, he was quite the humanitarian. He was making shorts that brought all sorts of problems to the public eye, including: - Stock market cornering - Cocoa Cola addiction (there was still cocaine in it then) - Old people Starving (before Social Security) - Child abuse (before the child abuse acts) - The hypocricy of the endless commissions for "moral reform" of the time. I rather like his AMERICA and ORPHANS OF THE STORM, which are sort of like BOAN without the racist elements. Yeah, there's still class elements... but even with the Native Americans as I recall, there's good and bad native Americans, and the real evil character is whatsisname Butler.. or Butcher...
Richard Valley	Re: Griffith	#18	[-]
Posts: 54081 Dec 15 04 8:20 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	I think they enforced a discipline on him that -- given time -- would have only benefited him. I think the most bizarre thing I've read on Scarlet Street in the entire five years of its existence is this statement by Ken wishing a discipline had been enforced on a director. If only he felt the same about some of his favorites . . .
Ken Hanke	Re: Griffith	#19	[-]
Posts: 71323 Dec 16 04 3:10 AM Administrator Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Perhaps I should have been more clear, since I was referring to the actual construction of the films -- that dialogue made his editing less ratty.
artlen	Re: Griffith	#20	[-]
Posts: 26 Dec 17 04 3:21 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Cabiria, the Italian epic, prompted Griffith to make Intolerance---and in particular the Babylon section.
	Remove this ad

<< Previous Topic Next Topic >>

Yuku free message boards

D.W. GRIFFITH

D.W. GRIFFITH