 | This  level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Image:Intolerance-1916.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 05:01, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Image:Intolerance-lillian gish.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 06:24, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Why is there no plot summary? all>an class="autosigned">—Preceding unsigned comment added by Jordinho (talk • contribs) 01:39, 7 March 2009 (UTC)an>all>[reply]
This article states that Intolerance caused the bankruptcy of Triangle Film Corporation. This is incorrect; Triangle was the film's distributor and, while it didn't help, Griffith's own production unit Wark Producing Corporation took the brunt of the bankruptcy proceedings in this case. This is further confirmed by the inset contemporary news clipping used in this article. Triangle did go bankrupt but not until 1918 and as a result of Harry Aitken's gradual embezzlement of the company. 05:48, 4 October 2010 (UTC)Pinikadia —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pinikadia (talk • contribs)
There definitely needs to be a section on the two spinoff movies, each of which contains footage that doesn't appear in Intolerance. Both films can be found on the 2013 Cohen version as extras. It looks as if some of the new footage was shot after Intolerance was released, although it's quite possible that other scenes were reinstated in the standalones after having been cut from Intolerance. Major differences in The Mother and the Law include a scene comparing the Uplifters with genuinely tolerant organizations like the Salvation Army (incorporating the Woman Taken in Adultery scene from the Biblical Story), and a scene where the Dear One's baby dies and the Uplifters blame her and not their own neglect. The Fall of Babylon has a new opening scene in which the Mountain Girl is less standoffish toward the Rhapsode, another which curiously mirrors the Dear One's attempt to walk like a prostitute from the Modern story, and the alternative ending, part of which has been mentioned as a DVD bonus scene, where the Mountain Girl survives the battle but is sentenced to death by Cyrus's court until the Rhapsode intervenes and they wearily set out for a life of exile. Much or all of this information, together with production information, needs to be included in the article. I don't know whether the two spinoffs should get their own pages, though they are included in the Griffith article as unlinked items in his filmography.Lee M (talk) 03:48, 30 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
This does not give enough weight to the negative reception it received/still receives. There are contradictions between it being met with "enthusiastic reception" at the premier, yet being a "failure" on release. Despite discussing how the film was in no way an apology for his previous racist film, there is no mention of it again. Did it have any influence on groups such as the Ku Klux Klan like its predecessor, The Birth Of A Nation?Zantarctica (talk) 08:31, 22 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Intolerance was not, however, an apology, as Griffith felt he had nothing to apologize for; in numerous interviews, Griffith made clear that the film was a rebuttal to his critics and he felt that they were, in fact, the intolerant ones.
An apology, in this context, would mean a rebuttal, not an expression of regret. 2A02:1210:2642:4A00:BDE5:B5F4:65C2:AE4 (talk) 07:23, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
