"Kane" vs. "Intolerance"

Rating: 6/10 (5 August 2006)

I was disappointed. A work of art should be viewed as a whole. So, besides its ground-breaking techniques, which are brilliant, this film seems to me not to "get together". There is something over-ambitious in it, surpassing the actors' and (don't shoot) perhaps even Welles' possibilities at the time. The story is simple, the characters are sketchy and motivation-lacking, and the "Rosebud" search reminds me of the melodramatic search for the Immortal Beloved in Bernard Rose's film (lame, I know), but fortunately it remained a mystery. With all that hype about the "greatest film ever" (???), it's too easy to be disappointed about "Kane". And speaking of technical aspects, why not equally praise Griffith's "Intolerance" (1916)? Me, at least, I do so.