Allegedly, Griffith was reluctant to make social and/or political commentary with his movies, until he made this one (with significant success in public). After that, he decided to go down that route, giving us movies like Intolerance and The Birth of a Nation.
While narrative per se is pretty generic (evil capitalist doing evil stuff), what is biggest characteristic of this movie is that mentioned narrative was not communicated to the viewer through the shots mainly, but through the effective editing and montage. This is something that was trademark of Soviet cinema of the beginning of 20th century, but it seems that it was pioneered by most famous US director of the same era.
Some of the scenes are being freezed toward their colsure, transforming them into paintings, communicating to the audience iconic truths of the social order which is being narrated. Also - influence of Realistic art movement on Griffith is obvious in this piece.
While narrative per se is pretty generic (evil capitalist doing evil stuff), what is biggest characteristic of this movie is that mentioned narrative was not communicated to the viewer through the shots mainly, but through the effective editing and montage. This is something that was trademark of Soviet cinema of the beginning of 20th century, but it seems that it was pioneered by most famous US director of the same era.
Some of the scenes are being freezed toward their colsure, transforming them into paintings, communicating to the audience iconic truths of the social order which is being narrated. Also - influence of Realistic art movement on Griffith is obvious in this piece.