Mormon Cinema
Read the following
article:
“What is Mormon Cinema? Defining the Genre” link: http://search.proquest.com/docview/213623337?pq-origsite=gscholar
Watch the following
video clips:
Discussion
Probably the first question we should ask is whether there
truly exists an LDS cinematic market/genre? Do we have a unique genre of film
that constitutes Mormon cinema? What do you think?
Before answering this question, consider the following
passage from an article in the journal, “Dialogue”:
God's
Army, released in the spring of 2000, was a watershed
moment in the creation of an LDS
cinematic market. There had
been films made by and for Mormons
before, but they usually fell
into categories of proselytizing
videos, faith-promoting Church
history films, straight-to-video
family entertainment, or animated
fare. But God's Army was different. It was explicitly Mormon and
commercial at the same time. It was
an unexpected but exciting
surprise for Mormons to go see a
movie about themselves on a
Friday night, munching down
overpriced popcorn, while Gladiator
was playing in the theater next door.
God's Army was a shift in
how Mormons consumed entertainment,
leading to an explosion
in the LDS film market.
Aesthetically straightforward in its
storytelling, the film had
strong linear character development
typical of a hero myth. The
film was competent in the basics of
film language and audience
expectations, and served up the
expected happy ending, with a
voice-over narration comforting the
audience with a sense that,
"all is well in Zion."
But the film's narrative provided a
way to explore the challenging
aspects of missionary life while still
celebrating what is
"virtuous, lovely, or of good
report" (Thirteenth Article of Faith).
It approached the marrow of Mormon
life, mixing the messiness
with the sacred, unafraid to discomfit
some viewers. In this story,
the missionaries, usually lionized in
Church media, were scaled
down to human proportions and shown to
be just as real as the
people whom they teach. The story
offered a spectrum of characters
that reached toward actual experience
and eschewed Church correlated
image. The film explored issues of
regret, doubt, racism,
abuse, and death, punctuated with
practical jokes, missionary
banter, slamming doors, fights,
miracles, and revelation. This
mixture of sacred and profane showed
the marrow of missionary
work, realistically explicating young
men's first encounter with
the tension between mortality and
divinity.
I’ve also included a clip from the sequel of sorts, “God’s
Army: States of Grace,” which digs deeper into the idea that “Mormon” themes,
set against a backdrop of missionary work, can be transposed to even broader
social and cultural issues. Could we
argue, then, that “Mormon” themes may have a certainly universality? If so, is
it uniquely Mormon cinema, or something else?
Continue to read what was said in the “Dialogue” article,
regarding “States of Grace”:
Expanding beyond an exploration of
missionary life, it is actually
a multi-viewpoint film with a diverse
focus. In addition to the
missionaries, Elders Lozano and
Farrell, several non-Mormon
characters are given equal measure.
Louis is a fallen preacher living
homeless on the beach, hiding from his
past sins. Carl is a
gangster who is extricating his life
from violence while attempting
to keep his younger brother from
making the same mistakes. And
Holly, the missionaries' next-door
neighbor, is an actress who lives
with the regret of a porn film credit
and struggles to bridge the resulting
estrangement from her family. Not
solely about Mormons,
States
of Grace expands the possible underpinnings of
films that
explore religious ideas for a broader
audience, exhibiting an inclusive
outlook. The film explores people's
struggles with grace
and the grim realities of a violent
world, approaching yet again
the mortal and divine in the metaphor
of marrow….
It is revealed that Elder Lozano was a
gang member in his
past; and he is able to build trust
with Carl, not at first because of
a religious message, but because of
the violent culture they have
shared. The story offers the idea that
our sins, as well as our redemption,
can build the needed love in a violent
world or destroy
us completely.
This concept is evident in the
juxtaposition of two visual narratives
central to the film. When Carl is
being confirmed a member
by the laying on of hands, his younger
brother is being murdered
in a back alley by Carl's gangster
enemies. The camera offers
God's viewpoint, looking down at the
newly confirmed member
surrounded by elders, slowly fading to
the scene of a dead
youth surrounded by a gang of
murderers. Even though the visual
analogy is obvious, its power
transcends the moment into a realm
of thoughtful cinema—when someone
dies, it means life for someone
else—reminding the viewer of Christ's
sacrifice….
This complicated mix of death and life
becomes the final
drama of the film. Elder Farrell is
being sent home early because
he spent the night with Holly. He now
faces the austere justice of
his father who had told him, "I
would rather you come home in a
casket than have you come back
dishonored." Filled with the fear
of parental damnation, he locks
himself in the bathroom and slits
his wrists. The dire narrative of a
missionary driven to attempted
suicide is digging deep into the
marrow of Mormon culture, providing
a critique of the perfectionism that
pervades LDS life by
showing the violent end toward which
such a graceless ethic of sin
and punishment tends.
In contrast, the film's final scene
suggests the possibilities of a
merciful ethic, which extends the
power of atonement to everyone,
Mormon or otherwise. At the end all
major characters witness a
live Christmas manger display on a
sunny California beach. A metaphor
for grace, the innocent Christchild,
is literally passed from
one to another. The scene echoes the
redemptive act of passing the
sacrament in Brigham City but is not limited by the bounds of organized
religion, having its effect outside
obedience and ritual.
“Brigham City,” which Dutcher actually produced in between
the two “God’s Army” movies, has an equally but pointed dark side. The
“Dialogue” article explains:
While "all was well" at the
end of God's Army, Dutcher's
next
film was a little messier. Brigham City tells the story of a
widowed
bishop/sheriff in a small, sleepy Utah
town who is thrown into a
crisis, personal and public, as a
series of murders come close to
home. Marketed with the tag line
"Nothing Attracts a Serpent like
Paradise," the film explored the
fragile boundary Mormons put
up to isolate themselves for fear of
the outside world, unprepared
for the fact that evil knows no such
bounds.
The sheriff is led down a path of false
starts and stops while
the death toll begins to pile up. This
tension is brought to a dramatic
apex when the killer is discovered to
be one of his own—his
deputy. The emotional conflict of the
climactic scene is a great
moment of suspense, leaving the
sheriff no other choice but to defend
his life….
Brigham
City shows a significant turning point in the development
of Dutcher's skill as a filmmaker.
Primarily his penchant for
climatic and visceral endings leaves
behind the "all is well" voiceover
in God's Army. After suffering over his decision to kill the enemy,
the sheriff/bishop sits on the stand
during sacrament, clearly
distressed. He refuses to partake in
the sacramental ordinance,
thus revealing his personal feelings
of unworthiness. Unsure what
to do, the deacon passes the bread to
others, but the congregation
refuses the sacrament as an act of
solidarity with the distraught
bishop. The bread and water are truly
seen as the powerful symbols
which they actually represent:
redemption. And the congregation
will not participate in the act of
redemption until they can bring
along the person who needs it the
most, the bishop.
The scene is an emotional tour de
force, reaching toward
peace and mixed with sorrowful
regret. Without voice-over or dialogue
to guide the audience along
comfortably, the scene lets the
audience experience the moment as
part of the congregation.
At this
point, we need to return to our original question, but maybe with a slightly
different spin. Can we really have a unique “Mormon” cinema without pushing our
own cultural boundaries and comfort level? Does a “Mormon” cinema mean that we
have to consider the blemishes and warts, as well as the deeper,
not-easily-answered questions, as Dutcher seems to suggest.
Sadly,
Dutcher created a genre, so he claims, but then found himself moving away, and
then out of the Church. Following “States of Grace,” he created a controversy
when he stated that LDS filmmakers should “stop trying to make movies that you
think General Authorities would like” (as quoted in the “Dialogue”
article). Not surprisingly, he followed
“States of Grace” with “Falling,” which has been described as “the first
R-rated Mormon film.”
How would
you respond to this statement? How would you respond to Dutcher’s philosophical
position? Has he overly narrowed and limited the definition of “Mormon” Cinema?
Having
thought about the question above, think again, considering the final paragraph
of the “Dialogue” article:
In the end, the films of Dutcher are
unafraid to explore this
marrow of experience, where meaning
slips between sacred and
profane.
From the personal conflicts and conversion in God's
Army to the
communal forgiveness in Brigham City, from
crossing
the
ecumenical boundaries in States of
Grace to the tragedy of no
grace in Falling, Dutcher's films explore the
meaning of redemption
rarely
expressed at the cineplex.
Having
explored this serious side (Dutcher’s darker side), let’s consider some other
popular “Mormon” films: “The Best Two Years,” “The Singles Ward,” “The Sons of
Provo,” “The Home Teachers,” “Errand of Angels,” etc.
In your
opinion, how do these films represent “Mormon” cinema?
Consider the
following question: Is there a difference between movies about Mormons and
“Mormon” cinema. Don’t just brush this question off. Could one argue that many
of the movies I just mentioned (e.g., “The RM,” “The Best Two Years, etc.”) are
about Mormons and their experiences, but not necessarily about deeper issues.
“The Home Teachers,” arguably makes fun of the unique quirks in our culture.
“The RM” pokes fun at girls who wait for missionaries (or who don’t) and adjust
to post-mission life by playing on Mormon cultural stereotypes and clichés.
They allow us to laugh at ourselves.
Could we
push the discussion further? At one level, “The Best Two Years” pokes fun at
greenies, learning foreign languages, and weird companions. We can all laugh
about that. It is a movie about quirky Mormons. Yet again, it has the
redemption story built into it—the trainer who has lost his drive and testimony
and is dealing with disruptive issues from home and the fact that his
girlfriend is marrying a former companion. Yet he rediscovers his commitment
and testimony as his greenie humbly and faithfully pursues teaching their only
investigator. The trainer was lost, but now is found, so to speak. Is this
enough of a theme to make it “Mormon” cinema—a film that addresses issues that
help explain the deeper side of the Mormon experience and accompanying issues. Take the
example of “The Work and the Glory.” How would you use it to answer this
question?
Last semester I took a general course here at BYU called Literature of LDS. It is interesting because in that class we discussed what constituted as Mormon literature. We talked about questions such as: Is it Mormon literature if it simply has an LDS author? Or is it Mormon literature only if it mentions LDS principles? After much discussion about what makes something LDS literature in the class, we learned that there is not a cut and dry definition of what constitutes as Mormon literature. What one person may consider Mormon literature another person may consider it to be offensive.
ReplyDeleteJust like the question of what is defined as Mormon literature, the question of what constitutes as Mormon cinema falls under the same category. It is not a cut and dry definition. One person may consider the show "Modern Family" a Mormon cinema (or television production) because there is an LDS character. Others have a stricter definition of Mormon cinema that would say "The Nativity," "The Restoration," "Finding Faith in Christ," and so forth are the only types of movies that can be considered Mormon cinema because it talks about what Mormon's believe.
The definition of what makes something Mormon cinema, varies among everyone in the LDS church. For me I think that LDS cinema can be anything that is done by a member of the LDS church whether or not it discusses principles of the Church. Furthermore, it does not even have to mention the LDS church. An example of this is the movie "Napoleon Dynamite." This movie was created by students at BYU-Idaho, yet there is no mention of the Mormon church in the movie. However, I am sure many members of the church would consider that movie to be a part of Mormon cinema just because it was produced by members of the Church.
I would have to say that certain “Mormon movies” are focused on different audiences. I would say that all are focused towards members of the LDS faith, but some try to reach beyond to others not of our faith. If someone who wasn’t a member watched “The RM” they would have been confused for probably quite a bit of it. Meanwhile something such as “The Other Side of Heaven” could be watched and appreciated by almost anyone. The story is one of faith and enduring, not focused on the tiny specifics we have in our religion, the movie actually doesn’t even say what church Elder Groberg was representing.
ReplyDeleteBut I have this story that keeps coming to mind. I served my mission in Australia and I had a member tell me about when she found a bunch of copies of “Baptists at our Barbecue” at a local variety store. She thought it was funny to find these just for sale to anyone considering how non-religious Aussies were. But then a lady came up next to her and said, “Oh! I love this movie! It’s so funny! But there’s so many Mormons in it.” Now I would not recommend “Baptists at our Barbecue” to someone who wasn’t LDS. But somehow this woman had gotten a hold of it and pulled something from it she enjoyed. So while I feel some movies are made primarily for an LDS audience it doesn’t mean that others can’t enjoy it as well.
I would have to disagree and say that for the most part, there isn’t a big difference between movies about Mormons and “Mormon Cinema.” I looked up the definition of Mormon Cinema and it said, “Usually refers to films with themes relevant to members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints,” it also said that Mormon Cinema is informally termed “Mollywood”—a blend of the word Molly Mormon and Hollywood.
ReplyDeleteI grew up in Mesa, Arizona where Mormon Cinema premiered in movie theaters, similar to Utah. I remember a few instances in which my parents made all of us go to the movies for family home evening to see one of these Mormon Cinema films. I always begged to go see other movies because I totally stereotyped these films as being kind of boring, and typically maybe reflected a “Molly Mormon” (terrible I know!) Now that I am in Utah, I actually love watching films like the RM, and The Singles Ward because I think they totally represent the Mormon college stereotypes—however I do think that films like this are directed to a Mormon audience because their humor is something probably only we would understand, I think other people would just think we are weird.
I think there are 4 genres inside of Mormon Cinema: (1) Funny Mormon Movies directed at Mormon audiences, ex: RM, Singles Ward, Best Two Years, (2) More Serious Mormon Movies directed at Mormons, ex: The Work and The Glory (3) The “Overcoming a Problem, Difficult Situation, or Informative” Movie usually directed by Mormons but directed to both Mormons and non-Mormons, ex: The Saratov Approach, Meet the Mormons, Freetown, and the Cokeville Miracle, (4) Films featuring a Mormon character directed by non-Mormon, ex: The Other Side of Heaven. I think all of these reflect Mormon Cinema because no matter what, they are characterizing Mormons in a good light—they all promote our religion and faith, and they all bring up a deeper issue that is usually stereotyped by others. For example, RM, yes it is a funny movies and pokes fun, but most of the fun they are poking really are bring up the dilemmas associated with coming home from your mission—your boyfriend/girlfriend breaking up with you, being awkward, etc. I love movies like the Saratov Approach and Cokeville Miracle because they show how having faith can protect you and help you in times of crisis. Cokeville Miracle doesn’t refer to Mormon teachings a whole lot, but it makes you feel good about believing in God and believing in religion.
I agree that Mormon themes have a sense of universality. People around the world appreciate wholesome values no matter which religion or group it may come from.
ReplyDeleteAlthough Mormon themes in movies do support universal wholesome values, I do believe Mormon cinema is very unique and can and should be classified in it’s own genre. Mormon cinema is a genre of film unlike any others. It’s not really action, it’s not really romance, it’s not really drama, it’s Mormon. In each Mormon movie I’ve seen, I’ve noticed the same goofiness, similar jokes, similar characters, similar occurrences of people jumping through hoops and going through trials until the movie comes to a close and everyone is happy. Not only are these factors what makes Mormon cinema different, it’s the fact that these films are focused on God, on service, and on families, not on sex, robbing a bank, or the end of the world like a lot of regular contemporary movies.
Although Mormon cinema is generally predictable and homogeneous, there is always an underlying message. I disagree that the movies mentioned in the readings are not only about Mormons and their experiences but also much deeper situations in daily life. I find that the Mormon cinema (“The RM,” “The Best Two Years, etc.”) is much different from Mormon themed films (“States of Grace” or “The Other Side of Heaven.” In the “Dialogue” article, Dutcher makes a point about how films like “States of Grace” about how the film, “Explores people’s struggles with grace and the grim realities of a violent world,” and goes on to talk about gang violence featured in the film. Although this is film is Mormon “themed” rather than explicitly Mormon “cinema”, I don’t believe it could be classified as Mormon cinema as it does not coincide with the goofiness, cookie-cutter characters, and Mormon activities or inside jokes that make Mormon cinema what it is.
There is a stark contrast between “The Best Two Years” and “The Other Side of Heaven.” This stark contrast is due to the two types of films they are. It’s like comparing a comedy genre film to a drama genre film. The comedy genre is comparable to Mormon cinema and the drama genre is more comparable to Mormon themed films. Mormon cinema is always mormon themed but mormon themed films are rarely classified as Mormon cinema because they rarely fit into the classic Mormon cinema model .
In my opinion, "Mormon movies" are directed only to a mormon audience, poking fun at little aspects of our culture and our unique experiences. "Mormon Cinema" is more open to a wider audience, sometimes taking artistic liberty as to how they display the mormon culture in a way that makes is more clear to the general public what is going on. I haven't watched a lot of either "genre," but I can definitely tell a difference between a movie like "Sons of Provo" and one like "God's Army" or "Saratov Approach" or even "The Other Side of Heaven." I don't think Mormon Cinema needs to have all those qualifications discussed in the article, I think it's sufficient if it is about Mormons, has a theme that reflects a truth or belief of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and is open and easily understood by a general audience. I also think to be called "cinema" it better be worthy of that title, and not something like "Sons of Provo," which might be better classified as a parody type movie.
ReplyDeleteThat being said, what I believe makes "Mormon Cinema" it's own genre of film is that it explicitly addresses parts of Mormon Culture in an objective way. It shouldn't be able to be classified as anti-Mormon, but it also shouldn't be a proactive way to try to push the church's ideas or morals on others: it simply focuses on an area or a lifestyle unique to Mormons and displays it as a whole--good and bad. This is seen in God's Army II (I haven't watched it but I watched the end of it since I got curious after reading this blog). Missionary work done the way we do it is certainly unique to our religion, but they seem to display it in a easy to understand, accessible (though slightly overdramatic) way. They don't only show the good that the Elders accomplish, but show some of the terrible choices that they make too, since one sleeps with the girl next door and then tries to kill himself. I wouldn't say those melodramatic moments are typical of the lifestyle, but they highlight things that are, which are that missionaries obey really strict rules to keep them safe, and that if they break them, or break a commandment, they can be sent home, and it dramatized how much guilt an Elder might feel if he got sent home, but also emphasized how sweet the possibility of repentance was. To me, this classifies a genre of "Mormon Cinema" because it is a really unique lifestyle and culture that we mormons have, and it is displayed the good with the "bad" (though dramatized) and presented to a general public.
Because I grew up inactive in the Church, my experience with “Mormon cinema” is very limited. I do, however, remember watching “The Home Teachers” with my dad. Although I’m sure that I didn’t understand the cultural quirks that make the film so funny, I still remember that I laughed a lot. Personally, it was interesting to watch all the trailers and clips from other films in the Mormon cinema genre. From what I saw, Mormon cinema is different from the clips and films the Church produces. Church videos are part of the Church’s missionary effort and are almost always positive, respectful, and serious. Films from Mormon cinema, on the other hand, seek more to entertain and are funny, occasionally irreverent, and touch on some sensitive matters (like those in the trailer from “God’s Army 2”). Nevertheless, I believe that the films in Mormon cinema do have underlying messages that center around LDS doctrine. One that seems to reoccur frequently is that of redemption. This is a universal message that can apply to any imperfect human being (in other words, everyone) and thus Mormon cinema has an appeal to those outside the Church as well.
ReplyDeleteI thought that Dutcher’s statement about how LDS filmmakers need to stop making films that the General Authorities would like was interesting. While I see the value in bringing up serious cultural issues that need addressing, I can also understand why that would be a negative thing in film. And I think it goes beyond simply making a film that the general authorities would approve of. I think what Dutcher failed to realize is that there is always the possibility that a non-LDS person might watch a film from Mormon cinema.
LDS hat off, if I watched God’s Army 2 and saw a fornicating Mormon missionary try to commit suicide, I would never look at Mormon missionaries the same again. I would think that they are hypocrites, preaching a message that they themselves don’t live by. LDS hat back on, I realize that not all missionaries, or members of the Church for that matter, keep all the commandments or are perfect. But then again, as members of the Church we are always representatives of the Church. Missionaries are representatives of our Savior. For these reasons, we need to present a positive image of living our faith, even if it is through fictional Mormon characters in Mormon cinema.
It seems that most of the movies that I've seen that are made by Church members fall somewhere on the spectrum between what you call "Mormon cinema" and movies about Mormons. Each of the comedies about Mormons has elements that teach important lessons and uplift its viewers. I grew up watching tons of "movies about Mormons" on Sundays because we weren't supposed to watch anything that would drive away the Spirit on the Sabbath, and they had a big impact on the way I viewed the Church (in a good way). I learned from them that it's healthy to laugh at ourselves and to not take ourselves too seriously, but also that good people make mistakes and can recover from those mistakes through Christ. The Singles Ward was the one we watched the most by far, and I think that the scene where Jonathan is crying in his car one night because of his shortcomings and looking out at the temple is one of the more impactful (though cheesy) scenes that I've seen, because as a very imperfect Church member, I can relate. I also can relate to the more serious movies made by the Church like The Restoration and The Work and the Glory. Though their emphasis isn't as much on comedy, they have an important place and can be powerful missionary tools that help people build and strengthen testimonies of fundamental gospel topics even if they aren't quite as "entertaining".
ReplyDeleteMost of the Mormon movies and movies made about Mormons that I've seen are great regardless of where they fall on the spectrum of comedy and seriousness, and I plan on watching them with my kids in the future when we need some uplifting.
That being said, I'm still not sure how I feel about Dutcher and his movies. I've never really seen any of them so maybe I'm wrong, but it seems like he focuses too much on the negative and on situations that aren't really relevant to most members of the Church. And even if they are, I don't think it's the best way to reach out to people with issues that are so serious (murder, suicide, etc.). Also, it seems as though someone who fell away from the Church probably isn't the person that I'd want to make movies about such sensitive and important things in the way that Dutcher does. I don't think there's anything wrong with wanting to make sure that the General Authorities will the Mormon movies people make- they have senses of humor too and can laugh at themselves like anyone else in the Church can, so if they disapprove it's probably because of something else that shouldn't just be ignored.
I feel like what we deem “Mormon” cinema or film can basically fall into three categories. The first is the educational category, which are films produced by the church to educate or inform members about Christ or church history or the like. Those are the types of films you see in temple visitor’s centers, or in Sunday school – the films that are explicitly supposed to teach your something about doctrine or Mormon values or scripture. The second category consists of films made by Mormon filmmakers for Mormon audiences – including Mormon fiction, or dramatizations of events in Mormon history, or characters playing out a narrative within Mormon culture. Some examples are The R.M., the Work and the Glory series, Meet the Mormons, The Singles Ward or 17 Miracles. The third category is my favorite category, which consists of films made about Mormons by non-Mormon filmmakers or critical Mormon filmmakers for general consumption. I feel like this third category allows for more open and critical analysis of Mormon culture, as we’re typically looking in on Mormon characters navigating a non-Mormon cinematic space. Some examples here are The Other Side of Heaven, God’s Army, States of Grace, and some may even argue Forever Strong. There are some films that even bridge the gap between the second and third categories – films that are made for Mormon audiences but may be challenging or critical in nature, like the Saints and Soldiers series.
ReplyDeleteI haven’t always thought this, but I do think there is a lot of value in Mormon cinema. As a filmmaker, I often think about how making a Mormon-themed film would make me think introspectively about my culture and my religion. I think it’s important, sometimes, to look at it that way. It allows for growth. I wouldn’t say that any LDS films are my favorites, necessarily, but I think they’ve been improving in value over the last couple years and there’s a lot of potential in not only creating LDS films for LDS audiences, but using Mormon characters and culture in larger films.
In my opinion, "Mormon Cinema" and movies about mormons are pretty one in the same. Of course movies like the "RM" and the "Best Two Years" are targeted towards LDS members due to their poking fun nature. Non-members would be totally clueless and not understand. From what I saw of more serious movies like "God's Army" or " The Work and the Glory," there is a broader intended audience and a deeper level of realness that can evoke high emotions. Although very different in nature, both portray real aspects of Mormon culture.
ReplyDeleteShows like"The Best Two Years" have a deeper intended meaning in the end as well that invokes Mormon Cinema. "The Other Side of Heaven" was made by Disney and portrayed a unique story about a missionary in Tonga. The situations he went through are highly relatable to the general public. We definitely have a unique genre of cinema and what constitutes it is aspects of Mormon culture in any setting.
Dutcher's movies entail a very dark version to Mormon cinema but still conveys real situations that most people like to leave out. I personally think that these movies are interesting and captivating to watch. I wouldn't go as far as watching the R rated film but his other films are still emotionally impactful and relate in a more serious and deeper level.
I think every Mormon movie has an underlying message that could be interesting to both members and nonmembers. Obviously, The Singles Ward and others are more relatable to members because of its sarcastic spin on LDS life. It’s often the ones with a broad, more obvious message that relates to other people as well. I remember one time I had a movie night with a couple of my non-member friends and they chose to watch The Other Side of Heaven. It was honestly probably because of Anne Hathaway, but I still thought it was interesting. Because they knew me and found something that would share my religion in an interesting way, they wanted to watch it. That’s one reason why I think Mormon cinema has a place with all people. While movies like the RM and others are more tailored to members because of its humor, movies like The Other Side of Heaven and Meet the Mormons definitely spark an interest in people outside of our faith because it shares who we are in a creative and interesting way.
ReplyDeleteEven Netflix offered Mormon films like Emma for a while. I’d be curious how many people would watch this outside of our faith, but I do think it was watched. If I wasn’t affiliated with a church, I think I would be curious in learning how other religions started and why. Historical films like Emma are very applicable in this situation.
When it comes to uniqueness, I do think we’re unique in the way that we’re comfortable mocking and being open about our religion and culture. I think if we continue to improve our quality, but keep the genuine reflection of our culture, the Mormon movies will be noticed in a general society. Something that I disagree with is Dutcher’s philosophical position. Is he meaning that in order to produce a LDS movie that makes it in the world that it has to be against what the general authorities want? I think that’s a very narrow view. I think what makes our movies different is that it’s honest, with overall clean messages. This is something people actually want in a world where movies are progressively cheapened by dirty scenes and language. I don’t think we need to contribute to this in order to make “Mormon cinema” last.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteReligious movie in general are quite popular, so to suggest that Mormons have their own cinema I don't think is very true. I have seen lots of religious films, that are not centered around mormonism, but are still great movies and would fit in the same category as Mormon films. There are plenty of movies about mormons, and they all fit in religious cinema. Within religious cinema, I think there are different categories, such as movies centered around Catholic beliefs or Baptist beliefs, and then there are movies centered around Mormon belief.
ReplyDeleteMovies like God's Army, and The Work and the Glory I think are focusing more on Mormon beliefs and so would fit more under the category of religious films. However, movies like Singles Ward, and The RM are not necessarily trying to get the point of the belief out there, but are more just following the lives of Mormon's with all the unique, funny things that they do. Movies like these are just entertaining, satire movies. Comedy movies all have something they poke at to make people laugh, at Mormons happen to play that part in some "Mormon" movies.
As far as my opinion goes about people outside of the Mormon church making films that are about Mormons, I think that all that really matter is credibility and accuracy. Some of the funny Mormon movies are funny because those situations, although exaggerated, are true. If a non-Mormon makes a Mormon film, I'm fine with that, as long as they know the truth and don't disrespect Mormons.
Growing up in a Mormon household, I never watched Mormon movies unless the church published it themselves. On my mission, my mission president's wife referenced "The Best Two Years" on numerous occasions. When I came home, I decided to start watching Mormon films to see what everyone was talking about. It was definitely interesting to see how Mormons observe themselves, but I did think they definitely played off the Mormon culture in an exaggerated form. Doing more research, it interested me with how many Mormon moviemakers have ended up leaving the church. I am curious why these people left the church. Were they so focused on the culture that they lost sight of the doctrine?
ReplyDeleteMy favorite Mormon film would probably be the Mormon version of "Pride and Prejudice". This movie always brings a smile to my face and a laugh to my heart. It really describes the typical life of a girl in Provo, Utah. I feel like Mormon films are moving away from comedic sketches about Mormon culture and turning towards a deeper meaning in their stories. Instead of "The Singles Ward" and "The RM", we are now seeing movies like "17 Miracles" and "The Cokeville Miracle".
I believe that the church provides beautiful films to portray church doctrine and I wish that these movies were more popular to watch. I love that the church is beginning to produce more of these films. I appreciate the focus that films have on the doctrine and not the quirky culture of Utah Mormons.
This sounds kind of weird but I think all the movies with producers, writers, and actors with Mormon content are just all considered Mormon cinema. All Mormon movies follow the underlying theme of sticking to your testimony and trying to be a follower of Christ no matter the struggle. Whether it’s a drama or a comedy (I don’t know what other kind of Mormon movies are made that aren’t considered either or a combination of these genres), the characters typically still have the basic gospel beliefs and it all comes down to them being faithful church members.
ReplyDeleteMy favorite Mormon movie is ‘The Singles Ward.’ I think there is definitely the Mormon theme in this film. I find it so funny because it’s so applicable. In no other movie produced in Hollywood can we find people who actually have the real struggles of dating in a singles’ ward. Not only dating but also having to consider marriage and being around people who also share similar values. Obviously we’re joking about our own culture but the underlying message is still there. Even in the more serious Mormon films we see the faith of members exemplified. For example ‘The Saratov Approach’ shows the families of missionaries praying, showing gratitude, and having hope their sons will return. The Mormon dramas definitely show the main messages of the film way better than the comedies. Even when the movie is portraying actual Mormon experiences, members of the church can mostly relate because we all have experiences where we exercise faith. We have the knowledge of the gospel that gets us through hard times and we celebrate it in our lives when things are good.
Taking my LDS hat off, I don’t think I would even know about Mormon movies. I think I’d still consider all Mormon made movies to just be Mormon despite their messages. Maybe I’d know about ‘Meet the Mormons’ because it was a big deal at the time. Other than that I don’t think non members even know these movies were made. Now, had I watched one I probably wouldn’t understand any of the humor. However in a Mormon drama, I could understand the “good feeling” and when a character feels the need to change his or her life for better. Lots of movies have those moments. A Mormon movie won’t have a lot of the things typical movies have (drugs, alcohol, sex, etc.) so it may seem like a kids movie because it is appropriate for those audiences. It might have a good message, but overall I’d probably be uncomfortable by how I don’t understand the jokes or certain parts of the dialogue. For example “earning your medallion” or being a “laurel” or the reputation of an “Elder’s Quorum President.”
There are valiant efforts being made by the directors of LDS culture films to enter into the mainstream, however I think it is extremely difficult to break out of the specific genre of “Mormon Cinema”. I have a cousin who is trying very hard to succeed in the world of acting. He’s starred in 3-4 films that are considered “Mormon Movies”. Although he’s been successful in them, he is having a hard time breaking through to other films that are being produced outside of Utah and considered more “mainstream”. To me this is a great indication that perhaps the LDS connection is generally viewed as a separate category of movie genre. Possibly the perceived absence of significant drug/alcohol/sex references could contribute to that.
ReplyDeleteMy personal opinion is that these movies absolutely cover deeper issues, but may never be able to break through the barrier of being movies about Mormons. Even the movie titles like “The R.M”, don’t resonate with the general public. I think a movie such as Napolean Dynamite comes the closest to breaking that barrier. Doesn’t necessarily capture the LDS culture, but it was fairly well known that Jared Hess was an LDS director and the movie was void of any real profanity or adult themes.
It has been years since I’ve watched several of the movies referenced in the YouTube clips, and had a good laugh reviewing them. However it further instilled in my mind how specific these movies are to the culture I belong to. The verbiage, jokes, and themes, are extremely pointed toward those familiar with LDS lifestyle. I think the farther we push trying to make an LDS themed movie more applicable to the world, we end up running into misrepresenting our religion and giving a bad name to the church and teachings we hold so dear.
My experience with Mormon cinema is actually very limited. Though I grew up in the Mormon Church, “Mormon Cinema” was never really a part of my cinematic education. I will say the one exception is the film Saints and Soldiers which honestly stands out as much as a war film as it does as a Mormon film. From watching the various clips posted, I think I got a better understanding of our unique culture. Again, my thought on being a good Mormon storyteller goes back to authenticity. I know at this point, it will bring up a tough line with the Dutcher films, and as someone who has not seen them, forgive me if I venture forward without knowing the true grit of the films. What makes a good film with good characters is a sense of authenticity, an explanation to the audience of why the characters are doing what they are doing, and what motivates them. It’s good to see people explain and interact with their faith in real time, even if they come to the right answer through the wrong reasoning, or falter and make human errors. These are understandable, and offer up more to interact with than our normal evangelical caricature. As long as authenticity and honesty is considered, I don’t think we need to make a distinction between “Mormon Cinema” and movies about Mormons.
ReplyDeleteNever mind the potential harm and mixed message that could be sent through a film like States of Grace, I think there is a lot of viability in speaking to audiences that are curious of Mormonism and showing them that it’s not just some polished illusion. I think there are a lot of investigators and potential converts who are turned off once they come to realize that Mormon’s come with plenty of flaws, they’re human like everyone else. Maybe there’s some merit to a little bit of brutal honesty, so long as we can circle back to the original message, the idea that when we make a mistake all is not lost. It certainly reflects one of the most Mormon messages of our scripture, the story of Alma the Younger. While on one end, we might scare people off, what better way could we think to show the power of that story than by making a contemporary example in something like States of Grace or Brigham City?
Knowing nothing other than the trailers and the accompanying descriptions, I think there is room in the “Mormon Cinema” genre for both films like The RM and States of Grace. As long as it goes back to authenticity, there’s validity in poking fun at some of the quirks and awkward ‘lesser struggles’ of our faith. In the more humorous films, we still see the message circle back to the same important themes of redemption, courage and honest integrity. There’s something to be said for films that can be both humorous and genuine, acknowledging a peculiarity while maintaining that uplifting quality. There’s room too for the darker side of the discussion too, as it illustrates the essential hope that no one has to be lost or cast out forever.
From the beginning, the church recognizes the import role, and significant impact, entertainment plays in religion. Modern “Mormon cinema” has evolved into a humorous light hearted genre that is both relatable yet uplifting. It is what many people today connect to, and what is popular across many TV and movie screens. Going back to our discussion on the Simpsons—there is something to be said about someone who can recognize the flaws in their society and poke fun at them.
ReplyDeleteLooking back at the early 2000’s take on Mormon cinema, specifically considering Dutcher’s approach, the overall theme is a lot more somber than that of the RM, The Other Side of Heaven, and other films I can vividly remember watching growing up. Although there are variations in LDS film’s, I wouldn’t classify the differences as dividing the genre at large. Just like there are “romance-comedy’s” that are more comedy and less romance, or vise versa, doesn’t mean it’s not a romance-comedy. If we allow film to be classified as an art, variations are inevitable and blatant classifications will never be possible. While some relate better to light hearted comedies, and can draw out good Mormon messages from them, others prefer cinema that has a more realistic approach—even slightly risky.
For me, this is the line drawn between Mormon cinema and cinema about Mormons. When content encroaches on risky or inappropriate concepts, I feel that it is not cinema made for Mormons to enjoy or learn from, rather cinema for others to learn about Mormons. Not saying these portrayals are completely accurate or credible, but they play a similar role as the Book of Mormon musical is playing in informing society and adding interest for Mormons. Again maybe it is just small details with in the same genre, or maybe differences create a whole other genre completely, but either way Mormon cinema has done incredible things for our church at large as it makes us relatable in todays media.
This is an interesting topic for me to think about because I feel as though 'Mormons' and 'Mormon cinema' is the same thing. I have to admit, I have never watched any of these videos that are listed except for 'The Other Side of Heaven.' But, I don't understand why acting mormon and doctrine mormon is different. Even though some of the movies (RM, The Best Two years, etc.) may poke fun of the culture, it is still our culture that the movies are based around.
ReplyDeleteI think things are over thought. I'm sure even though I have never seen these movies, they are still movies that hold great messages that stand true to our faith. It is entertaining to watch people fail, but isn't that an accurate representation of real life? We have expectations and they never seem to go the way we plan. It's life. I was never a missionary, but my husband has told me hard things that he had to go through while serving in Peru and he didn't think it would be nearly as challenging as it was. I am sure thats how it was in the movie 'The Best Two Years.' But to answer the question as to whether or not "mormons' and 'mormon cinema' is the same, I believe it is.
This may sound very "un-Mormon" of me, but I have never seen any of the movies you defined as "Mormon Cinema." The one I have seen is Saratov Approach, which seems to have a mix of humor, spirituality, and intensity. (I am planning to watch The Best Two Years tonight though so I don't feel as left out). But after watching the youtube clips you provided, I feel like I have a bit more of an understanding about what you mean by "Mormon Cinema." Some of the films such as The Best Two Years, Singles Ward, the RM seem quite a bit more light hearted than States of Grace. Honestly, even watching the trailers for those movies made me a little uncomfortable. Immediately, my thoughts went to President Monson and how he would feel watching those films. As important as I believe it is to uncover the cultural pitfalls that can be found in the church, I think sensationalizing Mormonism is irreverent. Which really makes me look at how other films sensationalize other religions and it makes me feel a lot more empathetic toward those who are targeted often in the media like we've looked at in past weeks.
ReplyDeleteSo in my opinion, calling any of these films "Mormon Cinema" is kind of odd. I think there are films about Mormons where screen-play writers and actors express some cultural incidents that happen in Mormonism that sometimes are and sometimes are not based on doctrine, but I don't think you can brand these as "Mormon Cinema" because they don't all represent ideals strictly true to the Mormon faith. In Saratov Approach, as well done as I think that movie is, it still is not fair to let it represent the church as a brand of "Mormon Cinema." I felt the spirit during some points, but I also felt so sick and terrified during some parts and I don't think it is entirely realistic. It is a sensationalized look at a missionary experience in Russia. So again, it is about Mormons, but not "Mormon Cinema" in my opinion.
In my opinion “Mormon” cinema is unique in the tone that it uses, as well as the script. I would say that if someone that is not LDS understands all the references/jokes/themes in the movie, then it is not considered “Mormon” cinema, but rather a movie about Mormons. One example would be “The Saratov Approach” which focuses a lot more on the plot/storyline without having to make specific references to our people/culture. On the other hand, movies like “the Home Teachers”, “The R.M.”, “The Best Two Years”, etc. are “Mormon” cinema because they have specific references that only people with a decent amount of exposure to the Mormon culture would understand.
ReplyDeleteI would put all Mormon Cinema on a spectrum that goes from “Mormon” cinema on the far left and stretches to “Movies about Mormons” on the far right. On the Far left you have “The Home Teachers”, “Singles Ward”, “The R.M.”, “Mobsters and Mormons”, (aka, any movie that is full of Mormon references that most people would not find as funny). In the middle you have “State of Grace”, “The Best Two Years”, “17 Miracles”, and “Ephraim’s Rescue” (aka, movies that have a few Mormon references, but for the most part can be enjoyed by anyone). Finally, on the far right would be movies like “The Saratov Approach” that have few, if any, Mormon references and can be enjoyed by everyone. You could even put “Napoleon Dynomite” on the far, far right.
I think that the movies on the far left do not necessarily dive into the deeper issues like the movies in the middle and far right do, but all have their place and purpose. Those who are not LDS can more easily relate to movies going from right to left, and those who are LDS from left to right. I think it’s important to have that happy medium that features some parts of Mormon culture and stereotypes, but also takes time to dive into deeper issues that exist both in and out of the church.
I feel like Mormon cinema - as well as all cinema - is at its best when it addresses topics that are a little bit more complex, and perhaps harder to swallow. If this is what Dutcher is inferring than I would probably have to agree with him. I believe that by weaving more complicated issues into film, you are reflecting the true nature of the human experience. That authenticity resonates with the viewer. I feel like early Mormon cinema followed the similar pattern of the common church practice of not talking about or even acknowledging hard or controversial topics. The Church has since stopped and is now much more open and transparent -- which I believe has increased understanding and actually increased faith. Displaying the warts or dirty laundry of Mormon culture or history in film demonstrates Christs ability to work through imperfect humans, Mormons and non-Mormons alike.
ReplyDeleteI first want to address the question of what is the difference between movies and Mormons and "Mormon Cinema"? I don't think there is really a way to define "Mormon Cinema" ethically because nobody has set any definitions. Does having a Mormon director make it Mormon Cinema? I would highly doubt that the LDS community at large would like to accept Ducher's "Falling" as Mormon Cinema when it had an R rating. But what about his other movies? What about some of the other movies we explored earlier? I do see why people use the term "Mormon Cinema" to describe certain movies, but I would hardly say that it counts as a real genre.
ReplyDeleteSo, therefore, I don't think there is a real difference between movies about Mormons and Mormon Cinema. I do think that there are movies that push the boundaries of accuracy and respect, but a few of those movies (The RM, Home Teachers, Singles Ward, etc.) are accepted by the LDS community. So, is that what makes it Mormon Cinema? Does a genre have to be accepted by the community which it addresses in order for it to count?
But, regardless how it is defined, I really am grateful for these movies. I think it is important to learn how to laugh at ourselves and some of our weird cultural quirks- it keeps us humble and reminds us that we, too, are just people. They all seem though to have some sort of spiritual theme to them, which is what makes it so similar to other popular mainstream movies. If it brings a range of emotions, I think more people can relate to it.
I think the Church as a whole is really pushing to try and create more media that can be viewed and understood even by those who do not belong to the Church. For example, a few weeks ago I was interviewed by a producer for the Mormon Channel over the phone regarding a story I had that connected to the theme of suicide. After a few weeks of talking, they invited my sister and I to come and share our story on camera as part of the "His Grace" campaign. When we got there we were asked to share our stories and answer questions, but they told us to use non-denominational terms when talking about religious matters. They told us to avoid words that are commonly understood only by the LDS community like bishop, ward, stake, or seminary. Instead, we were asked to find another way of saying it that would apply to more people, thus inviting a broader audience. I found this strange at first considering that everyone in the room would have known what I was talking about had I just used the normal terms, but having served a mission I understood the purpose. This particular branch of mormon media is trying to create a message that can breach the homes of all people- members or not. I love this because I think it makes us all look much more human in the eyes of the world and also much more inviting. I appreciate the mormon media that can relate to other people because I think that is how we peak interest in the Gospel and thus bring others closer to Christ. I would like to see more of Mormon Cinema to move in this direction.
Mormon cinema, if it is a genre, is a VERY broad genre. There is comedy, drama, romance, action, etc. The only thing they all really have in common is the fact that they are about Mormons. It was cool to watch some of these videos because I'd never heard of most of them. There is a huge variety in the type of cinema that Mormons provide. Some of them seemed a little bit more traditional and aimed towards just Mormons, like The RM or The Best Two Years. There was jargon and actions that happened that non-mormons might be confused by. But then they have God's Army and The Work and the Glory which, I feel, could be enjoyed by a larger audience outside of Mormons.
ReplyDeleteGod's army was one that I'd never heard of. But it was kind of refreshing to see the difference in that film vs. a lot of other Mormon cinema. It was action packed and dramatic. I agree with what was written about it. It seemed to challenge the traditional thought of cookie cutter mormon cinema.
I feel like a lot of Mormon cinema has the goal to either make fun of itself or to challenge stereotypes. We talked about it in class, but Mormons really are good at poking fun at themselves. But on the other hand, like in Gods Army, it goes against all stereotypical thoughts about Mormons and missionaries.
When I think of Mormon cinema. One that I think of, because it is so recent, is the Saratov Approach. I LOVED that movie. It made me laugh and cry and i was nervous a lot of the time. I think Mormon cinema is getting good at being the type of film that a lot of people could watch. Because even if I wasn't mormon, I think i'd like that movie.
One of my favorite Mormon films is “Mobsters and Mormons”. That was really the only one I grew up watching and I thought the other ones were really weird. Growing up I was always so curious how other LDS people lived. When I was in middle school I felt so alone, yet so normal around people who weren’t of my faith. I remember driving I salt lake and my window was down at a stoplight and I asked if they were Mormon. I was a weird kid. I looked to this movie as an example of what living in Utah was like.
ReplyDeleteI'm going to be honest I have not seen very many Mormon films and I have not seen any very recently. So I'm trying to remember some of the details about “Mobsters and Mormons” but the only thing I can think of is how the mobsters were outraged by pineapple on pizza. I remember this because I too believe fruit should not be on pizza.
“Mobsters and Mormons” is not what living in Utah is like. Mormon cinema is a happy moral lifting thing. They bring up issues and trials that most Mormons deal with in a way that relates to their audience, but I would find it surprising if they ever filmed a movie about someone learning about church history and having a testimony crisis or dealing with same sex attraction. I feel like that would defeat the purpose of moral boosting Mormon film. I don’t know if that’s an issue either.
"Mormon" film, may have several interpretations. For me, it means that which is produced and endorsed by the church itself. All of these movies mentioned above simply talk about mormon life, but are not necessarily made to promote one single idea, like "Mormon messages" (even the name implies the idea that THESE are defined as Mormon cinema) or bible videos, or teaching videos endorsed by the church, are. The difference is that one is made to make money and entertain, while the other is to promote a cause.
ReplyDeleteAlthough these other movies such as singles ward or the home teachers, may have an intended mormon audience, it does not necessarily classify them as "Mormon" film. Even without the Mormon cap on, I'd still argue that the world would see a difference between a movie about mormons (anything ranging from the RM, to the Book of Mormon Play on video, to Big Love, to the Best Two Years) and a movie MADE by the mormons. There is definitely a difference distinguishable between the two in tone and in purpose.
Personally, I really enjoy both genres. The best two years has always been one of my all time favorites, as it captures so many human truths, not only about missions, but about roommates, personality differences, and foreign experiences. More than any other perhaps, I loved the Book of Mormon animated stories directed by Richard Rich. I can still quote them verbatim, along with my siblings. Nevertheless, even though both can have deeper meanings or themes that are mormon-gospel-related, the overall goal and purpose and motivation of the production is different, and to me, this is what distinguishes one genre from the other.