Did anyone else think this film was a beyond brilliant piece of moviemaking? Having heard Richard Dutcher speak, I know he has a profound grasp of the Gospel and it certainly shows in his work. By far the best and most substantial film in the ever-expanding genre of LDS films, Brigham City's message is truly the essence of the Gospel.
Any other thoughts?
[deleted]
Yeah, I thought it was good, I don't know if I'd call if brilliant or anything but it kept me guessing who the killer was until the moment you actually found out. I always judge a good murder mystery by how long it keeps you on the edge of your seat.
shareWas this movie a murder mystery? I guess I missed that. I thought it was a wonderfully done movie about a town losing its innocence and through that process, gaining a deeper understanding of the gospel.
shareI saw this film when it came to California theatres a few years back. A married couple, who are our friends, took me and my husband to see it. We knew nothing about it except that they said it was an LDS film made by the same man who made God's Army. We wern't in the habit of watching PG 13 films at that time and are very selective of what PG 13 films we watch now. So when the movie's tone began to change into a murder mystery we were caught off gaurd. (All four of us mistakenly assumed this movie was PG). Now, don't misunderstand-I have read some posts that talked about LDS people sheltering themselves and thereby failing to recocgnize the dangers of our day-danger that is everywhere. I joined the LDS church at 17 and grew up in a very bad home. I choose to stay away from a lot of entertainment that has content in it that reminds me of the horrid things I witnessed in childhood. I certainly don't need to watch all the garbage out there to keep it real. But when I saw this movie I was extremely disturbed by the content, most especially finding out the serial killers identity at the end. It painted such an ugly picture for me-a man, who we assume to have been worthily married in the temple, with an eight month pregnant wife and a two year old child, now shot dead practically right in front of his wife, who will likely go into early labor from the trauma the whole situation would give her, and then be sent reeling into a dangerous postpartum depression. Basically her life and her kid's lives would be messed up for a good long time, to say the least. Another theme I found to be very disturbing was all the LDS girls that were raped and murdered (any person being raped is not my kind of entertainment whether implied or more). Now I am aware that these things can happen but I also feel that covenants can protect people as well. I just found these themes to slight the church's ability to filter out people who would do such aggravating harm. i.e. temple recomend inerviews etc. I know there is room for error because we are people trying to live right, and not people who are perfect. But still. At the end of this movie I felt sick. It was very well made and powerfully presented, and at the end I was not uplifted at all. We have made a point to never see a movie that we havn't screened since. Most people who I've ever talked to about this film were extremely uncomfortable with it-and this is people in CA and who have different movie standards than my husband and me.
These are my thoughts on the film. It is interesting to see what other people have thought of this film and I can see the points people have for liking it. Neither I nor my husband have any intention to see this film twice though.
Grace,
I really appreciate you taking the time to post a detailed opinion on this movie. I love to hear the way other people have reacted to movies that I enjoyed.
Respectfully, I wonder if you may have missed the point. Please don't take this the wrong way - I completely support the desire to eliminate any and all PG-13 type entertainment from your life. That may well be the higher road here. The movie has some dark tones and from what I have read, Dutcher's newest film, States of Grace, is even darker and more violent. That concerns me.
That said, I think part of the point of the film is that our covenants and the church don't necessarily protect us from everything. Ultimately, we must fall back on the atonement.
Covenants did not keep the Sheriff/Bishop's family from dying in a car crash. Temple recommend interviews didn't filter out a serial murderer. Based on my real life experiences, I think this is realistic (not that I know any serial murderers).
More importantly, the sheriff/bishop could not protect his community on his own. In the denouement (final sacrament scene), I believe, they all gain a deeper understanding of the meaning of the atonement in their lives as a result of the events depicted in the movie.
Jeff,
I do see your points and I appreciate your respectfulness. In my experience,having been raised by two vile criminals (I wouldn't say that lightly) I don't find this entertainment to be of any worth. I do believe that a spiritually sound Bishop would have discerned that something was wrong. I have known good bishops to discern much lesser problems in the lives of friends and family-bad stuff that needed dealing with, but nothing to the magnitude of rape and murder. Murder and rape arn't something that you can erase from your countenance. Plus, in the case of this movie, if the Bishop/Sheriff had been abiding by the law he would have finger printed the guy in the first place. Laxness in keeping laws and commandments can cost a lot. God is only bound when we do what He says. But as far as covenants not saving a family from a car crash, yeah, things like that can happen and it's tragic when it does. But temple recomend interviews would certainly filter out a serial rapist/murderer. That was a part of the film that many people, including me and my husband, found unrealistic and, quite frankly, insulting to the church. We have a registered sex offender in our ward and his countenance is creepy. Raping, molesting, murdering, these things are very purposefull, they cannot be done by accident and you can't hide it in your countenance if you've done it-especially if you havn't repented properly. That being said, this movie was very unrealistic in that way. I did get the point that Dutcher was trying to make about the atonement. I just don't agree with the way he went about making the point. It's very worldly. There are far better ways to teach about the atonement than through a string of young women being raped and murdered. That's really sick. These are my feelings and I stand by them. I felt like I should say something since I knew so many people who were disturbed by this movie. I geuss most people who don't like this movie probobly wouldn't have come to check out these message boards. But I did because I was curious about what other people thought-if everyone thought it was horrible or if it was just the majority of the people I knew. So now I know and have heard both sides, but I still wouldn't see it again. If you want to respond, that's fine. I don't check these boards often, but when I do I'll reply if I have the time.
One more thing. I'm not for the belief that God sends us down here to get raped etc. so that we can learn something. I am aware that these things happen and that many people suffer from other people's wicked choices. I know God doesn't always intervene. But our covenants can protect us from all but the necessary trials we are supposed to face. If we abide by them we won't face unnessecary affliction. Those are God's laws. A movie like this has the dark undertone that in order for this little town to understand the atonement they needed to lose a great number of their daughters to a serial rapist and murderer. That seems a pretty ridiculous gospel message to be putting out there doesn't it? That's not the gospel I know.
Grace,
You make some excellent points and this second post has helped me understand your thoughts.
The only thing I want to counter is your last statement:
"A movie like this has the dark undertone that in order for this little town to understand the atonement they needed to lose a great number of their daughters to a serial rapist and murderer."
I really don't think that was the message... I don't think he was saying that it *needed* to happen, just that it did. And that it was terrible. But maybe they grew from the trial.
Thank you for sharing your excellent thoughts and perspective.
-jeff
Thanks for your perspective, it is completely respectable.
However, I feel I must address something directly:
I do believe that a spiritually sound Bishop would have discerned that something was wrong....But temple recomend interviews would certainly filter out a serial rapist/murderer.
Raping, molesting, murdering, these things are very purposefull, they cannot be done by accident and you can't hide it in your countenance if you've done it-especially if you havn't repented properly.
Hello Todd.
Thanks for your thought provoking comments. I understand what you mean about Bishops not being perfect. I've seen examples of both the good and the assumptive. However, I do think it was in the fictional movie bishop's stewardship to protect the young women in his ward. Don't you? It can be done (protecting people, I mean), no matter how bad a person is or how much they can cover up. After all, God is in charge and if we follow Him we have a much higher chance of protection. In the case that someone isn't, that's not to say they deserved it because they weren't spiritual. Sometimes we go through terrible trials because people have agency and there are bad people out there excercising power over others unjustly. Though, I must say I have never been surprised when I have found out certain really bad things that people have done. I have always been able to look back and see that the patterns were there and that the Spirit warned me in some way. And as far as divining something as serious as rape, murder, abuse,anyone-no matter their calling-is entitled to that because it's always in your stewardship to protect yourself and your family if you have one. You don't have to be a Prophet for that. That is one of the basic themes of the gospel, to fortify yourself and your family against such dangerous people. This can be done. It is possible or we would never have been given those standards to live.
As far as the movie bishop not fingerprinting and learning a lesson from that, well that's just not my kind of entertainment then. Because seriously, if you have to "learn a lesson" at the expence of the young women in your "stewardship's" chastity and lives, then stay away from me. That's not what the scriptures teach. You don't have to experience devastating tragedy to know your supposed to uphold the law. LDS people already know that. That's the problem I have with all of Dutcher's movies-at least the one's I'm aware of. What a disgusting way to create drama and then teach a simple lesson of law abiding with it.
Also, just curious, what have I not experienced? I'm not really sure what you're implying there. Let me know if you have time.
I think the gravity in this movie comes from how easily it all could have been avoided (i.e. Fingerprinting). That makes the end sacrament so much more compelling, because the Bishop took the blame completely...but was supported by his congregation.
You make a point about stewardship...and as a second thought, this guy was in his ward as well. However...
There are documented cases (forgive me for not having sources, but I can google around if you'd like) of instances where things like this...perhaps not as bad...do not get noticed. I'll give an example of a child molestor who was removed from a calling because of the contact with the young children who, in another ward later in life, was placed in the same or similar calling and once again molested some of the children. Certainly that is within the bounds of a Bishop's stewardship.
This is one of the things I mention with regard to your experience.
From my first hand perspective, I have had experience with people who have sexually abused children...and I had no idea. Granted time had past from the incidents and had repented of the behavior, but these have been either family or close friends. I felt I knew them quite well...still I had no idea. The Spirit never whipsered anything to me.
Affairs go on in the church, frequently. Yet spouses, and certainly not Bishops, are aware of them all the time.
I just think it is potentially dangerous to assume that being spiritually sound would protect you and your family from the creepy people of the world. But I also think that you wouldn't know that stuff like this happens until you have had experience with it.
-Todd
www.toddlbauerle.com
"As far as the movie bishop not fingerprinting and learning a lesson from that, well that's just not my kind of entertainment then. Because seriously, if you have to "learn a lesson" at the expence of the young women in your "stewardship's" chastity and lives, then stay away from me. That's not what the scriptures teach. You don't have to experience devastating tragedy to know your supposed to uphold the law. LDS people know that. That's the problem I have with all of Dutcher's movies-at least the one's I'm aware of. What a disgusting way to create drama and then teach a simple lesson of law abiding with it."
I guess you have a problem with almost all tragedies then.
Criticize the Greeks then.
The guy is making a film, not some kind of proselytizing tool.
IMO, film makers shouldn't make money preaching the gospel.
And yet you criticize him for doing otherwise...
I dont think you get that the movie isn't about the church, it isn't about Mormons, it isn't about Utah, it isn't about any of that. It's about the human condition. The themes are universal to everyone.
Next Saturday night go watch the first vision or the Mormon tabernacle choir or something that doesn't reflect reality.
I think the end scene with the Sacrament, and how everyone finally began their healing process, provided balance to the bad depicted in the story. The ultimate message that I came away with, was that there is nothing so bad and evil in the world that the Atonement of Jesus Christ cannot ultimately heal. To quote Elder Jeffrey R. Holland in his April 2012 general conference address:
"I testify that [no one has] traveled beyond the reach of divine love. It is not possible for you to sink lower than the infinite light of Christ’s Atonement shines."
I think this last scene in the movie with the Sacrament was one of the most powerful scenes ever committed to film on the sacred nature of the Atonement of Jesus Christ.
Wow - there have been some really interesting reactions to this film. I haven't seen it in a while, but we went to see "States of Grace" this weekend, and I've been reviewing all things "Richard Dutcher".
My reaction to Brigham City admittedly comes from a film-laypersons perspective. That is, I really don't care too much about the lighting, soundtrack, angles, etc., unless I find them distracting or SO bad that they impede the story. I expect those things to be subliminal and just enrich the story. For me, it is all about the story and whether it speaks to me and stirs something in me that stays with me long after the credits have rolled. "Brigham City" did.
I am an LDS person who strives live by the precepts of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, to listen to the Spirit and act accordingly. I expect, and perhaps more naively "accept" that the LDS people in my circle are doing the same. I have, on more than one occasion, discovered that a person that I liked, served with, trusted and /or admired are deceptively passing themselves off as righteous. These people are generally friendly, charismatic and highly intelligent. In these cases, I was not the only one they had fooled. If this has never happened to you, you are probably still very young.
Priesthood leaders such as bishops bring different gifts to their calling. I have known bishops who were highly discerning spiritually, but I have known others who were less so to varying degrees. When this occurs, they still bring other virtues to the calling such as strong leadership skills, the ability to connect with youth, compassion or the capacity to administrate effectively.
The reason I point this out is that it was not hard AT ALL for me to buy into the idea that a clean-cut, polite young man could come into a small town full of good people and they were collectively anxious to embrace him and help him out. They accepted him at face value, a tendency that is common in the human condition, especially among those who try to “judge not.”
As for the fact that the Sheriff didn't fingerprint him, consider this. I once worked for a large corporation. When they hired me, they made copies of my drivers license, Social Security Card, gave me a personality test, ran a background and credit check. I currently work for a small company that was VERY small when they hired me. I was hired on a recommendation and a handshake. The only paperwork I filled out when I was hired was a W2. I eventually was asked to fill out the application for this job as a formality "for the files" about two months after I started working there. They didn't check on any of my resume references, nor did they run a background check. That was in '97. (My employer has become much more rigorous in their hiring practices since then.) The point is, the sheriff/bishop THOUGHT he knew him well enough that fingerprinting seemed an unnecessary and pointless formality.
So far, three of the "morals" that are covered are:
People, even well intentioned, good people - make mistakes.
People are not necessarily who/what they appear to be.
Priesthood leaders are not infallible. (GASP!)
I personally do not have to suspend disbelief in any way to embrace these concepts as reality. They are, however, key to the set-up of the actual message of the movie, which is that when we do make a mistake, even a serious mistake with grave repercussions, the atonement of Jesus Christ can heal us.
The dark themes in this film were symbolic to me of the world we live in. The scene at the end of the film symbolized the depth of humility and sorrow a man must achieve to comprehend the significance of the atonement on a personal level.
I empathize with the viewers who found this movie difficult to stomach, but for me, the underlying messages were richly rewarding and worth the discomfort to experience.
Thanks so much for the comments and story...
It adds a great weight to BRIGHAM CITY!!
-Todd
www.toddlbauerle.com
Sorry, but I found the acting and writing a bit flat. It lacked subtlety that quality writing has. The opening scene, for example, shouted, "I'm praying! I miss my wife! Look at my leg -- don't you wonder what happened?!" Good writing is quieter in the way it illuminates those points to the audience.
The whodunit mystery was nice with some twists (and a few red herrings that were too blatant), but a number of scenes seemed so contrived as to be an LDS commercial. *SPOILERS* For example, a sheriff who doesn't use search warrants? That sealed the deal for me there. And at the end, he's in front of the suspected killer and he watches him assemble a gun?? C'mon, sheriff, just take a piece or two so he doesn't have a working weapon!! Instead he's (presumably) forced to shoot the suspect. It was not a WWJD moment from any angle.
I think a lot of folks say, "Hurray! Finally a movie that isn't sicko Hollywood slop!" I'd agree and have often felt that way, but I hate that so many religious-based movies seem incapable of quality writing. The acting, though, wasn't too bad.
Interesting that he has left the LDS Church.
Last Movie: AVP R
Fav. Movie this year: Halloween 2007/Grindhouse/Die Hard 4
[deleted]