Saturday's Warrior

I recently watched the Mormon musical Saturday's Warrior for the first time in probably 10 years and I must say it was a very interesting experience. What most intrigued me was how aggressively opposed to the movie EVERYONE was. When I told my roommates I was watching Saturday's Warrior I immediately found myself having to quickly explain that it was for a class (implying that there was no way I would choose to watch it on my own). Also, I hoped to watch it in the safe, privacy of my own apartment, assured that no one would walk in on me watching it. However, I don't have a VCR in my apartment so I had to ask my brother if I could watch it at his. He said yes but it was obvious he was a little embarrassed about it. While watching it at my brothers place with some of my friends (who assured me that they were only watching it with me to keep me company and to be good friends) I witnessed a lot of negativity towards the film. For instance, one of his roommates walked in halfway through the movie and immediately said, "What are you doing? That's my VCR you're playing that on!" Another of his roommates walked in and started belting the songs (that was the nicest response I got, although who knows if he was being sardonic or not). My roommates also took every opportunity to make fun of the movie.

This hostility really intrigued me. Why do members of the church hate this movie SO much? I'll admit the movie is totally cheesy and bad, but in my opinion so is every other musical. For instance, my roommate made fun of the scene where Julie is reading her letter from Wally and starts singing, by saying in a very sarcastic tone, "ya, because I always sing while reading letters." At that point I turned to her and said, "Are you kidding me? That's what they do in every musical. They always bust out in song at random times."

Another observation I made was that everyone made fun of the songs, yet they all knew every word of them. I thought maybe no one likes them because they're really catchy and get stuck in your head (in fact I still have them stuck in my head and I watched it on Sunday). To tell the absolute truth, I actually kind of liked a lot of the songs, especially when compared to other cheesy musicals, which brings me to another observation. On the way home from Logan on Saturday my friends were listening to the soundtrack to Joseph and the Amazing Technicolor Dreamcoat. I've never seen the movie or the play so perhaps I shouldn't pass judgement, but man those songs were terrible and totally cheesy! Yet the same friends who were making fun of Saturday's Warrior said they absolutely LOVED Joseph and the Amazing Technicolor Dreamcoat. Huh? What's the difference? Is it Mormonism that we are embarrassed to have depicted in a musical? Is it because it's so dear to us? Or are we just embarrassed about our own culture? Because let's face it, Saturday's Warrior does a pretty good job of showing different aspects of Mormon culture as well as some of the difficulties and challenges we face in life. Big families, a wayward child, coping with death, missionary life, Dear John's, wedding plans, peer pressure, finding "the one," and pre-earth life. These things are very much a part of culture and are still topics of "Mormon films"today. So why is this one so hated?

In talking to some friends about this phenomena I got a couple of possible answers. One older woman who loved the play in the 1970s suggested that they just should have kept it as a play and never made a movie out of it. This would have endeared it in the hearts of members as a work of art and the next generation would have never had occasion to pass judgment on the movie by comparing it to other film musicals. We also compared it to the way they made The Phantom of the Opera into a movie recently. It was a huge success, mostly because it is a great story with great music, but I think it also has to do with the fact that they didn't try to give the movie the appearance of a play. Saturday's Warrior looks like they just filmed one showing of the play, because every scene is filmed on a the set of a play. It may have been a little better had they used more technology and made a movie instead of a filmed play.



Another complaint I have heard on more than one occasion is that the film has introduced many misconceptions into LDS theology. For example, the idea that a person in pre-earth life would be interacting with someone in post-earth life has caused many to think that, for instance, our grandparents who have passed on are talking to our future children right now, etc. Another one popular among young single adults is the attempt to find and marry "the one" that you knew in the pre-earth life. And their attempt to show the passing through the veil is pretty funny, but who knows what it's really like. I don't. Anyway, to these arguments I would say that while I wish they could have been a little more doctrinally accurate, it's just a musical, made for fun. If I'm looking for something that's doctrinally sound, I'm not going to go to a musical to find it. The nightly news also introduces misconceptions in people's minds about what's going on in the world, does that mean we shouldn't watch it? It all comes down to doing our own research rather than relying on media and entertainment to provide us with knowledge about the world, our religion, etc.

The hard thing about this post is, I still haven't really come to a conclusion regarding whether I like Saturday's Warrior or not. Part of me wants to be different and say, "It's not that bad, and I kinda like some of the songs." But in Mormon culture today it's seems to not be very kosher to admit such a blasphemy. I want to be cool, and you can't be cool and still like Saturday's Warrior. I still don't think I would be caught dead purchasing the movie. But who knows, maybe one of these days I'll man up and go against the grain of acceptable Mormon entertainment.

World Wide Leadership Training Meeting

This years World Wide Leadership Training Meeting was much different than in years past. For starters, the meeting is published on the church's website for all to see time and again rather than being shown to a select few in a one-time meeting. To me this shows how important the council being given is to every member of the church.

The format of this meeting was different than anything I've ever seen put out by the church. For one, the bulk of the meeting was centered around a round table discussion with Dallin H. Oaks (representing the Q of the 12), Julie B. Beck (representing the Relief Society), Susan W. Tanner (representing the YW), and Cheryl Lant (representing the Primary) and Jeffrey R. Holland, who was serving as the mediator for the discussion. I thought this was a great way to hold this meeting because it made the viewer feel like they were apart of the discussion. It was very formal yet casual in that those participating had notes but were not reading from a script but were literally having a discussion. The meeting was held in a very simple room with dim lighting, inviting a relaxed and casual feeling.

I also thought the topic of discussion for the meeting was different than I was expecting. I expected a leadership training meeting would be more geared to church leaders and discuss organizational issues, how to teach better, how to encourage missionaries, etc. Instead they made the meeting applicable to everyone in every stage of life and focused almost entirely on the family and life's decisions from dating to bearing children to the challenges of old age. Throughout the meeting I kept wondering, "how is this a leadership training meeting?" But then I realized that I think what they are trying to drive home is that we are all important in the church, we are all leaders, and that the family is the most important thing in this world.

Overall, I think this meeting was a great step in the church's use of film to include every member of the church in leadership discussions and training.

Together Forever vs. Truth Restored

Last week we watched the film Together Forever which depicts couples and family's who have struggled with some of life's greatest questions such as: where do I go when I die? Can I have my family with me in the next life? What can I do to love my spouse and help our marriage? How do I turn my life around? These and other questions were answered in the film by showing these people tell "their stories" and how the gospel of Jesus Christ has helped them. This is all well and good, however it is quite clear that they are using professional actors and making up the stories. For instance, they had the man behind the camera asking the actor questions. To me that just screams "I am reading from a script! This is all made up!" It doesn't even leave room in my mind to believe it is real and therefore I don't take it seriously.

Prof. Burton posed to us this question, "What are the moral implications of films that employ manipulative measures to achieve noble means?" I think this film has a noble purpose which is to aid in proclaiming the gospel and show how the teachings of Jesus Christ can help us in life's struggles. However, I think it accomplishes this purpose in a manipulative way. I know that my heart strings were pulled while watching the film, and it was only after reflection on the discussion before the film, and knowing they were just actors playing a part, that I realized it was only my emotions being touched, not the spirit. For me the problem with the film is that it is pulling emotional strings and disguising it as the spirit for those who don't know the difference.



I think the film could have been much more effective had they used real people telling real life experiences. This is why I have chosen to contrast Together Forever with the new commercial spots done by the church entitled "Truth Restored." These short clips are in simple black and white (not employing strategic use of color as was done in Together Forever) and show normal people telling their stories. The church experimented with these spots in certain states to test responses by people in order to determine if they should proceed to show them nationwide. To me these clips have a greater sense of legitimacy to them than anything shown in Together Forever. I wonder if that is simply because I know there are no actors or scripts? Had I not been told that there were actors in Together Forever would I have been more impressed with it?

Again I think the problem with Together Forever is that it is pulling emotional strings and disguising it as the spirit for those who don't know the difference. In a way they're making it too easy. They're taking a shortcut in sharing the gospel by telling a touching story, pulling at people's heart strings and having them believe they're feeling the spirit. On the other hand, who knows? Maybe they are feeling the spirit. And I'm sure there are countless stories of those who were led to investigate the church after watching Together Forever. I'm simply saying that I think "Truth Restored" has a better approach, especially if people know that those telling the stories are not actors, but real people.

Click here to watch a spot of "Truth Restored": http://www.mormon.org/mormonorg/eng/exhibit#Sandy_adversity