The Vanity of Earthly Greatness - Six Days in August

[drumdude]

I wonder if this means the Interpreter Foundation is once again violating the terms of their contracts with the streaming services that presumably paid for that content.

I’m shocked, absolutely shocked, that an organization DCP runs wouldn’t be able to honor a very basic agreement like that.

[I Have Questions]

I wonder if this means the Interpreter Foundation is once again violating the terms of their contracts with the streaming services that presumably paid for that content.

I’m shocked, absolutely shocked, that an organization DCP runs wouldn’t be able to honor a very basic agreement like that.

He was aware it was available to view in early June. At that point he said it should have been password protected, as otherwise that’s a breach of contract. Here we are more than a month later and it is still not password protected. So has someone dropped the ball or does Peterson not really care about complying with contracts? It’s clear he hasn’t followed up on it.

[Marcus]

I wonder if this means the Interpreter Foundation is once again violating the terms of their contracts with the streaming services that presumably paid for that content.

I’m shocked, absolutely shocked, that an organization DCP runs wouldn’t be able to honor a very basic agreement like that.

He was aware it was available to view in early June. At that point he said it should have been password protected, as otherwise that’s a breach of contract. Here we are more than a month later and it is still not password protected. So has someone dropped the ball or does Peterson not really care about complying with contracts? It’s clear he hasn’t followed up on it.

According to Peterson, it should be password-protected. Maybe Goodman disagrees. Peterson said the Telly went to the Interpreter, when the site clearly said it was awarded to Goodman's company. Maybe there is a similar disagreement over who gets to release access to it online.

[I Have Questions]

He was aware it was available to view in early June. At that point he said it should have been password protected, as otherwise that’s a breach of contract. Here we are more than a month later and it is still not password protected. So has someone dropped the ball or does Peterson not really care about complying with contracts? It’s clear he hasn’t followed up on it.

According to Peterson, it should be password-protected. Maybe Goodman disagrees. Peterson said the Telly went to the Interpreter, when the site clearly said it was awarded to Goodman's company. Maybe there is a similar disagreement over who gets to release access to it online.

Red Brick got the Telly NOT Interpreter? Wow! That's a devastating blow. FTR I accessed the film no problem without any password being required, without any details needing to be given. It just streams like a YouTube video.

[Everybody Wang Chung]

He was aware it was available to view in early June. At that point he said it should have been password protected, as otherwise that’s a breach of contract. Here we are more than a month later and it is still not password protected. So has someone dropped the ball or does Peterson not really care about complying with contracts? It’s clear he hasn’t followed up on it.

According to Peterson, it should be password-protected. Maybe Goodman disagrees. Peterson said the Telly went to the Interpreter, when the site clearly said it was awarded to Goodman's company. Maybe there is a similar disagreement over who gets to release access to it online.

Eventually Peter$on always manages to destroy most of his friendships/relationships. I think the director wants as many people to see it, but Priestcraft Peterson has shown time and time again he is only in it for the money.

https://vimeo.com/1023436976/df40ca611e

[Everybody Wang Chung]

Speaking of the Succession Crisis, it was too bad there wasn't someone in the Church who had the power to foresee, reveal and prophesy. If there had only been someone like that, the Succession Crisis could have been completely avoided, thereby preventing the Church from splintering into so many different groups.




https://vimeo.com/1023436976/df40ca611e

[Tom]

If anyone is even slightly interested in having a chuckle, the director, Mark Goodman has made Six Days in August available to the public for free again. Better hurry before the Afore throws a tantrum and pressures Mark Goodman to pull it down. The Afore really is all about the money.

Enjoy:

https://disq.us/url?url=https%3A%2F%2Fv ... id=2318198

Sone comments after watching the first fifteen minutes: Why does Brigham seem to be delivering a soliloquy to command the oxen to move? “To move, or not to move, that is the question.” The fight scene was not well choreographed. The sound effects were off. Heber Kimball’s reaction in the scene in which he learns of Joseph’s and Hyrum’s deaths was forced and tough to watch. “When?” (Unfortunately, Quinton Kappell was too thin to play the role of the barrel-chested Kimball.)

I’ve now watched the entire film. In a way, I appreciate the director’s decision to make it freely available beginning last October.

1. I largely agree with the reviews by Everybody Wang Chung and drumdude.

2. The cinematography is fairly well done. I don’t know the film’s budget (the Interpreter Foundation has not disclosed it), but I would guess that a good portion was spent on that aspect.

3. The pacing is uneven. As others here have observed, the events of the “six days” seemed to be crammed in at the end. Scenes in the early part of the film could have been cut.

4. As others have noted, the characters lack depth. Joseph and Brigham are depicted as essentially faultless. (Wilford Woodruff is portrayed as having a bit of a temper.)

5. The characters are too clean in their appearance. Brigham’s flowing, conditioned, and highlighted hair is distracting. The filmmakers should have rubbed more dirt on characters’ clothing and asked the actors to forgo bathing for a week.

6. Some scenes do not reflect the historical record. Joseph is tarred and feathered (the film doesn’t provide much of an explanation for it), but he is shown with merely some blush on his cheeks the following day.

7. The film neglects to explain who published the Expositor. The film shows Hyrum reading a very selective excerpt from the paper (his words are shown in bold below; notice what he does not read from the publication’s allegations):

Inasmuch as we have for years borne with the individual follies and iniquities of Joseph Smith, Hyrum Smith, and many other(s) official characters in the Church of Jesus Christ, (conceiving it a duty incumbent upon us so to bear,) and having labored with them repeatedly with all Christian love, meekness and humbility, yet to no effect, feel as if forbearance has ceased to be a virtue, and hope of reformation vain; and inasmuch as they have introduced false and damnable doctrines into the Church, such as a plurality of gods above the God of this universe and his ability to fall with all his creations; the plurality of wives, for time and eternity; the doctrine of unconditional sealing up to eternal life, against all crimes except that of sheding innocent blood, by a perversion of their priestly authority and thereby forfeiting the holy priesthood, according to the word of Jesus; "If a man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch and is withered, and men gather them and cast them into the fire, and they are burned." St. John, xv.6. "Whosoever transgresseth and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God, he that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, hath both the Father and the Son; if there come any unto you and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed, for he that abideth him God speed is a partaker of his evil deeds;" we therefore are constrained to denounce them as apostates from the pure and holy doctrines of Jesus Christ.

Plural marriage is mentioned in a few scenes, but the film does not even allude to the disturbing details (e.g., Joseph marrying women and girls behind Emma’s back, Joseph marrying young teenagers, Joseph’s use of coercive language to convince girls and women to marry him, Joseph marrying women already married to other men, etc.). The scene in which Joseph and Emma speak about plural marriage is extremely vague. The scene in Carthage Jail does not show Joseph Smith’s use of a gun. Overall, the film seems afraid to tackle difficult topics.

8. Sharp’s “henchman” is a cartoonish character. He seems to pop up in scenes, apparently even traveling more than a thousand miles to harass Brigham in Boston. The director should have toned down the henchman’s acting.

9. The writers seem to have invented, for dramatic purposes, the character of the blind man who hears Joseph Smith’s voice during Brigham’s speech.

10. The film’s humor is a weak point.

I didn’t see much in the film that distinguishes it from a movie that the church would make for a temple visitors’ center or seminary classes. Some have claimed that Six Days is a major step forward in Mormon movie-making. I don’t agree.

[Doctor Scratch]

An excellent, helpful, and very fair-minded review, Tom. The filmmakers should feel grateful that you took the time to watch. As for this:

I didn’t see much in the film that distinguishes it from a movie that the church would make for a temple visitors’ center or seminary classes. Some have claimed that Six Days is a major step forward in Mormon movie-making. I don’t agree.

As more time goes by, the more it seems that the film simply did not live up to the inflated expectations of some of the people who were involved in its production. I guess it turns out that attempting to rehab BY's reputation is quite a challenge after all, eh?