DiscussMormonism.com

Apparently the massive success of Witnesses was not enough to fund the best theatrical feature in the Interpreter Cinematic Universe (ICU).

The captivating title alone should be able to get many more non Mormons into the auditoriums. That’s before even seeing the sexy hunk actor who will undoubtedly be playing the role of Brigham Young.

drumdude wrote: ↑

Sun Jul 31, 2022 10:02 pm

That’s before even seeing the sexy hunk actor who will undoubtedly be playing the role of Brigham Young.

They'll need to do a shirtless scene. There's at least one shirtless moment in nearly every "Cinematic Universe" film.

Ah, of course—the anti-Community of Christ film, where they are deliberately leaving out any mention of Joseph Smith III as a possible successor.

Does that mean we can call DCP an anti-Mormon? He always argued that he never spent any time creating pamphlets against other religions, yet here he is creating an entire film.

drumdude wrote: ↑

Mon Aug 01, 2022 12:27 am

Does that mean we can call DCP an anti-Mormon? He always argued that he never spent any time creating pamphlets against other religions, yet here he is creating an entire film.

His behavior over the years has been antithetical to everything that I understand to be good about the LDS Church, so in that sense, yes—he is an anti-Mormon.

Doctor Scratch wrote: ↑

Sun Jul 31, 2022 11:46 pm

Ah, of course—the anti-Community of Christ film, where they are deliberately leaving out any mention of Joseph Smith III as a possible successor.

It’s a bold move—to try to affirm the exclusive truthfulness of one branch of the Restoration. The idea that the Succession clearly points to the LDS Church being the ONLY true church of those that arose out of the ashes of Nauvoo is ludicrous and untenable, but that doesn’t stop the Mopologetic enterprise. And I consider this outing, unlike Witnesses, to be a Mopologetic film, in that it is divisive by design.

drumdude wrote: ↑

Sun Jul 31, 2022 10:02 pm

Apparently the massive success of Witnesses was not enough to fund the best theatrical feature in the Interpreter Cinematic Universe (ICU).

The captivating title alone should be able to get many more non Mormons into the auditoriums. That’s before even seeing the sexy hunk actor who will undoubtedly be playing the role of Brigham Young.

Have they now provided an accounting of the use of funds on the first film, Witnesses?

Will the Interpreter crew use claymation to turn the face of Brigham into the countenance of Joseph?

IHAQ wrote: ↑

Mon Aug 01, 2022 12:09 pm

drumdude wrote: ↑

Sun Jul 31, 2022 10:02 pm

Apparently the massive success of Witnesses was not enough to fund the best theatrical feature in the Interpreter Cinematic Universe (ICU).

The captivating title alone should be able to get many more non Mormons into the auditoriums. That’s before even seeing the sexy hunk actor who will undoubtedly be playing the role of Brigham Young.

Have they now provided an accounting of the use of funds on the first film, Witnesses?

No, they haven't. But it's safe to say that they will essentially have to start from scratch in terms of their fundraising, because Witnesses was a box office flop.

A comment on SeN asked if it cost roughly 1.1 million, which matches with Interpreter’s public tax records. Dan didn’t challenge that question, and stated only that the next movie would be around the same cost as the first.