All 11 Megaplex Theaters To Pull Witnesses On Thursday

[Sledge]

If you can pull that off, I am game. That would be amazing.

I wish I could. I have no connection to the film. I was just making a silly comment.

[Kishkumen]

I wish I could. I have no connection to the film. I was just making a silly comment.

[Doctor Scratch]

Unless something changes, Thursday will be the last day all Megaplex Theaters are showing "Witnesses."

I wonder if the other theaters will follow suit or if they stop showing the film sooner?

I wish I knew more about the movie industry. Is this normal, good news or bad news?

Frankly, I am disappointed. I hope this isn't true. I was hoping to see the film during my July trip to Utah. I wanted to see this on the big screen. Now I will be stuck streaming it as a rental through Amazon vel sim. Ugh.

Reverend: I think that you were correct all along. The film was primarily Mopologist propaganda. That's why it's exiting theaters so quickly (among other reasons, I guess). But this shows just how big (or small) of an audience the Mopologists have.

[Ramus_Stein]

I wish I could. I have no connection to the film. I was just making a silly comment.

You got pwned.

[Kishkumen]

Reverend: I think that you were correct all along. The film was primarily Mopologist propaganda. That's why it's exiting theaters so quickly (among other reasons, I guess). But this shows just how big (or small) of an audience the Mopologists have.

Yes, it is true that the film was bound to cast a light on these events that would more or less conform to traditional LDS readings of the history, perhaps augmented or inflected at times by more realistic or unflattering aspects of the story. You should check out how unhappy Robert F. Smith was with the depiction of the witnesses. He complained about it on MDDB, and this elicited a response from DCP. Smith has an even more positive view of the witnesses than DCP does, and so he takes DCP and the filmmakers to task for not being sufficiently positive (accurate, in his view).

I am supposing that our Lord and cervine Savior did not make it into the film. I wonder whether Martin Hariss's views of Deity, which seem to include theriomorphic manifestations, make him a more or less respectable figure in Robert F. Smith's eyes?

[DrStakhanovite]

Reverend: I think that you were correct all along. The film was primarily Mopologist propaganda. That's why it's exiting theaters so quickly (among other reasons, I guess). But this shows just how big (or small) of an audience the Mopologists have.

Yes, it is true that the film was bound to cast a light on these events that would more or less conform to traditional LDS readings of the history, perhaps augmented or inflected at times by more realistic or unflattering aspects of the story. You should check out how unhappy Robert F. Smith was with the depiction of the witnesses. He complained about it on MDDB, and this elicited a response from DCP. Smith has an even more positive view of the witnesses than DCP does, and so he takes DCP and the filmmakers to task for not being sufficiently positive (accurate, in his view).

I am supposing it that our Lord and cervine Savior did not make it into the film. I wonder whether Martin Hariss's views of Deity, which seem to include theriomorphic manifestations, make him a more or less respectable figure in Robert F. Smith's eyes?

For those wanting to check out what Robert said, here is the thread:

I saw the film yesterday at a big screen Cinemark theater. Lots of people there.

The director was Mark Goodman, writer Mitch Davis, and it is rated PG.

There was a lot of beautiful location filming, and valuable use of historical sites. The actor playing Joseph Smith looked very much like photos and paintings we have seen, but perhaps not so imposing and physically as powerful as Joseph actually was.

Writer Mitch Davis, who did an excellent job on "The Other Side of Heaven" I & II, and who is an experienced writer-director, dropped the ball on this one.

Davis should have worked with a serious historian in order to come up with a better, more accurate script.

For example, in the scene in which Joseph returns to the forest to retrieve the plates from a hollow log, he should have wrapped them in a farmer's smock -- which would have been substantial -- rather than the light-weight shirt he appeared to use. In another scene (below), Joseph and Martin are depicted with cloth divider between them. The best information we have is that there was no such divider, and no reason for one.

(PHOTO NO ATTACHED)

In this same photo (in the monitor on the right) one can see Joseph holding a black hat. Witnesses consistently describe the hat as white, and that Joseph placed his face into the hat in order to block out the light. In this film, Joseph never puts his face in the hat, but dictates with his face, as shown here.

Joseph was primarily successful because he surrounded himself with men of strength and character. In writing his pious script, Davis seemed to miss that aspect in each case: Martin Harris was a substantial, successful farmer. He did not get that way by being a bumbling fool and henpecked husband. A scene with him on the road, consulting with experts in New York City and en route might have been helpful. Oliver could have been depicted as he actually was, a very smart young man, who rightly thought of himself as far more sophisticated than Joseph. David Whitmer was a powerful and opinionated character who thought that anything Joseph did after producing the Book of Mormon was heresy. He was a distinctive influence on Restorationists through the time of his death and beyond. All three witnesses were very independent minded, which makes their story all the more potentially interesting.

Here is Dan's reply:

Bob:

Thanks for your review, and for calling my attention to it.

We could, I suppose, debate whether the film's depictions of Oliver Cowdery, Martin Harris, and David Whitmer are nuanced in precisely the correct way -- I'm personally happy with the portrayals -- but I'm fine with the fact that we view them differently.

Other than that, I'm quite serene if the filmmakers failed to accurately show the precise number of millimeters between the hat and Joseph's face or accidentally got the color of the hat wrong. (I myself have argued in writing that the hat was used to exclude ambient light, but I wouldn't be a bit surprised if, over the long daily hours of dictation, Joseph placed the hat -- and himself -- in various positions.) Much bigger historical issues than those seem to be at stake here.

Incidentally, the film places a screen between Joseph and Martin, but not between Joseph and Oliver.

[drumdude]

"The precise number of millimeters away from the hat"


God how apologists would love to entertain the motion that Smith's head was never actually "inside" the hat, as to exclude all light. Maybe he was just looking into it, from several feet away, as if to exclude all light!

[Mixman76]

As someone in the film industry, a movie lasting a week in the theaters means that it is not bringing in enough money per screen to stay in the rotation. In other words, a flop. I just saw an IG post boasting that it made $155k in its opening weekend.
KSL reported that Purdie Distribution said it was in 350 theaters. So, doing the math that’s $442.86 per screen, divided by 3 days which make up the Weekend tally (Friday- Sunday) that’s $147.62 per screen. Average ticket prices around $10, and let’s say there are 3 screenings of the film per day that’s 4.9 people per screening. Not much to boast about.

[kairos]

I posted earlier but I can find it and if it is somewhere you have double opportunity.
Just wanted to point out here in Phoenix East Vally Gilbert a Mormon sorta “ stronghold, you can rent a Harkins theater for $100 so perhaps in Utah the distributors got rock bottom rental costs . What did a ticket go for in Utah?
There was no from the top pressure from SLC to fill the theaters here according to my SP son .
Perhaps the brethren wanted to see how W would do without institutional help to skew the numbers.
Finally my email dialogues with HS included her admission she saw the film 3 times before its release to the public and told me she knew of no mopologist strategy to defend the film from the antis. She said she enjoyed the film!
I think the film needs a little more time before the sink sank sunk scenario is complete. The Titantic moment for DCP may be just around the bend my huckleberry
friends!
Just reportin
Am

[Doctor Scratch]

As someone in the film industry, a movie lasting a week in the theaters means that it is not bringing in enough money per screen to stay in the rotation. In other words, a flop. I just saw an IG post boasting that it made $155k in its opening weekend.
KSL reported that Purdie Distribution said it was in 350 theaters. So, doing the math that’s $442.86 per screen, divided by 3 days which make up the Weekend tally (Friday- Sunday) that’s $147.62 per screen. Average ticket prices around $10, and let’s say there are 3 screenings of the film per day that’s 4.9 people per screening. Not much to boast about.

Exactly. The movie is a huge, spectacular flop. I guess there is the chance that they hammered out a profitable deal with the Church for further distribution rights--or maybe it will have a second life on streaming? Who knows. Regardless, I vowed to laugh when the movie failed financially, and I am a man of my word:



The best DCP has got right now is quoting from junk news services that are using adjectives like "commanding" and "impressive" to describe the movie's performance. "Look: young Junior's mudpie is impressive!" "Little Sally has taken a commanding lead in the 1st grade relay race!"