Which is the Better Film: "September Dawn" or "Witnesses"?

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Post Reply
User avatar
Doctor Scratch
B.H. Roberts Chair of Mopologetic Studies
Posts: 1161
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 7:24 pm
Location: Cassius University

Which is the Better Film: "September Dawn" or "Witnesses"?

Post by Doctor Scratch »

Greetings, Friends and Colleagues! With summer in full swing here at Cassius U., I find that I now have time for reflection, and time to pursue research projects with greater freedom. Mind you, I relish my teaching assignments. But sometimes, the extra time is truly welcome. In any case, I've been wondering as of late: How will things shake out with Interpreter's Witnesses movie? He's been boasted on "Sic et Non" lately that the film is now in the "big leagues" because, despite its status as an independent production, it's being ranked right up there in the "Big Leagues," alongside movies from Disney, Universal, and Paramount! An interesting, if somewhat silly point. To be honest, it seems like something of an act of desperation on his part--a last-ditch attempt to salvage his film's respectability after its pitiful box office performance.

But it makes me wonder: How should one go about judging a Mopologetic movie? How does Witnesses stack up against that last noteworthy anti-Mormon film? Folks might remember September Dawn, which came out in 2007 and was a re-telling of the Mountain Meadows Massacre, which has always been an especially tough pill for the apologists to swallow. You may have forgotten, though, just how much the MOpologists exulted in the movie's general awfulness. Dr. Peterson himself once said that he would judge the success of Witnesses primarily on whether or not they recouped their investment and were able to make a second film. That could still happen, thanks to streaming or other distribution deals, but the concept of the "box office bomb" is defined by whether or not a movie makes back its budge at the box office. In that sense, both September Dawn and (most likely) Witnesses will wind up being remembered as "box office flops." Viewed from that angle, the movies are tied.

There are other ways of thinking about this, though. The ratings aggregator site, Rotten Tomatoes has been mentioned a lot lately. Right now, Witnesses has an audience score of 86%, though as some have pointed out, this number is likely inflated by Mopologists and their supporters, who merely want the movie to have a high rating, and/or who have some stake in the movie "looking good." Hardcore bias, in other words, is inflating the numbers.

September Dawn, meanwhile, has an audience rating of 49%, but interestingly, it actually has a critical rating (normally the measure by which a movie is formally dubbed "Fresh" or "Rotten"). Witnesses does not have a single critic review. September Dawn is "rotten," with a 16% critical rating--it was widely panned by critics. So, this is a tough call. Witnesses has a completely bogus audience rating whereas September Dawn has more than 5,000 audience reviews, many of which are no doubt negative reviews from apologists. (I wouldn't be surprised if Allen Wyatt personally wrote 500+ of them.) Setting aside the audience rankings, then, we have the critical ratings, and I'm left wondering which is worse: a terrible 16% rating from critics, or no critic ratings whatsoever? I suppose it's a question of whether it's worse to be despised or ignored? In any case, I'm calling this one a draw.

That raises the question of visibility, and here, September Dawn clearly wins: it was reviewed by none other than Roger Ebert (who gave it zero stars), and the Washington Post, among other notable publications. So if we are measuring the movies' success by the amount of critical attention--positive or negative--that they got from full-time professional critics, then September Dawn wins.

And what about monetary figures? Here, again, September Dawn would appear to emerge victorious. It was shot on a budget of $11 million compared to Witnesses' $1 million. And September Dawn brought in a box office take of just slightly more than $1 million--so, around 10% of its budget. Witnesses has pulled in ~$200K at this point, so it's made back a higher percentage of its production and marketing budget, *but*, due to lack of transparency, we actually don't know what the real budget was. Still, I'm feeling generous, so I'll give this one to the Mopologists. Witnesses wins this one.

Reading the most recent "SeN" post, you would think that Witnesses is impressive based on its standing relative to other movies that are out. It's ranked 6th, after all! That's impressive, right? Maybe. You have to remember that it debuted at the tail-end of the pandemic. In its opening weekend, Witnesses failed to pull in $200K, whereas September Dawn made just shy of $900,000; it also debuted at the rank of 23, but there were a lot more movies in theaters at that time. Witnesses just isn't facing the same kind of competition. I'm inclined to give the edge to September Dawn here--it came out at the end of August, for crying out loud, which isn't exactly a stellar time for a new, "indy" movie to be released. Witnesses, meanwhile, came out in early June, which is right there around "tent pole" season. But due to the pandemic, all the "tent pole" movies--like Dune or the new James Bond film--have been delayed. So, this one really feels like something of a tie to me. Let's call it even in terms of box office rankings. (For the record, September Dawn lasted only two weeks in theaters. It also played in far more theaters, though. Witnesses would win if we were to focus on per-theater box office take. Then again, if Witnesses had been playing in 800+ theaters, would it really have earned much more money?)

What about star power? September Dawn featured a compelling performance from award-winning Hollywood luminary Jon Voight. Witnesses, meanwhile, did not have any major stars. This one clearly goes to September Dawn.

And then there are the more nuanced elements. What if we judge the two movies based on the amount of acrimony they managed to stir up? Dr. Peterson spoke of Witnesses being "strangled in the cradle[/i] due to reactions/attacks from critics and anti-Mormons. Again, though: September Dawn has more than 5,000 audience ratings, and slightly more than half of them are negative. Do you know what else it has? A whole entire FAIR Mormon page devoted to attacking it piece by piece. They even quote from a letter/email from the movie's co-writer:
I am the co-writer of the Screenplay "September Dawn," and Author of the book by the same name. We have been heavily slammed in the press and perhaps I'm being paranoid but the apparent sameness of their opinions are too coincidental. I have heard floating rumours of Mormons being told to slam the movie in reviews and one blog reporting it on yahoo.com has been pulled. Would like to correspond with anyone who can give me any information on this.

[SNIP!]

Please help me try to learn the truth as to whether or not the church is directing their members to help destroy our movie and credibility. Thank you.
Huh. That sounds familiar, doesn't it? FAIR Mormon responds:
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has not "direct[ed its] members to help destroy" September Dawn, and has made no comment about the film itself. Virtually all of the critical reviews reprinted above were written by non-Mormons. Instead of taking the criticism of her film at face value, Schutter resorted to paranoid conspiracy theories.
LOL! Sure: the institutional Church might not have "directed" people to go give the movie lousy ratings, but FAIR and the Mopologists very likely did! That said, FAIR does make a fair point about the reviews from professional critics. It's thus too bad that Witnesses didn't screen for more full-time movie critics, so that we could have that data for the sake of comparison. Going back to my original point, though: September Dawn clearly wins this one. If a film's quality is a measure of how much antipathy it stirs up amongst its critics, then it clearly smashes Witnesses to pieces. I admit I could be wrong: there might be an anti-Mormon website out there that is devoted to collecting every criticism of Witnesses in the hopes of "strangling the movie in its crib." Instead, there seem to have been a handful of people who gave the movie a low rating on Rotten Tomatoes, but is that it?

Ultimately, assessing a film's qualities is a mug's game. It may be that it's easier to simply say that it's all subjective. But, as I think you can clearly see, there is a case to be made that September Dawn is a better movie than Witnesses.

And for the record: I could not get through September Dawn. It truly is a terrible, unwatchable film. That said, I think that you have to admit that the anti-Mormons scored a major coup just in terms of getting it made. And an $11 million budget! Wow. An "old cash nexus" indeed.
"If, while hoping that everybody else will be honest and so forth, I can personally prosper through unethical and immoral acts without being detected and without risk, why should I not?." --Daniel Peterson, 6/4/14
User avatar
Bought Yahoo
High Councilman
Posts: 523
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2020 8:59 pm

Re: Which is the Better Film: "September Dawn" or "Witnesses"?

Post by Bought Yahoo »

Interesting story about September Dawn. The producer was doing an early screening of the film in Vail (or Breckinridge; I can't recall). One of my clients was invited. After the movie was screened the producer voiced a number of rather typical slurs against Mormons. My Jewish client, in a large group of people, stood up, mentioned my name and said I wasn't like that, and walked out.
User avatar
Doctor CamNC4Me
God
Posts: 8981
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 2:04 am

Re: Which is the Better Film: "September Dawn" or "Witnesses"?

Post by Doctor CamNC4Me »

Bought Yahoo wrote:
Fri Jun 11, 2021 10:04 pm
Interesting story about September Dawn. The producer was doing an early screening of the film in Vail (or Breckinridge; I can't recall). One of my clients was invited. After the movie was screened the producer voiced a number of rather typical slurs against Mormons. My Jewish client, in a large group of people, stood up, mentioned my name and said I wasn't like that, and walked out.
And then everybody clapped?

- Doc
Hugh Nibley claimed he bumped into Adolf Hitler, Albert Einstein, Winston Churchill, Gertrude Stein, and the Grand Duke Vladimir Romanoff. Dishonesty is baked into Mormonism.
drumdude
God
Posts: 5219
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2020 5:29 am

Re: Which is the Better Film: "September Dawn" or "Witnesses"?

Post by drumdude »

I imagine Peterson has made/is making an effort to get at least *one* critical review up on rotten tomatoes.

You can buy anything in this world with money, after all.
User avatar
Everybody Wang Chung
God
Posts: 1624
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:52 am

Re: Which is the Better Film: "September Dawn" or "Witnesses"?

Post by Everybody Wang Chung »

Doctor CamNC4Me wrote:
Fri Jun 11, 2021 10:20 pm
Bought Yahoo wrote:
Fri Jun 11, 2021 10:04 pm
Interesting story about September Dawn. The producer was doing an early screening of the film in Vail (or Breckinridge; I can't recall). One of my clients was invited. After the movie was screened the producer voiced a number of rather typical slurs against Mormons. My Jewish client, in a large group of people, stood up, mentioned my name and said I wasn't like that, and walked out.
And then everybody clapped?

- Doc
And Yahoo Bought and everyone lived happily ever after.
Image
"I'm on paid sabbatical from BYU in exchange for my promise to use this time to finish two books."

Daniel C. Peterson, 2014
User avatar
Kishkumen
God
Posts: 6121
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2020 2:37 pm
Location: Cassius University

Re: Which is the Better Film: "September Dawn" or "Witnesses"?

Post by Kishkumen »

I didn’t make it very far through September Dawn. I thought it was a laughably terrible movie and extremely offensive to boot. My sympathies will be with those who boost their own religion over those who tear the religions of others down. On that basis alone, I will always view Witnesses to be superior to September Dawn, which disgusts me.
“If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don’t have to worry about the answers.”~Thomas Pynchon, Gravity’s Rainbow
User avatar
Doctor Scratch
B.H. Roberts Chair of Mopologetic Studies
Posts: 1161
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 7:24 pm
Location: Cassius University

Re: Which is the Better Film: "September Dawn" or "Witnesses"?

Post by Doctor Scratch »

Kishkumen wrote:
Fri Jun 11, 2021 11:12 pm
I didn’t make it very far through September Dawn. I thought it was a laughably terrible movie and extremely offensive to boot. My sympathies will be with those who boost their own religion over those who tear the religions of others down. On that basis alone, I will always view Witnesses to be superior to September Dawn, which disgusts me.
Some great points, Reverend. I wonder if we might then say that “Witnesses” is an attempt to atone for all the attacks on EVs and atheists that have been published in the FARMS Review or on “SeN”?
"If, while hoping that everybody else will be honest and so forth, I can personally prosper through unethical and immoral acts without being detected and without risk, why should I not?." --Daniel Peterson, 6/4/14
User avatar
Gadianton
God
Posts: 3843
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2020 11:56 pm
Location: Elsewhere

Re: Which is the Better Film: "September Dawn" or "Witnesses"?

Post by Gadianton »

My sympathies will be with those who boost their own religion over those who tear the religions of others down.
Indeed, Reverend. An alternative film we could use as a benchmark, a film depicting the struggles of a man of faith, which was created by a man of faith, is Robert Duvall's 1997 film, The Apostle.

Not only did the film receive critical acclaim and a near perfect review by Roger Ebert himself, but it was made on half of the budget of September Dawn. It was made for 5 million of Duvall's own money. Granted, if made today, it would have cost more, but in fact, it crushed the box office, raking in 21 million. Not exactly Star Wars, but considering it was an "artistic" film, that was pretty darn respectable.

Indeed, Doctor Scratch's brilliant comparison shows the quality of work one is comfortable comparing Witnesses to. Which Turkey of the year was the better turkey? It doesn't feel quite right to put it against Duvall's work. Duvall is a professional! He's a real artist! It's not fair!

But maybe it is fair?

Recall Spencer W. Kimball's epic vision of the arts:
SWK wrote:In our world, there have risen brilliant stars in drama, music, literature, sculpture, painting, science, and all the graces. For long years I have had a vision of members of the Church greatly increasing their already strong positions of excellence till the eyes of all the world will be upon us.
SWK wrote:With regard to masters, surely there must be many Wagners (Richard Wagner, 1813–83) in the Church, approaching him or yet to come in the tomorrows—young people with a love of art, talent supreme, and eagerness to create. I hope we may produce men greater than this German composer, Wagner, but less eccentric, more spiritual.
SWK wrote:Brigham Young said, “Every accomplishment, every polished grace, every useful attainment in mathematics, music, and in all sciences and art belong to the Saints.”
SWK wrote:Members of the Church should be peers or superiors to any others in natural ability, extended training, plus the Holy Spirit which should bring them light and truth.
SWK wrote: Such masterpieces should run for months in every movie center, cover every part of the globe in the tongues of the people, written by great artists, purified by the best critics.
Absolutely Brutal!

Speaking of Star Wars, I can only imagine that rather than Yoda, in the social Darwinian afterlife of Added Upon that the co-executive producer fantasizes about, Kimball will take on the powerful form of Lord Vader. Will he clutch his minion by his throat and say, "You have failed me!"?

A prophet of God has set the standard, and the apologists have failed to meet it. Duvall's work shows that it is possible for an independent film about a personal struggle of faith, and created by a person of faith to impress 'the best critics'. By President Kimball's own standard, the success of Witnesses proves that the Church isn't what it claims to be. It is false. Quite ironic given the film is a work of apologetics.
User avatar
Sledge
Area Authority
Posts: 605
Joined: Tue May 04, 2021 10:30 pm
Location: The Athenaeum
Contact:

Re: Which is the Better Film: "September Dawn" or "Witnesses"?

Post by Sledge »

Doctor Scratch wrote:
Some great points, Reverend. I wonder if we might then say that “Witnesses” is an attempt to atone for all the attacks on EVs and atheists that have been published in the FARMS Review or on “SeN”?
The EVs attacked first, if you recall, going back to Joseph Smith’s time. Old school apologetics is a response to people like Ed Decker.
User avatar
Doctor CamNC4Me
God
Posts: 8981
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 2:04 am

Re: Which is the Better Film: "September Dawn" or "Witnesses"?

Post by Doctor CamNC4Me »

Sledge wrote:
Sat Jun 12, 2021 12:43 am
Doctor Scratch wrote:
Some great points, Reverend. I wonder if we might then say that “Witnesses” is an attempt to atone for all the attacks on EVs and atheists that have been published in the FARMS Review or on “SeN”?
The EVs attacked first, if you recall, going back to Joseph Smith’s time. Old school apologetics is a response to people like Ed Decker.
How are you so ignorant of your own faith, of its history, of the earliest words uttered out of the mouths of early Mormon leadership? Good Lord.

- Doc
Hugh Nibley claimed he bumped into Adolf Hitler, Albert Einstein, Winston Churchill, Gertrude Stein, and the Grand Duke Vladimir Romanoff. Dishonesty is baked into Mormonism.
Post Reply