A New Trailer Drops for the "Witnesses" Movie

[_Dr. Shades]

Susan Easton Black. . . what hast thou done?

She--who should know better, considering her status as emeritus professor of church history--states that critics have resorted to saying that the witnesses saw the plates with their "spiritual eyes."

THAT'S A BORDERLINE LIE!! The implication, of course, is that the critics invented this from thin air. Not so; Martin Harris said this point-blank and critics are merely reminding us what he said.

[_Nomomo]

The Trailer is over the top ridiculous!

[_DrW]

Far from the dramatic film the Interpreter Foundation claims it to be - from its trailer, The Witness looks more like a mocumentary of the Joseph Smith story and a textbook example of Poe's Law in action.

[_Physics Guy]

It looks as though Smith swings the plates in their cloth bag to knock out his attacker. I'm iffy about how that would work, because it doesn't look as though he has much room to swing the bag of plates. Weight-in-bag-based martial arts are not my thing, so I could be wrong, but my feeling is that you'd want more room to swing a heavy weapon, to get it up to enough speed.

The plates are supposed to have weighed, what, fifty pounds? That's more than a cinder block, which is around thirty pounds. If I had a cinder block in a bag, I don't think I could just swing it at a guy from the ground like that. What Smith does in this trailer looks more to me like what someone could do with a brick in a bag—maybe two bricks, tops. A brick weighs around five pounds.

Evidently this film is going to show the plates to the viewer. That's going to hamstring the film as apologetics directed at non-Mormons, because it's too obviously begging the question of whether the plates were real. I mean, it might make it convincing that people who had really seen and touched ancient plates would behave as the Mormon "witnesses" did, but it's not going to do anything to persuade non-Mormons that only people who had really seen and touched ancient plates could have behaved as the witnesses did. To do that, you'd need a completely opposite film: one that showed Smith trying to bamboozle people with fake or non-existent plates, and the people nevertheless reacting as the Mormon "witnesses" did—and it all being totally unbelievable. If a film pulled that off, and really showed that bamboozled or corrupted people behaving like the Mormon witnesses would have been ridiculous, then you'd have an impressive argument for non-Mormons.

As it is, a film that shows the plates as real is only speaking to Mormons. And it may well shore up some wavering testimonies by giving Mormons a clear picture of how it could have all really happened, with real plates and real people. That kind of thing can be quite reassuring, I think—and perhaps not unreasonably. One of the most nagging worries that a wavering Mormon must have, it seems to me, is a suspicion that the whole story about the "coming forth" of the Book of Mormon is just unrealistic, to the degree that there is no way that it even could have happened, because it can't even be staged in full detail without obviously coming apart at the seams. Staging the story and showing that it doesn't collapse in contradictions would legitimately put such fears to rest.

It's not entirely clear to me yet, though, whether the story presented in Witnesses will in fact hold together without collapsing.

Once you see that loose stack of plates on the screen, you might be thinking, "Yes, that's right, it could have been just like that—see, it works!" But you might also have a hard time not thinking, "That doesn't look like a lot of text there. Could those few plates really hold the whole Book of Mormon?"

Above all, once you see those people handling the plates on the screen, you might be thinking, "Of course they were firmly convinced, because it happened like that—they really handled the things!" But you might also have a hard time not thinking, "If they'd seen and handled something solid like that, why didn't anyone describe the plates in more detail? Why do I have to look at imagined models of the plates instead of being able to see multiple original sketches and detailed descriptions by the people themselves?"

In short, the more vividly real Witnesses makes it all look, the more people may find themselves asking: How come Witnesses is so much more impressive ... than the actual witnesses?

[Guest]

https://www.freesoundeffects.com/free-t ... ch-426855/

I just can't enough of the fact they used that 'kpow' sound effect. Seriously. Click on the link and you'll see they most likely used the 'free' sound effect.

KPOW! SMACK! BAP!



- Doc

[_kairos]

If truth in advertising is important there must be a scene toward the end where Joseph Smith is seen orally dictating the Book of Mormon with his seer stone in the hat, Olive dutifully copying while in the background the golden plates are seen a far off nestled safely in a hollow log about 1/2 mile from the house.


k

[_Stem]

Its perhaps sad to think they have put or are putting such effort into this. The witnesses and the plates are all useless elements of the story. The plates remained some conceptually silly items that sat hidden while Joseph dictated the Book of Mormon, apparently. Even Skousen tells us Joseph didn't translate anything. The Book of Mormon is a 19 century production. There's no denying the elements that suggest as much. If the plates are old and contain the Book of Mormon story they contain a wholly different version of it.

The silly things disappeared and haven't been seen since, apparently. The 8 witnesses saw plates. Well, what does that matter? The 3 witnesses were visited in vision by an angel? How is anyone to take that seriously? The voice of God said something to them. What does that mean because as it is the voice of God has said millions of things to millions of people. If God lied to the 3 witnesses by suggesting that the English Book of Mormon is a translation of the ancient plates, then the story only works against the religion.

The Church would be better off if there were no plates ever mentioned, nor no witnesses.

[_Dr Exiled]

Yes, Dewey, Cheetum, & Howe, why don't you take a look at this Witnesses film for us. We may have a copyright lawsuit.

[_Dr Moore]

Put on your believing hats, people. Wake up. Open your eyes.

The plates fell to the ground and settled, open to the air, in a sack which is clearly shown as torn nearly to the corner seam. Viewer is meant to know that the sack is open at the top and also open at the bottom. Joseph grabs the top of the sack, which knots itself around 50 pounds of metal plates, and swings the flail, connecting audibly with his attacker's jaw.

All of this is a diversion for the critics, a red herring.

This is a work of pure genius. Layers and layers wrapped around the WITNESSES motif.

• Joseph's attacker is the FIRST witness to the plates. He witnessed them bodily, with his head.
• We know there were 3 attackers in the woods that night. While we may not be shown all 3 witnessing the plates in like manner (head-to-metal), we are left to assume that all were repelled by the plates as a physical weapon.
• This scene reveals that Satan, in his vain effort to interrupt the restoration's millennial ushering, was made a TYPE and SHADOW of the 3 witnesses to come. His emissaries were made the first trio of physical witness to the plates and their "power."
• Can you imagine a more forceful juxtaposition? Satan, desperate for a body, is physically warded off by the plates. Satan, desperate for followers, is spiritually warded off by the plates. Simply magnificent. Bravo!
• The sack itself is, of course, a metaphor, a clue. The gospel and the restoration, to critics, is an open sack, things go in one end and fall out the other. It appears useless and ridiculous.
• But, and the batman "pow" sound effect draws attention to this point as if to wake you up. The gospel and restoration, miraculously and securely knotted in the hands the prophet Joseph, and wielded by Joseph, becomes a great thing, whether a medieval flail or the power of convincing.

[Guest]

Notice how the plates and the bag look at about 22 seconds in (after they're knocked from the actor's arms). The plates are clearly exposed and you can see a ring. Now check how the plates/bag look at about 33-34 seconds as Joseph tries to reach for them. I see a bag, but I don't see the plates. At 35 seconds in, we see the exposed plates again. At 36 seconds, Joseph grabs the bag and pulls it toward him. I don't see the plates. Then we see the exposed plates again at 36-37 seconds. Is there a problem here?