Six Days in August D.O.A.?

[Doctor Scratch]

“American Primeval” sounds very interesting. A complex Brigham Young who has to turn to violence and morally questionable behavior in order to protect the Saints? *That* sounds like a genuinely interesting premise. What a shocker that Hollywood insiders would be absolutely schooling the Mopologists on the basics of telling an interesting story.

“Six Days in August” has been sucking big-time at the box office because it is simply a terrible idea for a movie. I mean, what is the dramatic interest supposed to be? Whether BY actually assumes control of the Brighamite faction? Who, apart from a handful of people, would ever find that compelling as a film? I get the Rev’s interest as a historian and someone who likes to “geek out” on Mormonism, but he is an outlier. This was a terrible, stupid idea for a movie.

[Gadianton]

“American Primeval” sounds very interesting. A complex Brigham Young who has to turn to violence and morally questionable behavior in order to protect the Saints? *That* sounds like a genuinely interesting premise. What a shocker that Hollywood insiders would be absolutely schooling the Mopologists on the basics of telling an interesting story.

“Six Days in August” has been sucking big-time at the box office because it is simply a terrible idea for a movie. I mean, what is the dramatic interest supposed to be? Whether BY actually assumes control of the Brighamite faction? Who, apart from a handful of people, would ever find that compelling as a film? I get the Rev’s interest as a historian and someone who likes to “geek out” on Mormonism, but he is an outlier. This was a terrible, stupid idea for a movie.

What was the reasoning for Six Days? After the story of the witnesses, which makes sense at least from the standpoint of a long-time hobby horse of witness apologetics, why would the next story be the succession controversy? Okay Joseph first and then Brigham, but why that story in particular? It's kind of out of nowhere, or what am I missing?

[drumdude]

“American Primeval” sounds very interesting. A complex Brigham Young who has to turn to violence and morally questionable behavior in order to protect the Saints? *That* sounds like a genuinely interesting premise. What a shocker that Hollywood insiders would be absolutely schooling the Mopologists on the basics of telling an interesting story.

“Six Days in August” has been sucking big-time at the box office because it is simply a terrible idea for a movie. I mean, what is the dramatic interest supposed to be? Whether BY actually assumes control of the Brighamite faction? Who, apart from a handful of people, would ever find that compelling as a film? I get the Rev’s interest as a historian and someone who likes to “geek out” on Mormonism, but he is an outlier. This was a terrible, stupid idea for a movie.

What was the reasoning for Six Days? After the story of the witnesses, which makes sense at least from the standpoint of a long-time hobby horse of witness apologetics, why would the next story be the succession controversy? Okay Joseph first and then Brigham, but why that story in particular? It's kind of out of nowhere, or what am I missing?

It’s better to think of it as the second half of Witnesses, rather than its own film.

[I Have Questions]

“American Primeval” sounds very interesting. A complex Brigham Young who has to turn to violence and morally questionable behavior in order to protect the Saints? *That* sounds like a genuinely interesting premise. What a shocker that Hollywood insiders would be absolutely schooling the Mopologists on the basics of telling an interesting story.

“Six Days in August” has been sucking big-time at the box office because it is simply a terrible idea for a movie. I mean, what is the dramatic interest supposed to be? Whether BY actually assumes control of the Brighamite faction? Who, apart from a handful of people, would ever find that compelling as a film? I get the Rev’s interest as a historian and someone who likes to “geek out” on Mormonism, but he is an outlier. This was a terrible, stupid idea for a movie.

What was the reasoning for Six Days? After the story of the witnesses, which makes sense at least from the standpoint of a long-time hobby horse of witness apologetics, why would the next story be the succession controversy? Okay Joseph first and then Brigham, but why that story in particular? It's kind of out of nowhere, or what am I missing?

From what Peterson has said, it seems there isn’t any longer term strategic planning on these films. Film 2 was going to be a film about Lewis Carroll until Peterson saw a movie that essentially did exactly what he thought his film 2 would do. Then the production company (who make money out of Interpreter films) pitched him a different idea, the succession crisis, and he reluctantly went with that despite being largely unconvinced by it, because he didn’t have a better idea. At least initially. So the strategy is simply that Peterson wants to play at making films. Any films. So long as someone else is paying for it.

[Moksha]

Another movie idea that apologists might consider, is how the Brethren unified together to block the wild idea of Hugh B. Brown and those University of Utah so-called "Liberal Mormons" trying to give priesthood and temple-going status to people of African descent.

[Tom]

Wednesday, October 29

Box office: $5,968
%+/- YD: -48
%+/- LW: -36.4
Theaters: 35
Average per theater: $170
Total domestic gross to date: $336,826
Days: 20

On day 20 of its run, Witnesses had grossed $538,797 and was playing in 87 theaters.

Film 2 was going to be a film about Lewis Carroll until Peterson saw a movie that essentially did exactly what he thought his film 2 would do.

A comedy based on Lewis Carroll’s "Jabberwocky" starring the Proprietor would be interesting.

[drumdude]

I have a feeling today may have been the last day in most of the venues. What sane booker would keep it playing?

[Tom]

“American Primeval” sounds very interesting. A complex Brigham Young who has to turn to violence and morally questionable behavior in order to protect the Saints? *That* sounds like a genuinely interesting premise. What a shocker that Hollywood insiders would be absolutely schooling the Mopologists on the basics of telling an interesting story.

“Six Days in August” has been sucking big-time at the box office because it is simply a terrible idea for a movie. I mean, what is the dramatic interest supposed to be? Whether BY actually assumes control of the Brighamite faction? Who, apart from a handful of people, would ever find that compelling as a film? I get the Rev’s interest as a historian and someone who likes to “geek out” on Mormonism, but he is an outlier. This was a terrible, stupid idea for a movie.

What was the reasoning for Six Days? After the story of the witnesses, which makes sense at least from the standpoint of a long-time hobby horse of witness apologetics, why would the next story be the succession controversy? Okay Joseph first and then Brigham, but why that story in particular? It's kind of out of nowhere, or what am I missing?

The Proprietor gives his reasons here: https://latterdaysaintmag.com/why-this- ... in-august/

[Gadianton]

Thanks IHAQ and Tom.

I read the link, and I think I see what's going on here. He was lukewarm, but became convinced over time that it's a very important work given how Brigham is vilified for all the nasty things he did.

It's a red herring. It would be like making a film about Hitler as an art student and leaving it at that.

[Moksha]

A comedy based on Lewis Carroll’s "Jabberwocky" starring the Proprietor would be interesting.

Especially when he started to gyre and gimble in the wabe.