Inside Interpreter's "6 Days in August" Fundraising Campaign

[Doctor Scratch]

"In this country, you gotta make the money first. Then when you get the money, you get the power." --Tony Montana (Al Pacino) offers advice to Manny Ray (Steven Bauer) in Brian DePalma's 1983 film, Scarface.

Greetings, Friends and Colleagues.

Like me, I'm sure you are anxiously anticipating new developments related to the Interpreter Foundation's latest film project--the avowedly anti-Community of Christ movie entitled, 6 Days in August. Unfortunately--as you may have heard--the Foundation is apparently facing a budgetary shortfall. Or something like that. Details about the matter have been sparse. Until now, that is.

It turns out that the solicitation documents have been circulating widely among prospective donors, and a copy of them just so happened to get "leaked" to an "informant" of mine, and I'm pleased to report that I've had an opportunity to peruse the materials. The document is roughly 12 pages long and it is unabashedly aimed at people with deep pockets. Its title is "The Interpreter Foundation Presents SIX DAYS IN AUGUST - A movie about the succession crisis after the martyrdom of Joseph Smith," and it was authored by Daniel C. Peterson.

The main body of the proposal opens with a "Cover Letter" which is dated July of this year (so perhaps the fundraising goals have now been met?) and is written in what might be described as a "strident" tone. "We have raised just over $2 million and completed the filming of Six Days in August," Peterson reports, but he goes on to issue a dire warning: "our fundraising tank is empty." (More on this later.) "We urgently need your support to raise $513,302 by September of this year to fund post-production efforts and marketing and distribution!" (Bolding and underlining in the original.) Wow.... Half a million? It would seem that the budget on this sophomore effort has ballooned quite a bit, no? The Executive Producer goes on to ask that donors pitch in and support "this important and remarkable movie project that we hope will change minds and touch the hearts of so many people who struggle with issues surround LDS Church history and others whose testimonies will be strengthened ever further" [sic]. He explains the urgency of his request: "If we release it at the end of the year, we will be drowned out by other family-based movies that are scheduled to be in theaters. That's why we need your help right now to meet our deadline of September 1st."

Wow...that's right around the corner! And half a million is a lot of money. One wonders how close they are to meeting their goal? Still, a couple of observations. First, they certainly don't have to release the movie in either October *or* December. Why not November? Or sometime in 2025? I hear that Hollywood releases tend to be more sparse in January and February. Meanwhile, is it really accurate to characterize Six Days in August as a "family-based movie"? Does anyone imagine that this is the type of movie that kids are interested in seeing? Rather, it seems more like the kind of thing that kids are forced to sit through during Family Home Evening, no?

In any case, the Cover Letter continues, and segues into a far more Mopologetic section:

This story is vitally important today. The members of the Quorum of the Twelve have led the Church, and senior apostles have presided over it, ever since those dramatic days in early August 1844. Attacks on the legitimacy of the Twelve's assumption of leadership over the Church in 1844 are, whether deliberately or not, attacks on today's apostolic authority.

And such attacks are, in fact, currently under way--and most particularly about Brigham Young, whom certain critics wish to blame for everything that they dislike or regret about the subsequent teachings and practices of the Church.

Huh. So donors should support the movie for this reason? Well, of course, people are free to spend their money however they'd like. But this strikes me as quite a bizarre bit of reasoning: "Give me $500,000 because nameless critics blame BY for things they don't like about the Church." Maybe these donors are especially skittish and feel that they *need* this movie in order to strike a blow against these faceless critics? The tone here, in any event, stands in stark contrast to the earlier assertions about how the movie will "change minds and touch the hearts."

Regardless, the Executive Producer goes on to give his dramatic pitch:

Here is why Six Days in August is so important. The murder of the Prophet Joseph Smith and his brother Hyrum on June 27, 1844 was a devastating blow to the Latter-day Saints. Much like the ancient apostles at the death of Jesus, the Saints of mid-1844 were dazed and disoriented

Ahem. I have to pause here to note the theft of one of my own favorite terms "a devastating blow." The comparison of Joseph Smith to Jesus here is also noteworthy.

So, what should they do? To whom should they turn for guidance? Or should they reevaluate the Restoration altogether?

Thus, the Church was at a crossroads....Who was in a position to lead them? Sidney Rigdon had been out of harmony with Jospeh for much of the Nauvoo period and had actually been living in Pittsburgh, far from the main body of the Church. Furthermore, unlike the Twelve, Sidney had not received all the keys or all the ordinances of the temple. James J. Strang and Joseph Smith III were also candidates as successors.

It needs to be pointed out here that the Executive Producer has repeatedly made wisecracks about wanting to cast "Pee-wee Herman" in the role of Strang.

If the leadership fell to any of these potential candidates, or if the concept of "gathering" were abandoned, how would the temple doctrines and practices recently revealed through Joseph Smith be continued? Clearly, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints would be very different today--a slightly eccentric Protestant denomination, perhaps, with an elaborate lay priesthood and some extra scripture--had the Twelve note succeeded to its leadership.

My, that's quite an interesting take! But the pitch goes on:

The Twelve Apostles had been away from Nauvoo on missions--among other things, to support Joseph Smith's presidential candidacy--but they now returned to assert their right and their responsibility to preside among the Saints. Some of these Saints, however, even thought that the whole idea of "gathering" needed to be abandoned. It had, after all, always brought tensions and persecutions in its wake.

Is it just me, or does this sound more like a rambling historical account rather than the pitch for a dramatic film? Well, as I noted, donors can spend their money however they'd like. The Executive Producer urges them to do so: "Your gift is urgently needed to complete the post-production process so we can release this magnificent movie in theaters."

Here's a question for all you students of Mopologetics out there. The Executive Producer essentially gives 3 arguments in favor of donating to the movie project:

1. We need the money because this movie will "change minds and touch the hearts"
2. We need the money because "attacks are, in fact, currently under way" on Brigham Young, and by extension, the apostolic leadership of the Twelve
3. We need the money because this is a "magnificent" film about how the LDS Church managed to avoid becoming "a slightly eccentric Protestant denomination...with an elaborate lay priesthood and some extra scripture"

Which of these reasons is most likely to be persuasive to a donor? Speaking of which--and I do not know if this is true or not--but I have heard rumors that Interpreter, uh, "borrowed" the list of donor names from BYU's advancement team. Or perhaps certain individuals sympathetic to Mopologetics were "diverted" away, as the former FARMS Editor in Chief promised to do in his angry missive to Gerald Bradford?

But I degress. The Executive Producer shares some fascinating details about the filming. I know that many here have hoped for a scene in which BY is transfigured into the visage of Joseph Smith, but this sounds every bit as compelling: "A scene of Brigham Young speaking in tongues to command a team of oxen which is stick in a muddy highway to rise up and extricate themselves and their wagon out of the mire was filmed in Tennessee in April of 2024." Cool! But don't they worry that naïve Latter-day Saints might be disturbed to see Brother Brigham "speaking in tongues"?


Later in the document, donors are presented with "The Case for the Interpreter Foundation and its Production of Six Days in August" which sounds like the title of a Hardy Boys book. Still, I found this section of the pamphlet to be remarkable--breathtaking, even.

Since its founding in August 2012, The Interpreter Foundation has been leading the charge among independent organizations who defend and promote The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, its doctrines and its leaders.

Well, now, can we really call it "independent" if it has received funds from either the Church itself, or from organizations such as the More Good Foundation?

At a time when staunch defenders of the faith are needed now more than ever, many leading organizations, publications, and scholars have abandoned the field of battle. Elder Neal A. Maxwell's admonition to allow "no more uncontested slam dunks" when countering critics of the Church has largely been forgotten.

Excluding the Church and its educational system, The Interpreter Foundation is the major source of new, original, insightful, and faithful scholarship on our scriptures, temples, and the ancient world. The foundation's [sic] work is essential because the foundation [sic] can conduct independent research that nonmembers will more readily examine and consider than if that research came from the Church itself.

LOL! What?!? That last bit is totally bonkers. Feel free to point out a single "nonmember" who has reacted this way to Interpreter.

But this next bit is stunning in its arrogance and dismissiveness:

The Interpreter Foundation is the major source of new research that is, in turn, being popularized by Scripture Central and FAIR to reach a broad audience of nonmembers and members via videos, written materials, and social and other media. Without The Interpreter Foundation, this source of new and faithful research would disappear, and a vita light would be extinguished.

My goodness! You had better hope that this doesn't get back to Jack Welch or Scott Gordon! I mean, what are they: chopped liver? He's making it sound as if Interpreter is the only game in town, and like FAIR and Scripture Central merely regurgitate the "original" material that's generated by Interpreter. I'm sure that's news to Welch and the people at Scripture Central, who, it needs to be said, appear to command a much larger budget than Interpreter.

Meanwhile, I wonder if the Executive Producer undercuts his case a bit with this next part:

Many donors who had never given to Interpreter gave for the first time to Interpreter's Witnesses movie project. Since then, many have become ardent Interpreter supporters and have moved forward to make additional gifts to Interpreter's general-operations budget. With the publicity and exposure Witnesses gave Interpreter, our support is at an all-time high.

We have sufficient funds to run our operations for two years, without receiving any gifts. However, we hope to create a rainy-day fund whose proceeds will generate enough to continue our basic operations if our annual giving somehow declined or ceased.

Hmmm. If "support is at an all-time high," and "We have sufficient funds to run our operations for two years, without receiving any gifts," then why are donations "URGENTLY NEEDED"? Maybe just to pad that "rainy-day fund"? (And anyone else notice the allusion to Ensign Peak here?)

It's all very interesting, as is the concluding portion of the pamphlet, which contains a pair of tables laying out the budget. One is for "6DIA Post-Production" and gives a total budget of $276,836.40, meant to be set aside for things like Editing ($81,000), Audio Mix ($30,000), General Services ($45,000), PRINCIPLE CAST [sic] ($1,610), and Music ($50,700). And while the budget for Online Post-Production is $45,000, the budget for Visual FX is highlighted in an alarming red color and is listed at $0.0 I hate to disappoint, but with zero dollars given over to "Visual FX," it seems unlikely that we are going to get the transfiguration scene that so many have been looking forward to. And I assume the author meant "Principal Cast" (rather than "principle") but regardless, the compensation seems shockingly low.

Meanwhile, there is also a budget table for "6DIA Marketing/Distribution", with funds set aside for Distribution, Public Relations, the Trailer ($20,700), and securing an MPA/CARA Rating ($3,000). There is also a confusing listing for something called "DCPs" which is apparently going to run around $18,750. I admit that I don't know what this is. Could it be that a possessive apostrophe was left out, and this is actually meant to say, "DCP's" as in "DCP's Compensation"? Regardless, you have to applaud the transparency in terms of informing prospective donors about how the money will be spent. On that note, anyone wishing to donate is welcome to get in touch with the Interpreter Foundation: the option to donate is easily findable on their home webpage.

In any case, it would seem that the Interpreter Foundation and its leadership have a bold and ambitious vision for the future--arguably a hubristic and overinflated one, but unambiguously ambitious. Speaking of "overinflated," I cannot help but think of the memorable scene roughly midway through Brian DePalma's classic "rise-and-fall" tale, Scarface, in which Tony Montana (Al Pacino) is gazing up into the evening Miami sky and sees a blimp floating past, and the electronic display on its side reads, "The World is Yours..."



Perhaps, in the end, Executive Producer Peterson will have the last laugh and will meet his fundraising goals. Perhaps he will, in October, get to deliver that famous line: "Say hello to my little film!!"

[Dr Moore]

Fascinating analysis, Doctor!

Speaking of which--and I do not know if this is true or not--but I have heard rumors that Interpreter, uh, "borrowed" the list of donor names from BYU's advancement team.

What!?

An independent or arm’s-length, much less a “not affiliated,” organization would not be given access to BYU’s donor lists. If this is true, it means the church has in fact provided a massive enablement of financial support to, and an explicit affiliated endorsement of, the Interpreter. That’s rather shocking and is news to me. As a long time BYU supporter, I am annoyed beyond words that the powers at BYU are out sharing my information with supposedly independent apologetic outfits like the Interpreter. Maybe this is well known in some circles, but to me it’s extremely disappointing and a betrayal of trust.

If what you heard is true, then the italicized part of the disclaimer below (from the Interpreter’s website) is a lie:

The Interpreter Foundation is an independent organization that supports but is not owned, controlled by, or affiliated with The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

https://interpreterfoundation.org/foundation/

[drumdude]

Excellent post. I want whatever they’re smoking at Interpreter which makes them so delusional.

[drumdude]

Fingers crossed!

[Tom]

This is mind-blowing. Doctor Scratch, you will recall the Proprietor’s urgent request for donations in his fundraising letter in early June: “Please consider making a tax-deductible gift to help us raise the $256,000 we need to fund post-production efforts, associated with cutting raw footage, assembling that footage, standardizing and enhancing the color of the footage, adding music, dubbing, and sound effects.”

What is the total budget for this film? (It seems to be growing every month.) The Relief Society sister in Parowan is asking. (On a related note, a few days ago, she asked me why the Interpreter Foundation has failed to post a single expense report for 2024. I could not answer her question.)

I did tell her that I have it on excellent authority that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is aware of and supportive of this project. Whatever that means.

“DCPs” may be a reference to digital cinema packages.

Posted from Ajax, Utah

[Doctor Scratch]

You make a number of good points here, Tom. Yes, what is the budget? It would seem that it now sits at somewhere in the neighborhood of $2.5 million. And I do recall that letter from early June. The document I reviewed was dates July, so it would seem that, in the course of a month and a half or thereabouts, they failed to raise much in the way of funds.

[Tom]

Doctor Scratch:

The Executive Producer goes on to ask that donors pitch in and support "this important and remarkable movie project that we hope will change minds and touch the hearts of so many people who struggle with issues surround LDS Church history and others whose testimonies will be strengthened ever further" [sic].

I must confess that I am surprised that the cover letter has spelling errors. Did anyone proofread the letter before it was sent out?

Doctor Scratch:

First, they certainly don't have to release the movie in either October *or* December. Why not November? Or sometime in 2025? I hear that Hollywood releases tend to be more sparse in January and February.

Excellent points. I don't know who has the Executive Producer's ear, but he may be listening to the wrong people.

The Executive Producer writes:

James J. Strang and Joseph Smith III were also candidates as successors.

Are Strang and Joseph Smith III treated in the movie as potential successors?

The Executive Producer writes:

If the leadership fell to any of these potential candidates, or if the concept of "gathering" were abandoned, how would the temple doctrines and practices recently revealed through Joseph Smith be continued? Clearly, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints would be very different today--a slightly eccentric Protestant denomination, perhaps, with an elaborate lay priesthood and some extra scripture--had the Twelve note succeeded to its leadership.

I once wrote a short essay for a third-grade writing assignment. I soon found out that my teacher absolutely detested the word clearly. If something is truly clear, she told me, you don't need to pronounce it "clear." If it isn't genuinely clear, she said, then you shouldn't try to bully or deceive your readers into thinking it clear. I've carried that lesson with me ever since--and it seems directly relevant in this case.

I share your astonishment, Doctor Scratch, at the way that the documents attempt to minimize the work of FAIR and Scripture Central while aggrandizing the work of the Interpreter Foundation. Was that necessary?

Posted from Ajax, Utah

[Doctor Scratch]

Dr. Moore:

I can certainly understand your frustration. If these rumors are indeed true, then I wonder about the “flow” of information, as it were. That is: was the donor information *given* to Interpreter? Or did Interpreter *take* it? If it’s the latter, then you kind of have to wonder if there will be consequences for such behavior.

[Doctor Scratch]

I share your astonishment, Doctor Scratch, at the way that the documents attempt to minimize the work of FAIR and Scripture Central while aggrandizing the work of the Interpreter Foundation. Was that necessary?

Interpreter would not exist without the groundwork that Welch laid down. And I believe I observed in a separate thread that Interpreter, FAIR, and Scripture Central all seem to be in a kind of “competition” with each other, and by practically every measure, Scripture Central is winning. Welch’s organization even found a way to offer an olive branch to the FIRM folks, whereas Interpreter has seemed hell-bent on sowing division not just with the Heartlanders, but other factions of Saints, such as the Transhumanists.

[I Have Questions]

How did the fundraising shortfall for Six Days go from $250,000 in June to $500,000 in July when the begging bowl letter was sent out?

Fundraising might be easier if the much-promised transparent financial accounting of “Witnesses” had materialised.

It would also be helpful to know how much of his own money the Exec Co Producer has pumped into Witnesses and Six Days.