Saints and Soldiers (2003)

Saints and Soldiers contains an interesting dichotomy in LDS film. While nearly every scholar states that this is an LDS film there are no explicit references to any character’s faith. There are however, implicit references to aspects of the Mormon faith in Deacon’s character. He “doesn’t smoke, doesn’t drink, doesn’t even like coffee”. He carries an unidentified book of scripture around on him at all times. He prays while on watch. He went to Germany on a mission for his church for two years. These are all clues that indicate that he is in fact a member of the LDS church. Therefore even without explicitly stating that Deacon is a member of the church one can imply membership because of these contextual clues. This analysis brings to thought a question about the uniqueness of the Mormon identity. Are there not other churches or peoples that have nearly the same standards as the church? On my mission I taught a family that on many occasions were asked if they were Mormon. They didn't smoke. They didn't drink (much). They went to church every week. They prayed as a family. They read the Bible together, individually and as a family. These traits are not unique of the LDS faith.

In many, if not all of the previous LDS films that I have viewed have, "[alienated] or [excluded] the non- Mormons" by "largely polarized [audiences] by recognizably Mormon subjects, themes, or treatments" (Givens, 202). Saints and Soldiers uses the cross overs between Mormon culture and the rest of Christianity to both reach a wider audience and create empathy between these two cultures. "Matt Whitaker and Geoffrey Panos (the screenwriters) choose instead to rely on a text coded in such a way that its meanings can be read in both particular and universal ways (202). By doing so they were able to bridge the gap between cultures.

           
Does this bridge, however, destroy the inherent nature of LDS cinema? If any culture can easily accept the themes and devices of this film without any prior knowledge of LDS culture do the filmmaker give up the film's Mormon identity? How is it any different than The Land Before Time (Don Bluth) or The Swan Princess (Richard Rich)? (Neither of which are considered LDS films). The LDS genre is a deeply complex genre. "There can be no linear scale of “Mormonness” for a film" (Astle, 28). Each film must be evaluated on an individual basis. "A film that initially appears to have nothing to do with the Church might, in fact, be quite thoroughly infused with Mormonism, while one that is apparently full of Mormon content might be rather devoid of it" (29). 

There is no scale that one can look at and say, "There are 34 direct references to the church in this film, it must be an LDS film" or "Well, they mention the Book of Mormon, but not the Joseph Smith so it doesn't quite make the cut". The definition, however, lies in the inherent identity of the film. While Saints and Soldiers makes no explicit references to LDS faith or culture then "Mormonness" of the film is high because the identity of Deacon is so clearly LDS that there can be no question as to his faith. He must be a member of the church because he is what members desire to be like. He is not pigeonholed. He is not stereotyped or mocked. He is true. He is real. He bridges cultures like each individual must do in order to develop empathy and charity. For "[Charity] is accepting people as they truly are. It is looking beyond physical appearances to attributes that will not dim through time. It is resisting the impulse to categorize others" (Monson, Charity Never Faileth, October 2010 General conference).

Film Information
Works Cited

The Single's Ward (2002)

I don't even know where to begin? When I was growing up I remember that for a while every party, every time my friends would get together we would watch The Single's Ward. Then one day it clicked. This movie is a monstrosity. It is pure product placement. Watching it today made me seriously reconsider even doing this whole project (although later this week I'm going to be viewing The Book of Mormon Movie... now that makes me reconsider things). "Aristotle supposed that entertainment enjoys a natural advantage by providing us with certain sensual pleasures and thereby more readily chasing away our cares" (Anderson 232). This film is purposed to entertain about at the expense of the church. In other words, This Single's Ward, "primarily appeals to the body; it is more likely to be pleasing and diverting because it satisfies bodily cravings for rest, relaxation, and physical satisfaction" (232). However, this project is not about how good the movies are or how much they make me want to puke. It's about how these movies represent Mormon identity.

           
So how does this film stack up? You may remember a few weeks ago I wrote about the representation of women in the movie The RM (also made by Halestorm). Cammie Giles is a twenty something year old Activities director in the church. While she, unlike the women in The RM, is a very spiritual person, she has one major flaw. She is the definition of self-righteous. When she discovers that her boyfriend, Jonathan, tells slightly off color jokes about Mormons (nothing worse that what I've heard on BYU campus) she storms out of the room in a hysterical mess. It seems for a while that her only intentions with the unknown Jonathan in the foyer are to get him to come inside. In fact, Jonathan says himself that she'd "be a good missionary" in reference to her pushy attitude (Hollist, 142). One might even interpret this film by saying that the only way that women can be spiritual in the church is if they are self righteous or holier-than-thou.

What interests me more than the view of women in the church, however, is the perspective that this film contains about inactive members of the church. Jonathan is highly knowledgeable about the church. He quotes scripture and conference talks, references Book of Mormon stories, and "knows the tactics" used to reactivate less active members (he even still has his white shirt and tie in the closet). In fact, aside from occasional alcohol use and some off colored jokes in a comedy routine he is a stand up guy. His ex-wife is a recent convert that he himself got to join the church. Upon buying a six-pack of beer and a package of cigarettes she says, "I'm done. I don't even know if the church is true anymore".  No other explanation is given. From these two perspectives we can discern part of the attitudes that the filmmakers have concerning inactive members of the church. One, they lack a belief in the church. Two, inactives are opposed to the culture of the church. The first of these perspectives blames the individual for their inactivity. The second the community in which they live.

           
I've found through this project that most LDS films pigeonhole members, non-members and inactive members. They represent members as self-righteous, nerdy, or just plain weird. Non-members are seen as wild and free, but desperately wanting to connect with the world. Inactive members are hurt or confused about Mormon culture. These films create stereotypes of deeply complex identities that make up the Mormon Church.

Film Information
Works Cited