Posted on 08/23/2007 5:45:11 PM PDT by Reaganesque
"This handsome indie Western damningly recounts the 1857 slayings of 120 settlers passing through Utah, but the didactic presentation, grim speechifying and tacked-on love story all signify a less-than-healthy regard for the audience's intelligence."
Variety Justin Chang
1/4 "The film feels less like historical drama than a venomous religious tract printed on celluloid." Minneapolis Star Tribune Colin Covert
"September Dawn has the ham-fisted lyricism of political ads and pharmaceutical commercials." Village Voice J. Hoberman
"When the movie isn't doling out ham-fisted history...it gives us magnificent vistas of a pristine prairie...and there's a deep sweetness to the subplot of Jonathan and Emily falling in love." Film Journal International Frank Lovece
1.5/4 "When watching the screen depiction of a historic event in which 120 people were murdered, giggling is not the appropriate response." Salt Lake Tribune Sean Means
1/5 "It has the chilling certitude of the self-righteous." Orlando Sentinel Roger Moore
2.5/5 "The real problem is that September Dawn isn't a very good movie. It moves too much like a public-school history pageant and gives us mono-dimensional characters who speak dialogue that fairly reeks of printer's ink." Arizona Republic Richard Nilsen
1/5 "The jarring MTV-style filmmaking is so distracting and the 'messaging' so unsubtle that after two long hours you find yourself leaving the theater with a massive headache, wondering when you started to hate Mormons." Orlando Weekly Brett Register
1/4 "Forget Grindhouse. September Dawn is the year's first honest-to-goodness exploitation flick." Slant Magazine Nick Schager
1/4 "Bombastic, slow-drying dramatization with lead-weight dialogue and a turgid romantic subplot." Newsday Gene Seymour
D- "Has serious problems in historical terms. But in this case they're exacerbated by the simple ineptitude of the filmmaking." One Guy's Opinion Frank Swietek
"Even if one gets past the movie's controversial depictions, there is the matter of its second-rate, made-for-television fare -- the poor battle choreography, the wooden editing and the cheesy writing." Washington Post Desson Thomson
2.5/4 "If September Dawn is a kind of Western, it's a Western utterly devoid of heroism or the usual archetypes. But the core message transcends time: Hatred laced with religious fanaticism is a toxic blend." Milwaukee Journal Sentinel Dave Tianen
1/4 "Doesn't even measure up to an episode of your typical, cowboy TV show from the Fifties like Roy Rogers or The Lone Ranger. Get my drift, Kimosabe?" NewsBlaze Kam Williams
Click here for links to the full reviews.
The simple fact is that the settlers were killed in cold blood: men, women and children down to the age of 6. Such things do happen in war, and the Mormons were, so to speak, at war with the United States. They had fled the United States for the sanctuary of Mexican Territory, Then, all of a sudden , they were back in it.
Don’t get me wrong. The timing of the release date is suspicious. I just don’t know how much this has to do with Voight.
I can't speak of any inside knowledge to the timing of the release of the film; but since my understanding (from others who have commented) is that if it was shot in 2005...it would have taken a few yrs to get the script; cast the characters; etc...all the usual prep. Anyway, when that ws being rounded up, there's no way they could have had any idea that Mitt would be running for prez.
There goes your conspiracy theory about the production of the film--tho, again, I can't speak to the timing of its release other than this:
When did the TV and Big Screen movies come out about 9/11 from 2001? Was it (a) 2005 (b) 2006 (c) 2007. I don't know for certain which years those three movies came out (2 Big Screen; 1 TV movie), but I venture at least 2 of the 3 were 2006...
Why 2006 and not 2005? Well, just like married folks & employees tend to have something special for those round-number anniversaries (5,10, 15, 20, 25, 50), the media does the same.
So, if you're gonna release a movie about the original 9/11 terrorist act that occurred on U.S. soil, which year would you release a movie about an 1857 event? (a) 2006? (b) 2007? (c) 2008?
Apparently you would answer (a) 2006, so that they could then say they were coming out with it on the 149th anniversary? (Yeah, 149; that's a nice "round number.")
If you want max PR for a film, and you know media outlets are going to be already doing stories on the 150th anniversary, from a pure PR standpoint, you'll try to capture that attention to merge it to point to your film.
Film at 11
“Get my point?”
I’ll take your word for it, but I haven’t ever seen the term ham fisted used in a movie review. That may be because I don’t read a whole lot of movie reviews.
But there's the unmistakable air of evil about this enterprise, and not just an atrocity the Mormon church caused to happen 150 years ago.
At least the LDS organization finally admits it!
“There goes your conspiracy theory about the production of the film”
Since I didn’t have one in the first place, that wasn’t too difficult.
I’m not trying to offend Mormons. They are fine people. However, I am a descendant of Mormons. I know my family history from my grandmother, Rebecca Maloney. She and her entire family had to flee Utah in the late 1860’s. Danites (under the authority of Brigham Young) tried to kill her father, Stephen Maloney three different times because he had gone through the temple ceremony, taken the blood oath, then refused to marry a second wife. Brigham Young himself had his eye on Rebecca’s oldest sister.
They lived in Provo. You can check them in the 1860 census. They fled in an Army wagon train after they reached the safety of the fort.
LDS members no longer do this sort of thing. But there’s no denying that it happened in the 1800’s. To absorb the truth of it, you have to read secular history books. The LDS church doesn’t come completely clean on this stuff.
Has the LDS organization put out a movie about MMM?
Why you ought to get in touch with the Tannners they would love you!:)
I would have never even heard of this movie if it wasn’t for FreeRepublic, and I keep up with a lot of movie news. It will be soon forgotten.
Doubtful. Ham-fisted is a pretty standard description of movies, books, or whatever that are, well, ham-fisted in trying to Communicate Their Message.
Other ham-fisted fare includes any "Billy Jack" movie; Ayn Rand's novels; most movies that tout the fact that they were made by Christians; and the rantings of certain FReepers, DUers, and any other excessively earnest on-line posters....
Don't be so hasty ... I love Spam. Spam sandwiches, fried spam, spam-and-eggs .... Mmmmmmmm.
Or perhaps finally expressing empathy for your dog's agony as you sing in the shower.
Lol!
“Why you ought to get in touch with the Tannners they would love you!:)”
Actually, Mr. Tanner has passed away. Their writings have been very scholarly. For those who would like to see some of their historical research, here is their site:
“Just a question for you: Why is Jesus not sufficient?”
Just a question for you: Have you stopped beating your wife yet?
If you believe the assumption built into your question, you are ignorant of our faith. If you don’t believe that assumption yet still ask such a question, you are like those who questioned Christ just to try and trap him in his words.
“At least the LDS organization finally admits it!”
That was a quote from a movie review.
I think it's sad that the movie appears to be crap (poor filmaking and lack of historical authenticity). The story of Mountain Meadows deserves better than this. I'm hopeful that the upcoming book will totally and honestly deal with what actually happened. It would be in the churches best interest to expose any misdeeds that went beyond John D. Lee, both in the events leading up to the massacre and in any subsequent attempts to cover up the facts. It is also sad that those opposed to the church will never accept any version of history that comes from LDS scholars.
Perhaps that is why the LDS Church should open its archives to an independant scholarly committee. Wouldn't that be more appropriate?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.