It is now available as a $4.99 download at Audience Alliance.

Not only is the film a new take on the classic “boy-girl meet in pre-existence and then meet again on earth narrative”, it’s an Italian (with English subtitles) LDS-themed comedy. Plus the press clippings (and people I know who have seen the film) say that Marco has a real gift for physical comedy. An Italian Mormon Modern-day Charlie Chaplin? That’s worth checking out.

The trailer:

There’s a lot to like in his analysis so head on over and check it out. I especially look forward to part 3, where Kevin is going to talk specifically about film reviews and what’s fair criticism and what isn’t.

Then earlier this year I ran across (and mentioned in a links roundup post) this brief Richard Brody review of the film for The New Yorker. Here was an urban(e) critic who made me rethink my earlier impressions — enough so that last week my wife and I watched Gentlemen Broncos. Brody writes, “…. it’s a work of visionary inspiration that, like many outrageous Hollywood comedies of the classic era (such as those of Frank Tashlin), tackles remarkably serious matters.”

It turns out that he’s right. What I’m less sure about is where he tries to give a Mormon gloss on the film: “In his jejune yet highly moral inspiration, Benjamin is the prophet of a pop-infused Gospel, an updated Book of Mormon, that speaks to a new generation of young people whose coarsened sensibility is paradoxically attuned to Biblical explicitness and ferocity.”

I don’t think that that’s exactly what this film is about, but it’s a nice try, and perhaps there’s something to the coarsened sensibility thing. I hope to give a full accounting over at LDS Cinema Online, but for this revisit let me throw this out there: with Gentlemen Broncos, the Hesses package issues of authenticity, fandom, selling out, provincialism and dreams of stardom in a way that both celebrates and makes fun of and keenly dissects the myths of Hollywood and Big Publishing. In order to appreciate this movie you have to a) really feel the sweetness — not just see that it is there — and b) focus in on the relationship between the protagonist Benjamin and his mom. If Napoleon Dynamite was an awesome takedown of hipsterism and faux-quirkiness in indie/mainstream indie film (and I think it was); Gentlemen Broncos is a masterful takedown of both the haughtiness of artists who have no ideas left and make worshipers of their fans and the pretensions and faux-celebrations of fan fiction. And it actually succeeds. There’s more there than the critics are seeing because they refuse to buy in to the possibility of the sweetness and authenticity and affection in the Hesses writing/filmmaking. They don’t understand that we are meant to love Saltair even though we also laugh at it, and that it’s precisely that double feeling (instead of complete disdain) that gives lie to the way Hollywood usually treats religion, small town America, family relationships and the American dream.

Anyone else actually seen this film?

If you are interested in contributing to the blog, e-mail ldscinema AT motleyvision DOT org. This does not mean that AMV proper is abandoning cinema, but we’ll focus on posting reviews and film-centric criticism over there.

AML Awards + Annual Meeting: Here’s a link to the AML Awards for 2009, including the award citations; Tyler has write ups of several sessions at chasing the long white cloud. I’ll reserve my take on this year’s awards for the comments section.

LDS Publisher’s Book of Mormon YA fiction contest: The results are in! Congrats to David and all the other winners. Here are the entries by AVVers and friends of AMV. Speak up in the comments if I missed you (and my  apologies if I did):

• Song of Saphir and Covenant of the Scalp by David J. West
• Two Thousand Sons and One Daughter by Emily M.
• Young Hagoth Plays it Safe by Theric Jepson
• Gideancum’s Revenge by William Morris

Wm may be a Whitney Awards voter: So Rob twisted my arm (amazing how forceful he can be in spite of the shards of glass injected in to his heart [kidding, Rob. I hope the treatment works.]), and I’m in a LDS-Fiction-y mood so I’m going to try and hit two or more categories as a Whitney Awards voter. Historical Fiction is my best bet, and I may be able to do Speculative Fiction as well. Sadly, General Fiction will likely not happen because of a lack of review copies and the fact I need to do put my time over the next 29 days in to categories where I’m going to be likely to contribute (you have to read all 5 finalists in order to vote). If you are interested in what I have to say about the finalists as I read them, check out my GoodReads account and friend me if you haven’t already or subscribe to the RSS feed if you don’t have/don’t want an account.

More Stuff You Should Check Out

1. Gideon Burton is open sourcing his sonnets
2. The Up Beat, a documentary on the Utah/LDS Ska scene, is now available on DVD (updated 3/3 — forgot to HT The Mormon Left for this item)
3. This March 20 Mormon Artists Group concert looks like a not-to-be-missed event for anyone who can make it to NYC
4. Yes, it went straight to DVD, but the New Yorker makes a case for (and provides a weird Mormon gloss on) Jared Hess’s Gentlemen Broncos
5. Here’s a way to view all the Mormon fiction titles BYU Bookstore is currently selling

(Here’s a link to the trailer. Couldn’t figure out how to embed it. Also, here’s a link to Darius Gray and Margaret Young talking about the film.)

I got the film through interlibrary loan (a literary Mormon mommy’s best friend!!) and facebooked anyone else I thought would be interested in watching it. Lots of people were interested, but only a few friends were interested enough to clear out time to come watch it.

The good stuff about the movie:

* It had a lot of good historical information that, for me, reframed the issue of blacks and the priesthood. Call me ill-informed, seminary and institute graduate that I am, but I had never heard of Elijah Abel or Jane Manning James. To my mind their stories show that this has never been a simple case of prejudice or Old South paternalism. I always felt the question was not adequately addressed by the one seminary video on the second Official Declaration. It also can’t be explained away in one nay-saying, Mormon-hating diatribe. This is a complicated issue and No One Knows does a good job of embracing the complicated nature of the question.

*It also had a lot of good info on how the Church interacted with the modern civil rights movement. I had heard of the Genesis Group only in passing and to find out it was actually sponsored by the Church and came about through a group of black men working with white priesthood leaders was inspiring to me. So often, it seems, Church members who are struggling with very real disaffecting issues think their priesthood leaders don’t want to hear about it. The Genesis Group suggests that maybe they do. And maybe they can help.

*The MUSIC! Wow. I love me a good spiritual. There is something about that soulfulness that makes me tremble–in a good way. The music in the film is great. However, it did make my next sacrament meeting seem a little dry. . .

*All the personal interviews were another highlight for me. This movie doesn’t spend too much time constructing a sweeping historical time line. Instead it tells stories of individuals and honors their experiences. For me, this is the most authentic type of literature out there. The film definitely has a pro-LDS bias, but I was okay with that because well, I’m pro-LDS and because I think on a meta level this film is the story of how Darius Gray reconciled his strong feelings of the Church’s truth with the real-life difficulties he faced as a black man in the Church. Gray, and Young, are obviously thoughtful, kind people and this film evokes both those things.

The not-so-good: (I would call this section the bad, but I don’t think any of these things were bad. Just shortcomings.)

*The length. The film is only 73 minutes long. Its list of deleted scenes and unused material is almost as long as the film itself and is full of interesting tidbits–the one about the Dialogue article that epitomized the policy debate and the stories of LDS interracial couples are the two most memorable in my mind. It made me sad that the producers/directors didn’t/couldn’t find a way to include more of that stuff in the main body of the film. Leaving all that material out detracted from the richness of the rest of the film.

*Vague citations. For all of the great info this movie has it doesn’t really provide any concrete way of following up on these issues. The film used lots of quotations from Church leaders that seemed to be pulled out of thin air. In my mind it matters if a Brigham Young quotation came from his personal journal or an address to the US government or the Journal of Discourses. Especially on an issue like this where part of what is at stake is the Church’s institutional image and policies. If a central question to the discussion of black and the priesthood is “Was the ban a doctrine or was it a policy?” where and how Church officials said things becomes extremely important. I have no doubt that the filmmakers did their research; I just wish it had been more transparent. When quoting someone most documentaries include citations in small print at the bottom of the screen. I’m not sure why this film didn’t.

*The art. The documentary includes shots of some beautiful memorials and sculptures about the black LDS experience but NEVER tells you where they are. I want to know if they are somewhere in the south or if I can stop by and see some in person next time I’m in Utah. They also didn’t give credit to the artists (at least not that I saw) of those works. (It occurs to me as I write this that maybe all the sculptures are tombstones? If so, that would explain some of it. . .) Also, I think the film could have been enriched if it had included other forms of art by black LDS artists. Maybe there isn’t a lot out there to use or maybe there simply wasn’t enough money. But I wish some of that stuff had been included.

*The question of audience. Like I hinted at before, this film is an important piece of the puzzle for me when it comes to race issues and my religion. It doesn’t have all the answers. If anything I have more questions now than I did before. But they are new questions and new pathways of thinking and I feel like the film didn’t anticipate that. I feel like the filmmakers were talking to people who had lived it and just needed a little catharsis. This seemed true for the group I watched the film with. Of the six of us who showed up I was the only one who was not alive when the policy change occurred. (My husband, who is six years older than me, was only two so the content of the film was new to him too). In viewing the film this age discrepancy turned out to be a big deal. When the movie was done they each shared a few sentences about what they remembered about that day and, in particular, their parents’ reactions. Then they moved on. After five minutes of discussion they were satiated on this topic. For someone like me, who doesn’t remember this, who didn’t live it, I needed a little more time to digest and think about it. That’s probably why I wanted the film to be longer.

All in all, I’m glad I watched the film. It was certainly worth the interlibrary loan. And I actually think it would be a great piece for book clubs to do. I know it’s not an actual book, but it is a good length for a group viewing and a discussion. (Your discussion might be more fruitful than mine!) The $25 sticker price seems a little steep, but I imagine if I had bought this film I would lend it out to people fairly often. It’s a great film that I hope people will be able to access for a long time and point to as part of their inevitable discussions about race and the Church. If you haven’t seen it yet, get to the library or the website today–it’s worth it.

The article is available via a subscription to Dialogue, but Randy has generously allowed me to excerpt a few passages here at AMV. To start out with I want to present his basic summary of the second point of his two-part purpose for the article (the first is to offer up the case for “approaching Mormon film from a taxonomical perspective” — I’m going to assume that most of AMV’s readers already believe in the merits of such an approach, or at least allow that such an approach can be a useful exercise in literary criticism).

So on to his second purpose:

Answering the second question—what is Mormon cinema?—is more difficult. As mentioned, the term has constantly shifted, avoiding any single definition. However, Mormon film does have components in common with film genres, certain ethnic cinemas, and even national cinemas, among other precedents. It can therefore be useful and not inaccurate to describe Mormon film as a genre, or at least approach it from that perspective. To be more accurate, however, we must define Mormon cinema as a religiously based ethnic cinema that is continually developing characteristics of an actual genre or even multiple genres. Thus, positioned in the interstices between genre and ethnic cinema, Mormon film exhibits characteristics of both but complete adherence to neither.

I like that Astle frames things in this way. It can be seen as a bit of a cop out “It’s in the interstices”! However, it rings true to me. One of the things that fascinates me about Mormon narrative art as a field is how it shows during of the course of its history some of the same preoccupations as other emerging literatures of its time. So, for example, the foundational work on Mormon literature as a field that was done by Orson F. Whitney has a lot in common with other belated, emerging national literatures of the late 19th century (Greek, Romanian, Latin American) in terms of stated goals, worth, etc. With the lost generation of Mormon writers, we find works that are much more regionalist-goes-national in nature (the literature of the South being the most vibrant example of American regionalism) and are closely tied in with Western regionalism. More recently (the past 3-4 decades), we see Mormon literature splitting in to streams that are informed by the previous two generations, but that seek to mimic Christian genre literature (Covenant), legitimize Mormon thought through the genre most open to exploration of ideas (speculative fiction), and works that borrow somewhat from the ethnic literatures, the hyphenated Americans that have been semi-legitimized since the 1960s (much of the Mormon literary realism, which is supported by the AML and the Mormon journals, falls in to this category, imo).  All this is to say that because of the unique makeup of the Mormon socio-cultural history and environment, it’s no wonder that a hybrid approach is necessary. Because the Mormon identity is malleable in how it presents itself in cultural form (religious praxis is a different issue — but one that is important as it keeps Mormon culture from being solely an “ethnic” identity) and how it interacts with other literatures (and cinemas), it’s no wonder that it so often falls in to the “interstices.”

The devil is in the actual analysis, of course, and for that you’re going to need to get hold of a copy of this issue of Dialogue (or pay for an electronic subscription). What I like about the article is that Randy provides some interesting, valid readings of Mormon films (both his own and a few from other critics) that relate back to his major arguments. However, I will offer up one more excerpt. This comes later in the article where Astle is exploring how Hamid Naficy’s characteristics of diasporic filmmakers (and their films) apply or don’t to the world of Mormon cinema. He writes:

The final and most important way in which Hamid Naficy’s theories aid an understanding of Mormon cinema, however, is in relating themback toMormon society, including both the films’ supporters and critics. The result is a much richer comprehension of how Mormon films function within their own social context. As mentioned, Mormon filmmakers are notmarginal or subaltern but interstitial, emanating from where dominant and minority groups interact: “To be interstitial . . . is to operate both within and astride the cracks of the system, benefiting from its contradictions, anomalies, and heterogeneity.” This duality affects the thinking of all members of accented communities, not just the filmmakers; thus, most “ethnic communities are highly sensitive to how they are represented by both . . . outsider and insider filmmakers. They often feel protective and proprietary about their ‘image,’ sometimes even defensive—all of which forces accented filmmakers either to accede to the community’s self-perception and demands or to take an independent path at the expense of alienating the community and losing its support.” Naficy terms this dilemma “accented cinema’s extraordinary burden of representation.”

Sound familiar to anyone? (And yes, Randy, goes on to talk about Richard Dutcher). This is just one aspect to his analysis, though, and it’s very much worth reading. Definitional criticism is not easy, it’s often controversial, and it tends to get a bit squishy in Mormon spheres because of the oddness of Mormon cultural identity.

Astle has taken his already fine and rather encyclopedic work in the field and applied some serious critical tools to it with this article, which solidly melds theory with specific examples. Well worth checking out, and one of the best pieces of Mormon narrative arts/literary criticism to come along in several years.

* Randy is not the field’s only film critic, but he is one of the most prolific and knowledgeable. See for example, his BYU Studies article Mormon Cinema on the Web.

To enter the drawing for the free tickets, you may do one of three things: Give a shout out to the movie on Twitter, as your Facebook status, or as a group email to your friends. Then either send a cc of the email or a link to your Twitter/Facebook status to tigerindustryfilms@gmail.com. The drawing will be held at 5:00pm Mountain Time on Thursday, Oct. 1. Winners will receive a Fandango confirmation number to their show of choice. So the contest is done entirely by email and you have no tickets to pick up anywhere. Let the games begin!

Now, onto a little fuller explanation of the film.

Most of the reviewers I’ve read can’t help but compare White on Rice to Napoleon Dynamite, which is an interesting enough commentary on what Mormons have been contributing to the world of cinema. We seem to do really well in two genres: first, there are the insular comedies and melodramatic dramas that are so inaccessible that no one outside of the Intermountain West even bothers to take a side in the debates that ensue over how appropriate they are, and then there are the screwball comedies about lovable, bumbling, socially inept protagonists that do remarkably well with sarcastic college kids across the nation.

White on Rice falls squarely into Category 2, but what I love about it is its ability to avoid some of the over-the-top nonsense (not that protagonist Hajime “Jimmy” Beppu isn’t over-the-top; it’s just not nonsense) that plagues Jared Hess’s films, and also the amazingly innovative stabs that director Dave Boyle isn’t afraid to take. At the risk of sounding like the deconstructivist nihilist that I’m not, here are the pleasant ways in which White on Rice effectively pushes the envelope:

1. It’s subtitled. Not the whole movie – in fact, I can’t remember what percentage of the dialog is in English; maybe half. But they jump over the American box office assumption that subtitles are too much for our poor little demographic to handle, and throw entire Japanese scenes into the film. This shows significant faith in their audience, an audience that Boyle knows probably includes a fair share of anime enthusiast white kids who are going to latch onto this quirky indie film like there’s no tomorrow, not in spite of, but because it hits a particularly live cultural vein. (NPR once called Japan the first nation whose economy is supported by its ability to be hip.)

2. It uses violence to humorous effect. Not that I’m a fan of violent movies. (I Am Legend kept me awake and shaking for two weeks.) But White on Rice manages to open with a parody of a bloody samurai film and twist it to a commentary on the ridiculous role that violence has taken in our entertainment culture. Why on earth would someone laugh at a bloody samurai film? I don’t know. Why on earth do we pay millions of dollars to see machine gun blockbusters? Why is it OK to send our kids on virtual alien-slaying missions and call it playtime? I don’t know. Perhaps that’s something we need to examine.

3. It tackles cultural stereotypes head-on. The Deseret News criticized White on Rice’s use of ethnic humor. The fact that it was Asian people making the Asian jokes doesn’t seem to register. The most endearing and well-played character in the film is Justin Kwong’s 10-year-old Bob, Jimmy’s nephew who is a straight-A student, concert pianist and profitable entrepreneur. Because his strict Asian immigrant parents pressured him to achieve? No, actually, because he sneaks around and does it under their radar. Another highlight is when Aiko, Jimmy’s sister, is presented with  a woefully misunderstood attempt at “cultural sensitivity” by an emergency room doctor – and she laughs in his face.

4. It’s not actually an American comedy. Director and co-writer Boyle may be American; the film may be set and shot in Salt Lake City; the movie maybe be ostensibly western in its plot structure, but everything about this film, including the quirky, irreverent humor and the decidedly atypical approach to violence, is extremely Japanese. This movie had more in common with one of my favorite quirky Japanese films, The Taste of Tea, than it did with Napoleon Dynamite. It runs on a different cultural spectrum than what we’re used to seeing. For this reason, it might not sit well with a lot of American LDS audiences. But not for the same reasons that “edgy” attempts at art like the U of U’s production of The Bakkhai won’t sit well with those audiences. (Reviewers have claimed that White on Rice has sexual references – they’re not blatant and they’re not thrown in to tease and titilate or intentionally provoke the audience. In fact, they’re deliciously unromantic and Japanese-pragmatic and one of my favorite lines of the movie is what Aiko’s husband Tak says to the salesman at the adult store he enters to buy an anniversary gift for his wife.) It’s a truly international piece of cinema. Do you know how long I’ve been waiting for an original, international piece of LDS cinema?

The film is rated PG-13, mostly for the samurai-style violence and for one memorable use of the S-word, and probably isn’t appropriate for young children. But I think it would do well with teens and young adults and I encourage you to catch it while it’s still playing in Utah and California or at an upcoming opening in Denver or Hawaii. And let me know what you think – let me know if this indie take on entertainment has a future or deserves a spot in the Mormon art world.

Perhaps I’d better qualify my use of the phrase “Mormon Movie.” (Re-hashing the eternal question, of course) Director/Co-Writer Dave Boyle is a BYU grad and served a Japanese-speaking mission. His serendipitous friendship with Hiroshi Watanabe turned into a witty comedy idea and thus was born White on Rice. It’s only about as “Mormon” as Napoleon Dynamite, but it’s unique, refreshing, international, and thoroughly satisfying. I may just prefer it to Jared Hess’s work – it’s every bit as quirky and postmodern (without all the depressing postmodern existentialism that taints the almost-brilliant films like 500 Days of Summer that the American independent market produces) without being as over-the-top. It’s a comedy you still feel respectable after watching. And it reminds us that the world’s got a lot more stories to tell, even if we do have to film them on location in Salt Lake City.

I don’t want to predispose you too much one way or the other – just go to it with my word that it’s funny and unique and report back with your reflections. I’d love to hear some other perspectives.

The film opened a few weeks ago in California and is still showing in Orange County, San Francisco and San Jose, and it’s opening in Salt Lake and Provo this weekend and will be in the theaters for at least a week, more if it does well. There are dates scheduled in Denver and Honolulu, with more cities to be announced as the self-distributing film rolls on. See a complete list of theaters here.

Of special interest are the showings which will be attended by Boyle, Watanabe and child co-star Justin Kwong, with a question and answer period to follow. These will be today, September 26, at 11:55 am and 2:10 pm at the Provo Town Center Cinemark and then at 7:15 and 9:30 pm in Salt Lake at the Century 16. The movies will be showing at these two theaters throughout the week, but these specific screenings will also have the Q&A sessions.

ぜひ、見にいらっしゃて下さい。面白くて、とてもすばらしい映画です！

Here are the headlines: Randy Astle has started a networking site for filmmakers; Christian Vuissa’s new film is coming out this fall; the indie film “White on Rice,” by Mormon David Boyle,  is gaining some buzz; and the Audience Alliance’s first film “Broken Hill” will test Kieth Merrill’s hope for a family-friendly alternative to Hollywood.

Full details after the jump.

Networking site for LDS filmmakers

LDS filmmaker and critic/historian Randy Astle has started up a network for LDS filmmakers called the LDS Filmmakers’ Network. According to Randy, the site is “open to all Latter-day Saints over 18 years of age regardless of professional experience, regardless of whether their films are gospel-themed or mainstream.” It’s uses the Ning social network platform, which is a pretty good idea, in my opinion.  Ning is pretty decent platform for this sort of thing, that is special interest but casts a wide enough net to generate enough network activity for it to be worth joining. For example, Ning has been a good platform for small private high schools, churches and hobby groups. It goes beyond just what you can do with Google or Yahoo! groups (which are basically listservs at heart) with features for member blogs, event management, photo and video uploading, bulletin board discussions, etc.

As Randy notes, “Members are asked to join one geographical group to let others know where they live. There are then 66 professional groups with categories like directors, producers, screenwriters, actors, and more technical positions like motion capture specialists, caterers, location managers, animal wranglers, accountants, musicians, choreographers, gaffers, and everything else both above and below the line.”

As with any social networking endeavor the trick will be to get enough people sign up that it reaches that critical mass where there are enough active users to generate a decent amount of activity. Considering the collaborative nature of filmmaking, it seems like the type of project that could have some success.

Christian Vuissa’s next film

LDS Film Festival creator Christian Vuissa’s seventh film “One Good Man: Life as a Latter-Day Dad” (formerly titled “Father in Israel”) hits Utah theaters on Oct. 9. Here’s the thing: if it gets a strong opening, it will screen for longer in Utah. I mean, yes, you can always pick it up on DVD, but the communal nature of seeing a film like this is not to be underestimated. My favorite Mormon arts experience still has to be seeing New York Doll with a group of Mormons and punks in San Francisco.

The film had some good buzz around it when it debuted at the LDS Film Festival earlier this year. My sister Katherine reviewed it for Mormon Artist. It will be interesting to see how it does in the theaters. LDS Film.com, sadly, no longer updates box office data and Box Office Mojo appears not to collect data on films with such limited releases.

Mormon indie director’s “White on Rice”

Dave Boyle follows up his film debut “Big Dreams Little Tokyo” with “White on Rice.” Screenings are set so far for the LA area and Utah in September. The film features Hiroshi Watanabe as a goofy, freshly divorced guy living with his sister. That’s not the best way to describe the premise so check out the site and watch the trailer and read the reviews. Also: what we’re seeing with Boyle, imo, is a somewhat particularly Mormon phenomenon — that of the foreign RM who finds a way to make a career/art/continuing relationship with the country/region/language where he served. This type of quirk has served Jared and Jerusha Hess well so it’ll be interesting to see if Boyle can gain some traction. Sweet indie quirk seems like a natural fit for creative cosmopolitan Mormon types.

Audience Alliance’s first project debuts

Audience Alliance’s attempt at a family-friendly, audience-driven and supported model for filmmaking gets its first test with the release of “Broken Hill.” The film is billed as a inspiring musical drama that’s based on a true story and  features a sheepherder’s son from the Australian Outback who loves classical music and through a series of plot points that I won’t detail here culminates in a prison concert. And it that sounds like a Hallmark special, well, that’s sorta the point.  “Broken Hill” opens Sept. 11 in Salt Lake City, Fresno, Dallas and Greenville, SC. Check the film’s website for details.  Kieth Merrill is the main figure behind Audience Alliance so it will be interesting to see if the pro-family formula wins over an Evangelical audience.