This week we received the October issue of the Ensign magazine, the LDS Church's official publication. Enclosed was the latest installment in a series of DVDs produced by the Church and distributed along with the Church magazines. I think this is a fabulous idea and a great way to make sure as many Church members as possible are aware of and have possession of the recent work of the LDS Film Studio. My only real quibble with the idea is that mailing them in a magazine necessitates a flimsy cardboard cover, not the standard DVD case.

So this latest movie is entitled "The Restoration." I wonder why they gave it that title; a better one would have been "The First Vision," because that's all it's really about. The Restoration was far more than just the First Vision. In fact, you could argue that the First Vision wasn't even part of the Restoration, since nothing was officially restored except the knowledge that God and Jesus are two separate beings who still speak with prophets today.

I liked the production values. The actors are fine. Shelly seemed surprised that Joseph Smith was blonde, but contemporary descriptions of him often say he was. As always, though, he has a big nose.

It was a very wise choice not to specifically depict the Father and the Son during the First Vision, opting instead for a simple, intense light source. You could argue that one of the most important revelations of the First Vision is the fact that God and Jesus have physical bodies, and therefore those bodies should be depicted. But I think it's good that they weren't, for two reasons. First, any attempt to depict the glory of God in a literal manner will fall short, and end up looking hokey. Especially as years pass and special effects technology improves. You don't want a viewer laughing when he sees God. Second, and perhaps more important, any attempt to depict the glory of God in a literal manner will fall short, and therefore limit us in our imagination and the depth of the spiritual meaning of the First Vision. That is to say, if the Church holds up a picture and says "This is what God and Jesus look like," people will think that's what they look like, and that's limiting. The truth is more sublime than any movie or painting could portray, and I'd rather contemplate the truth than the cheap imitation of it. I guess that's the same reason why the more I think about it, the less I like the paintings of Christ by Del Parson and Greg Olsen and the like, and the more I like Minerva Teichert, and wish there were more impressionistic Mormon artists like her. Her work calls up the spirit, but not the precise image of Christ.

I thought it was interesting, but not surprising, that they left out the part of the First Vision that involved Satan. The movie is targeted to a non-Mormon audience, and I suppose that would have just confused the issue (there was plenty of simplification of things along the way). But still, I think the fact that Satan tried so hard to stop Joseph is almost as remarkable as the fact that the Father and Son appeared to him.

Finally, I wonder if this movie will achieve its objective. Again, it's obviously targeted to non-Mormons, and the Church is relying on members to act as the distribution system to the non-Mormon set. Even assuming that works, I can't predict if it will influence them. I'm pleased that the maudlin sentimentality that sometimes pervades Church-produced movies has been kept to a minimum. The spiritual impact of "The Restoration" will probably depend on the spiritual preparation and attitude of the viewer. And that's probably as it should be.