Yes, that's my little brother quoted in this Washington Post article. He's teaching a class on LDS film history at BYU, and he's delivering speeches as the LDS Film Festival and giving interviews to reporters from major media outlets. Sounds like maybe he's made it (and he tells me that he said more interesting things than that for which he is quoted, so don't get the idea that he's too boring). His crusade, it seems, is to tell the world that "God's Army" was not the first Mormon movie.

And speaking of "God's Army," I thought the most fascinating thing about this article was the stark difference in attitude between the two other principal interviewees: the HaleStorm guys and Richard Dutcher (maker of "God's Army"). These two filmmakers obviously have hugely disparate attitudes about what Mormon film is, and what it should be. and they are going to continue to make movies that seem differenter and differenter as time goes on.

The HaleStorm guys have taken "Church Ball" (which we heard plans of as soon as their "Singles Ward" came out) and "sanitized" it. In other words, they've taken the church out of church ball. What's left? Ball. I don't know about you, but a movie about nothing more than Ball doesn't sound very interesting. Are there any other churches that have organized basketball tournaments among their congregations? I don't think so. Taking the Mormonism out of it will be a bad move, I think, even if Gary "Whatchootalkinbout, Bishop?" Coleman is in it.

Dutcher, on the other hand, wants to tell the story of the Mormons. His movies have focused on missionaries and a small Utah town and someday his big-budget biopic of Joseph Smith will come out (I hope). He doesn't take the Mormonism out; he relishes it. And that's what makes his movies so great. "God's Army" and "Brigham City" both taught me things about my faith that Sunday School never could (I haven't seen "States of Grace" yet, but I hear the effect is the same). Sure, there's a greater risk that it won't resonate with a non-Mormon audience, but I don't think that's necessarily true (or a worthy goal). "The Other Side of Heaven" was a silly watered-down story about a Mormon missionary that never mentioned the Mormon Church. It had Disney's distribution power and played in 306 theaters, and it made $4.7 million. "God's Army," which dealt heavily in spiritual things, played in 50 theaters and made $2.6 million. I'm not sure which was the better financial success.

The point I'm trying to make is that if you're going to make Mormon movies, you should leave the Mormonism in them. People don't have to share the values or culture of the characters in their movies in order to enjoy the movie. How good would "My Big Fat Greek Wedding" be if you took out the Greekness? How good would "Fiddler on the Roof" be if you took out the Jewishness? How good would the Star Wars series be if you took out the religious-like values of the Jedi? I will not be too sad if I never see another HaleStorm/Ston Five movie; but I will do everything I can to see Dutcher's movies (meaning: hopefully they'll get out of Utah).