The Trailer for "Banner of Heaven" has dropped

[smac97]

Here:

Quote

Hulu and FX have dropped the first trailer for Dustin Lance Black's Under the Banner of Heaven, which sees Andrew Garfield coming for his first Emmy as a Mormon detective investigating a double murder.

"I wonder how something so horrific could have come to pass," he intones over the atmospheric minute-long clip which offers a brief glimpse of Normal People star Daisy Edgar-Jones as Brenda, a young faithful Mormon getting blessed before her wedding day.

The "brief glimpse" includes temple content, so... (a still image is at the link also).

Quote

Under the Banner of Heaven is based on Jon Krakauer’s book of the same name, and follows a devout detective whose "faith is tested as he investigates a brutal murder that seems to be connected to an esteemed Utah family’s spiral into LDS fundamentalism and their distrust in the government".

Huh.  I have never heard of the Lafferty brothers being described as "esteemed."

Thanks,

-Smac

[Calm]

33 minutes ago, smac97 said:

have never heard of the Lafferty brothers being described as "esteemed."

The one brother (Ron iirc) was apparently in several bishoprics and on a city council before going psycho…I couldn’t finish reading the article to see what it said about the other…too scattered today.

https://www.cityweekly.net/utah/blood-brothers/Content?oid=2469422

[jkwilliams]

Until now I never made the connection between earlier iterations of the endowment and the method of murder used by the Laffertys. It makes me wonder if some of Brigham Young’s teachings about blood atonement derive from the same source. 

I have no intention of discussing specific temple content, but smac’s post has given me something to think about. 

[bluebell]

I'm always wary of movies or series that are 'inspired' from real life events.  That pretty much gives them license to make up whatever they want as long as there is at least one part of the show that is connected to what actually happened.

[jkwilliams]

3 minutes ago, bluebell said:

I'm always wary of movies or series that are 'inspired' from real life events.  That pretty much gives them license to make up whatever they want as long as there is at least one part of the show that is connected to what actually happened.

Basically, any retelling of an event is fiction because it involves interpretation. I suppose the made-up part is a function of who is interpreting and why. 

[Teancum]

2 hours ago, smac97 said:

Here:

The "brief glimpse" includes temple content, so... (a still image is at the link also).

Huh.  I have never heard of the Lafferty brothers being described as "esteemed."

Thanks,

-Smac

Interesting.  Krakauer's book was not flattering to the Church.  WOnder what the series will be like.

[jkwilliams]

Just now, Teancum said:

Interesting.  Krakauer's book was not flattering to the Church.  WOnder what the series will be like.

I’m kind of doubting it will be sympathetic. Probably less marketable if it goes easy on Mormonism. 

[Teancum]

45 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

Until now I never made the connection between earlier iterations of the endowment and the method of murder used by the Laffertys. It makes me wonder if some of Brigham Young’s teachings about blood atonement derive from the same source. 

I have no intention of discussing specific temple content, but smac’s post has given me something to think about. 

I lived in Spanish Fork when the Lafferty's committed their horrific crime. A member of the stake presidency that had excommunicated the brothers lived across the street from us. It was rather scary and nerve racking for them. And I certainly made the connection you reference above back then. I certainly tainted the endowment till it as changed for my wife and for me.

[jkwilliams]

2 minutes ago, Teancum said:

I lived in Spanish Fork when the Lafferty's committed their horrific crime. A member of the stake presidency that had excommunicated the brothers lived across the street from us. It was rather scary and nerve racking for them. And I certainly made the connection you reference above back then. I certainly tainted the endowment till it as changed for my wife and for me.

I can imagine. I’m not sure why that connection never crossed my mind until now. 

[Hamba Tuhan]

10 minutes ago, Teancum said:

Interesting.  Krakauer's book was not flattering to the Church.  WOnder what the series will be like.

Considering Mr Black's previous artistic endeavours in relation to his former faith, I would expect something both more gentle and more subtle than Protocol of the Elders of Zion.

[jkwilliams]

8 minutes ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

Considering Mr Black's previous artistic endeavours in relation to his former faith, I would expect something both more gentle and more subtle than Protocol of the Elders of Zion.

I watched a little of Big Love, but I haven’t seen 8. Has he done anything else Mormon-related, or are you basing your assessment on those two endeavors?

[Hamba Tuhan]

2 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

I watched a little of Big Love, but I haven’t seen 8. Has he done anything else Mormon-related, or are you basing your assessment on those two endeavors?

I'm nowhere near on top of his oeuvre. You may need to consult the web for all the details.

[jkwilliams]

3 minutes ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

I'm nowhere near on top of his oeuvre. You may need to consult the web for all the details.

Was just wondering why you equated his work with a well-known work of virulent anti-semitism. I am not familiar with anything he’s done that merits that comparison. 

[Hamba Tuhan]

Just now, jkwilliams said:

Was just wondering why you equated his work with a well-known work of virulent anti-semitism. I am not familiar with anything he’s done that merits that comparison. 

I feel reasonably certain that I did not 'equate' anything in what I wrote.

[jkwilliams]

22 minutes ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

I feel reasonably certain that I did not 'equate' anything in what I wrote.

Then why mention it? A gentler and subtler “Protocols” would be only slightly less vile. I guess I don’t understand the hyperbole. 

Edited February 24, 2022 by jkwilliams

[Calm]

59 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

I watched a little of Big Love, but I haven’t seen 8. Has he done anything else Mormon-related, or are you basing your assessment on those two endeavors?

I skimmed through his filmography and did find a Mormon character in his Virginia…married sheriff having a long term affair with a schizophrenic single mom.  The movie was panned by most, couldn’t find anything detailed as to plot, but as far as I could tell the sheriff is a hypocritical jerk and there may be stuff about polygamy and other things that make us look weird if the reviews are accurate.

[jkwilliams]

Just now, Calm said:

I skimmed through his filmography and did find a Mormon character in his Virginia…married sheriff having a long term affair with a schizophrenic single mom.  The movie was panned by most, couldn’t find anything detailed as to plot, but as far as I could tell the sheriff is a hypocritical jerk and there may be stuff about polygamy and other things that make us look weird if the reviews are accurate.

I can understand making Mormons look weird would bother people, but the reference to the Protocols of the Elders of Zion seems way over the top. 

[strappinglad]

My folks and the Watson Sr. family were friends . We visited them in the 60s a couple of times . I knew Dan in his youth. Nice kid. Ron was older and I never saw him. We didn't visit after 1970. quite the shock hearing about the brothers and their crimes later. One of my comps in the mission field ended up a bishop to the sister and by then all hell was breaking loose. Ron now sounds like he wanted to be an OT type father whose word was law , even to the point of taking a child's life if necessary. 

IIRC Ron tried to commit suicide in the prison some years ago. 

[JLHPROF]

2 hours ago, jkwilliams said:

Until now I never made the connection between earlier iterations of the endowment and the method of murder used by the Laffertys. It makes me wonder if some of Brigham Young’s teachings about blood atonement derive from the same source. 

Correct on all counts.

People have always corrupted the Gospel for evil.  (Warren Jeffs, Evil LeBaron, etc).

Then the Church removed a key part of the ordinances and made everyone feel better.

[jkwilliams]

1 minute ago, JLHPROF said:

Correct on all counts.

People have always corrupted the Gospel for evil.  (Warren Jeffs, Evil LeBaron, etc).

Then the Church removed a key part of the ordinances and made everyone feel better.

Not everyone. One of my good friends from my mission was very troubled that the endowment changed. It was a catalyst in his eventually leaving the church. I was relieved when things changed. 

[bluebell]

34 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

Basically, any retelling of an event is fiction because it involves interpretation. I suppose the made-up part is a function of who is interpreting and why. 

If that were true then the book "Under the Banner of Heaven" would be classified as fiction.  But it's not, it's classified as nonfiction.  All of Ken Burns documentaries would also be classified as fiction, because history always uses interpretation, but they aren't either.  They are nonfiction.  

Interpretation does not make something fiction in and of itself.  

There is a difference between a movie that keeps to the facts as much as possible and one that uses a true event to tell a fictitious story.  Think of the movie Fargo or Braveheart, for example.  

The main character in this series is a Detective Pyre, who (as far as I have been able to tell so far) doesn't actually exist.  It's a made up character (maybe a composite?  I haven't been able to find out much about him yet).  So while this series is said to be inspired by the Lafferty murders and the book Under the Banner of Heaven, it does not appear to be trying to tell a true story.  It's using the true story to invent its own stuff.

Nothing wrong with that--movies and books do it all the time, that's why historical fiction is so popular--it can just sometimes convince viewers that they know more about an event or person than they actually do.

[bluebell]

1 hour ago, Teancum said:

Interesting.  Krakauer's book was not flattering to the Church.  WOnder what the series will be like.

Krakauer's books often come under scrutiny from the people who were "there".  He's a good author but he has his biases (as we all do) and they usually show in his books in one way or another.  He's not a fan of organized religion in general (from what I understand.  I haven't researched it in a few years though so maybe his thoughts have changed on that). 

I own most of his books and really like him as an author.  You just have to realize that going in and be a bit skeptical of some stuff.

[Calm]

28 minutes ago, strappinglad said:

My folks and the Watson Sr. family were friends . We visited them in the 60s a couple of times . I knew Dan in his youth. Nice kid. Ron was older and I never saw him. We didn't visit after 1970. quite the shock hearing about the brothers and their crimes later. One of my comps in the mission field ended up a bishop to the sister and by then all hell was breaking loose. Ron now sounds like he wanted to be an OT type father whose word was law , even to the point of taking a child's life if necessary. 

IIRC Ron tried to commit suicide in the prison some years ago. 

The brothers claim the dad was violently abusive and beat their mother and them until they were old enough to fight back.  I assume that was something kept behind doors if it happened, I guess I am wondering if you think it possible looking back now. 

[Robert F. Smith]

3 hours ago, Calm said:

The one brother (Ron iirc) was apparently in several bishoprics and on a city council before going psycho…I couldn’t finish reading the article to see what it said about the other…too scattered today..........................

https://www.deseret.com/2004/7/27/19841799/1984-lafferty-case-still-haunts#ron-lafferty-left-and-attorney-ron-yengich-review-documents-naming-yengich-as-laffertys-attorney-on-sept-25-2002-in-4th-district-court-in-provo

Quote

Ron and Dan Lafferty grew up in Payson, in a family of six boys and two girls. Their father, a stern disciplinarian, seethed with a quiet rage he sometimes directed toward his wife and pets. After one spat with his wife, he beat the family dog to death with a baseball bat.

In his sons, Watson Lafferty planted the seeds of paranoia, rebellion and fanaticism. He taught his boys to distrust conventional medicine and the federal government. He also took his religious beliefs to the extreme: When one son accidentally shot himself in the stomach with an arrow, he told him he would have to suffer until morning for breaking the Sabbath.

Ron and Dan became best friends, boys known for their short tempers and willingness to back each other in a fight. As they grew into men they took after their father in other ways, too. Instead of buying baby food, Dan chewed food into a mush and then spit it into the mouths of his children. He later refused to pay taxes or obey traffic laws, believing he was above the laws of man.

In 1982, the LDS Church excommunicated Dan for trying to take his 14-year-old stepdaughter as a second wife. Dan told his brothers they were the true leaders of God's church, and they believed him — letting their beards and hair grow long like Biblical prophets. The six boys were now spending more time with their brothers — railing against the LDS Church and the U.S. government — than they were with their own wives and children.

When Ron's wife refused to practice polygamy and left him, he began a steady descent into madness. He spent his days and nights in an old Orem home the brothers called "the farm," writing what he believed would one day be read as scripture.

 

Edited February 24, 2022 by Robert F. Smith

[Hamba Tuhan]

3 hours ago, jkwilliams said:

Then why mention it?

Coincidentally, that's the exact question that I've seen a number of faithful members ask regarding some of Black's creative choices.

I suppose one could likewise ask, why make a television series based on a book riddled with historical and other errors as well as slanderous, inflammatory misrepresentations?

Edited February 24, 2022 by Hamba Tuhan