The State of LDS Cinema
Posted on February 6th, 2006 by Kevin Burtt (The Baron)
Richard Dutcher speaks out about the state of LDS cinema here…
[Warning: this post will reference the LDS film culture in general and a number of LDS films specifically that will probably be unknown to M* readers outside of Utah, and may preclude you from joining in the discussion. Sorry!]
[Additional Warning: this post contains many gratuitous links back to my own website. I apologize for nothing.]
Two basic statements gleaned from the article that summarize Dutcher’s views:
(1) He does not like ‘goofy’ LDS fare like “The Home Teachers”, “The RM“, and “The Singles Ward”–which he considers to be relentlessly mediocre.
(2) He wishes his own, more serious films made more money.
Taken apart, each of these statements has merit. Dutcher’s films are clearly the cream of the crop in LDS cinema and it would be nice if more people saw them. And, I can certainly agree with the mediocre complaint against LDS films in general, though I do think the statements from others (not Dutcher) in the article that these movies are “awful, disgusting and degrading to Church members” overstate things a little.
Dutcher seem to directly conflate these two statements together, however, which isn’t quite so clear… Are Dutcher’s serious films not making money because everyone is going to see these mediocre LDS ‘comedies’ instead?
Here’s the box office numbers of many of the recent LDS films (from IMDB.com):
- Work & Glory 1: $3.3 million
- God’s Army: $2.6 million
- Work & Glory 2: $1.9 million
- The Book of Mormon Movie $1.7 million
- Saints & Soldiers $1.3 million
- Singles Ward: $1.25 million
- The Best Two Years $1.16 million
- The RM: $1.11 million
- Brigham City: $0.8 million
- Charly $0.8 million
- Mobsters & Mormons: $0.4 million
- The Home Teachers: $0.2 million
- Baptists at Our Barbecue $0.2 million
- Sons of Provo $0.12 million
The numbers for States of Grace are not complete yet, and everyone is chasing The-Movie-That-Must-Not-Be-Named, which grossed well over 4 million…
From these numbers a few things seem obvious: NO LDS films, serious or otherwise, are making money. Dutcher makes it sound like mediocre films are rolling in the dough while his films suffer, when it was just a few months ago that John Moyer (writer/director of M&M) was complaining about LDS audiences going to “The Exorcism of Emily Rose” instead of his movie ($400,000 gross box office).
Looking at the numbers, I don’t see the evidence of mediocre movies triumphing over good. Sure, Brigham City didn’t make as much as it ’should’ have, but look at the Halestorm movies–each one made less than the one before it! The two most recent are clear at the bottom of the list! If LDS movies are struggling (which seems inarguable) they seem to be struggling across the board. The highest grossing LDS comedy so far has been “The Singles Ward”–which just so happened to be the first LDS comedy, and thus was more of a novel idea. (God’s Army–near the top of the list–likely benefited from this same newness also) Once the novelty of watching movies about Mormons wore off, though, it was more or less all downhill from there…
There are many reasons why the LDS movie market doesn’t make a lot of money:
- Limited audience outside of Utah: There aren’t enough concentrated pockets of Church members outside of Utah and Idaho to successfully market an LDS film, and non-members will have a hard time getting involved in a movie that’s just full of ‘inside jokes’.
- Limited audience inside of Utah as well: Most families with kids will just wait for the DVD instead of trekking to the theater for an LDS movie. (It’s cheaper than paying theater ticket prices, not to mention arranging babysitters) Plus when Church members DO venture to the theater, LDS films have stiff competition. (Most people would like to support local movies, but when a ticket to “States of Grace” or any LDS picture costs exactly the same amount as a ticket to a “Lord of the Rings” or a “Star Wars” movie, which do you think people are going to choose?
The idea that films like “The Home Teachers” are syphoning audience members away from ‘good’ movies such as “States of Grace” (still unseen by me because I’m–wait for it–waiting for the DVD) does not seem to have merit. Church members aren’t choosing one movie over the other–for the most part they’re choosing neither…
What can be done? There are a few things that cannot be changed:
- The “Wait for the DVD” crowd (of which I am an unrepentant member) is only going to increase–a ‘problem’ faced by mainstream Hollywood movies as well. Ticket prices are too high, there are too many ads and rowdy teenagers, not to mention how common fairly impressive home theater systems have become. There will continue to be a increasingly large section of the population that will decide to stay away from the theater and watch movies at home instead. Add in more Utah-specific attributes, such as more kids, and the fact that your average LDS movie does not have the visual spectacle that would encourage large-screen viewing anyway (we’re not talking “King Kong”, here, folks…), and LDS filmmakers would be wise to lower expectations for theatrical grosses marking the success or failure of a movie.
- LDS films are never going to play well outside of Utah: The Church member population is just too thin, and the non-Church population has no compelling interest in seeing it, any more than Utah audiences would be running to the theater to see “Mobsters & Methodists”. The success of an LDS film outside of high-LDS areas will depend on more individualized marketing…which, again, points directly at DVDs.
There are a few things that can be changed, however:
- Better writing: Writing is the one aspect of filmmaking that is immune to low budgets. A well-written movie, with sharp dialogue, clever plotting, and compelling characters, can overcome a variety of flaws. In my opinion, Dutcher’s films (the two I’ve seen) are pretty well written, but we need better writing in LDS films across the board. Furthermore, we need more mature LDS films that don’t paint characters in ridiculously broad strokes (like many ‘family’ movies today) and simplify complicated issues to the level of a six-year-old. Church members can handle complexity and subtlety in a movie, really!
- More of the ‘right’ kind of movie: “God’s Army” and “Brigham City” are compelling, but are also somewhat dark and challenging as well. (This is great from an artistic perspective…not so much from a commercial perspective where audiences tend to want ’safer’ movies) Many of the others seem content to offer up a bunch of LDS-centered jokes and hope we laugh at one or two. I am amazed that the LDS genre is overwhelmingly dominated by wannabe comedies, one of the more difficult genres to pull off successfully anywhere (”Dying is easy…comedy is hard” as they say…)
What’s missing? What’s the ONE element of film that would seemingly most appeal to LDS audiences? What’s the ONE area of film where Dutcher, Moyer, Kurt Hale and all other LDS filmmakers have a CLEAR advantage over even, say, Peter Jackson? Where are the truly spiritual films? Films that don’t care much about laughs, but seek to tell a simple, spiritually uplifting story that will cause audiences of all ages to be moved? Am I the only one who thinks there’s a huge gaping hole in LDS filmmaking, right in the center where it should be? Current films seem to go for jokes first, and try to tie things up in some sort of spiritual message at the end. Why aren’t they about the Spirit from the beginning?
As an example, the LDS Church-produced film “The Prodigal Son” is concise, well-acted, and has a clear spiritual message without resorting to jokes about jello or scrapbooking. It’s one of my favorites. We’d pull that out many times on my mission to show to investigators, and I can recount numerous examples where you could almost literally see the lightbulb going on in their heads while watching it about what the principles of repentance and forgiveness meant.
I don’t see the full-length equivalent of “The Prodigal Son” in the current LDS film scene. (And look what we have upcoming: “Suits on the Loose”, “Church Ball” and “The Singles Ward” sequel. Anyone excited yet?) Why aren’t there more movies that directly take spiritual principles and apply them in the lives of modern day people? Why aren’t there more stories about people geniunely trying to emulate Jesus Christ and understand the power of the Atonement in their lives?
Suppose, for example, a filmmaker wanted to make a film that combines–oh, I don’t know–mobsters and Mormons. There are two distinct tones a filmmaker can take with the material:
(1) It is a story about a former Mafia guy who one day feels a deep need to change and set his life upon a different course. He meets two LDS missionaries one day and, against all odds, decides to be baptized. He forsakes his former lifestyle (not without difficulty) and moves to Utah with the hope of starting a new life. He meets some friendly Latter-Day Saints, but also many who refuse to associate with him–some because he is different, and some who are openly doubtful that he has, in fact, changed from his previous wicked lifestyle and that he isn’t just a ‘wolf in sheep’s clothing’ who will cause nothing but disruption in their peaceful, little utopia.
And sometimes he thinks they may be right–because he is constantly beset with temptations from his previous lifestyle that he has to struggle to keep buried. He felt the power of the Spirit when he was baptized, but as time goes on he wonders if he can truly be forgiven for everything he’s done and become ‘born again’, especially when community support is spotty. How can he prove to everyone in his community–and to himself–that the power of the Atonement can truly cleanse the life of someone such as he?
-or-
(2) It is a shallow ‘fish-out-of-water’ comedy filled with jokes about the difference between Italians and Utah Mormons, with a brief lesson on accepting others near the end.
No points for guessing which of these two movies was actually filmed… This isn’t to pick on “Mobsters & Mormons”, which isn’t better or worse than any of the other LDS movies out there, but seriously–how is it that option #2 was the very first thing an LDS filmmaker thought to do with the premise of Latter-Day Saints meeting the mafia, instead of #1? Which one would you rather see?
In short, there’s a hole in LDS cinema and someone needs to step forward and fill it. If I want to see a comedy I’ll just pull out my “Princess Bride” or “Emperor’s New Groove” DVDs–if I see an LDS film I want to be spiritually edified. I believe LDS audiences in general are dying to see something spiritually moving on the big screen. Maybe Halestorm needs to cut back on the slapstick and try something more serious. Maybe Richard Dutcher (if financial success is a goal of his…) needs to step back from his dark and artistically challenging films and do a real ‘crowd-pleaser’ for once. I think the troubles of LDS cinema are in large part the filmmakers fault–not just the audiences–and someone needs to make use of LDS spirituality–the one advantage an LDS filmmaker has–and create something Church members can feel good about…
» Filed Under Any
Comments
27 Responses to “The State of LDS Cinema”
Leave a Reply
…not that I wouldn’t be interested in Peter Jackson’s take on the “Singles Ward” sequel. Bet there’d be a lot of zombies in it…
I do agree with you that Dutcher seems to be increasingly supercilious in his attitudes towards Mormon audiences. Let’s face it, most people, of any religion, don’t go to watch the kinds of films he makes in record numbers. They are more challenging and thoughtful pieces that are bound to be underappreciated by the majority. For the most part I enjoy them very much, but thought his most recent film was a little too forceful in pushing an agenda rather than telling a story, and some of its cinematographic techniques were anticlimactic. I still liked it, but not as much as the others. I felt his rage at this so-called “mediocrity” in Mormon film was a little too apparent, and as a result he added too many extra doses of something. Hard to pinpoint exactly what it was, but I felt a little too manipulated into certain conclusions by plot twists that weren’t very plausible, especially near the end of the film.
Waiting for Dutcher’s latest to come out on DVD, so I haven’t seen it. I have to disagree with his assessment. Most mormon movies aren’t mediocre. They are bad. At best, Dutcher’s films are mediocre. People don’t go to Mormon movies because Mormon movies aren’t good. Mormon’s don’t see Mormon movies because they are good, they see them because Mormons are in it.
So go see Danny Boyle’s “Millions.” It’s PG, discusses morality, and it even has Mormons in it.
I’ve commented on this topic in other boards in the past, so I’ll just summarize my basic thoughts (for some reason, I can’t find my other posts). Some of these were already stated previously.
Let’s be careful here before we give *too* much credence to Dutcher. His comments, with minor editing, can be applied to *any criticism* of the movie industry by any *artist*. I prefer to classify Dutcher as a “Mormon-art-movie” producer. There’s a difference between movies for entertainment’s sake and movies for art’s sake.
Another issue is that of definition. What is really a “Mormon” movie? One made by Mormons or one that is about Mormons? Dutcher’s view of Mormon moviemaking doesn’t seem to extend much outside the Zion corridor. The average Mormon living in TGSOT would go see a Mormon-themed movie … IF IT CAME TO US. So how do you get a Mormon-themed movie to come to TGSOT? You make a seemingly “normal” movie with a couple of Mormon characters. That seems to be beneath him.
Why was “The Other Side of Heaven” so well received? It was geared for a larger audience and had a heavy Mormon theme. Could we not call that a Mormon movie? The problem is that Dutcher isn’t trying to make movies that the “average” American wants to watch — he’s trying to cater to a particular element of the Utah Mormon psyche that exists only in a very marginal form that’s not commercially sustainable (if it even *does* exist).
I thought “The Best Two Years” was wonderful. Oddly enough, I found a pirated DVD copy of it in Russia long before I could buy it in the States. “New York Doll” is excellent.
[Incidentally, I do understand why OSH is considered persona-non-grata in the LDS movie discussion. I just disagree with the entire premise of what constitutes a “Mormon” movie. 90% of the non-LDS people who saw OSH know it’s about a Mormon, even if they removed many details from it.]
From these numbers a few things seem obvious: NO LDS films, serious or otherwise, are making money.
Well, from a “do you serve God or Mammon” point of view, that may be a good thing.
“States of Grace” is supposedly opening here in Phoenix this weekend. We were impressed by Eric Snider’s review of it so it may be a date night movie(babysitting availability to be determined).
I received an email touting “Down & Derby” as the #1 selling DVD nationwide–which scared me, even after reading the rest of the message indicating it was only referring to LDS bookstore sales.
It really would be something to find more movies that “directly take spiritual principles and apply them in the lives of modern day people”
I’ll let you know how “States of Grace” fits that bill.
Oh, and “Millions” is one of my favorite movies =)
Message to LDS filmmakers who want to see their movies make money:
Be wierd.
Napolean Dynamite - $44,540,956
Question: Isn’t that what Dutcher is doing?
(I’m assuming by ‘that’ you mean creating the kind of spiritual movies I was calling for)
Yes, and no. As (I hope) I made clear in the article, I like Dutcher’s first two movies (God’s Army and Brigham City) and like the fact that he takes chances with darker, more artistically challenging material. However, not everyone can take ‘challenging’ and ‘dark’–they would prefer movies where you leave the theater in a joyous mood, rather than gloomy and emotionally drained. (I like movies with happy, upbeat endings occasionally too…) Dutcher’s movies are great and they have a deserved place in LDS cinema…but they are not in the center of LDS film. Hence my ‘crowd-pleaser’ remark–the LDS film genre needs more upbeat spiritual films with a strong moral center as a complement to, not a replacement for, any of Dutcher’s work. The LDS equivalent of “Millions” or “Whale Rider”, in other words.
Or if by ‘that’ you meant ‘Be Weird’, then…that’s a whole other matter.
Saints and Soldiers?
I suppose I am being flippant. I don’t know that you could create enough drama with an upbeat film that deals with spiritual issues. It would be like reading a romance; if you know the beginning from the end, there is no drama.
I also think that it is significant that the two cited movies revolve around children. Why is it more financially acceptable to watch children struggle with these religious issues and come out believing? When was the last time you saw a mainstream movie with an adult that dealt this kind of thing (and featured this sort of conclusion)? Maybe Signs?
I thought God’s Army was O.K.–it’s tough to really say because, like you said, I think a lot of the allure was due to it being the first movie you could see in a theater that predominantly featured Mormons. I thought Brigham City was a little slow, but had a great ending.
I absolutely loved States of Grace. It is worth it to see in the theater. I’ve seen it twice and I think one of the coolest things was just watching everybody after the movie. Literally everyone just sat there in awe (I assume) during the end credits. Both times it was absolutely silent and virtually motionless for a good 2-3 minutes after the credits started rolling. This movie has a lot of food for thought and I’ve thought about it/discussed it with my wife days after having seen it.
I think part of the problem in the past with Dutcher’s films and even now with States of Grace, is a lot of people just can’t look past what they don’t think should be shown in a movie. For example, in States of Grace, you see and hear on film the entire Batism ordinance, the Confirmation ordinance, a healing ordinance, and several prayers. Some people (and I think I understand what they are feeling) just aren’t comfortable seeing those sacred things in a movie. I completely disagree, but I can understand where they are coming from. To me, the ordinances give the movie even more power–because they are true and because most of us have a spiritual history that we can tie in, when we see it in the context of a movie.
I’m also amazed at how these actors (my understanding is that none of the “main” characters are LDS) could pull this off so convincingly. The acting, with the exception of just a few weak moments, were absolutley superb. In particular, the “main” missionary, Lozano, the I-look-like-Shaq-but-can-act guy, the Grandma, and, perhaps most surprisingly, all of the “thugs”. Usually in movies, guys trying to be “hard” come across as the guys who were in my High School plays trying to come across as “hard”–it just doesn’t work (Anakin in the recent Star Wars prequels comes to mind). Not so with the actors in ‘States of Grace’.
I don’t think you should lump States of Grace with God’s Army and Brigham City as a ‘dark’ movie. Yes, the movie does get very dark, but the overall message is about light. I walked out of the movie very uplifted and wanting to be a better person–especially after the 30 second preacher payoff during the end credits. By showing the contrast between dark and light, I think Dutcher has made a very powerful film that just wouldn’t be as moving without first showing (without actually showing) just how dark life can get.
I’ve said my piece on other threads too, but I must chime in on this one.
HPLC said: “Most mormon movies aren’t mediocre. They are bad. At best, Dutcher’s films are mediocre. People don’t go to Mormon movies because Mormon movies aren’t good. Mormon’s don’t see Mormon movies because they are good, they see them because Mormons are in it.”
I pretty-much agree with this straight-forward comment. In fact, I believe that much of the problem with “genre” would be overcome simply by making better movies.
I saw States of Grace two nights ago, and I have to say that Dutcher still disappoints me. As I’ve said before, he has a bad habit of forcing the irony in his stories–States of Grace being just as bad, if not worse than his other films in that regard. Irony (imo) has got come from what seems to be a rational intersection of incompatable elements. In other words, we should have a sense that the collision of such elements–as paradoxical as it may seem–stems from a rational trajectory or premise. When viewing SoG one gets the feeling that the characters a planted strategically in overly controlled enviroments in order to yield the desired thematic elements. Therefore, the desired thematic elements (it seems to me) are over-wrought (or over-worked) thereby causing the irony to be less believable than it should be. The beauty of irony is that it is believable when it should, for all intents and purposes, be unbelievable.
That said, I thought there were some very compelling elements in SoG and I think Dutcher might have made better use of them by stream-lining his story–sticking with Carl a little more.
I have to disagree with your assessment . Most Mormon movies aren’t bad. They are horrible. The only movie I’ve ever walked out of was an LDS movie. Top to bottom every Mormon movie I’ve seen has had bad writing, bad acting and bad marketing.
It has nothing to do with Mammon, if they movies don’t make money, LDS filmaking will dissapear (I consider this a good thing, we need a few years away from the trash that has been released lately).
Here is what I want from the next Mormon movie. A well written mystery, maybe a murder or a The Firm type of thing. Rated PG, with no F-words, and very few swear words at all. No nudity and very little violence. Then throw in a couple of LDS characters, but don’t make every single character a Mormon. No Jello, no testimony meetings, no baptism at the end. Don’t center the whole movie around being Mormon.
In short, make a regular movie using realistic Mormons as characters in the film. Actually I’d be satisfied if Steven Spielberg took whatever his next film was and added a couple of LDS characters that weren’t used as comedy relief.
Mormon filmakers have failed and someone new needs to give it a shot.
The questionable position of Napoleon Dynamite as a Mormon movie points to a problem. When a couple of BYU alumni write a movie and one of them directs it with an old classmate in the lead role, set and filmed in a town two miles up the road from where Ezra Taft Benson was born and buried that has 4,000 people and eight wards, and there’s ambiguity as to whether it’s a Mormon movie, then it seems that unless a movie features missionaries or a bishop and includes depictions of ordinances, Mormons, as Mormons, have nothing to offer. There’s apparently nothing particular about Mormons that can be communicated in a movie.
I don’t know that you could create enough drama with an upbeat film that deals with spiritual issues. It would be like reading a romance; if you know the beginning from the end, there is no drama.–John C.
I don’t quite buy the old Tolstoy line. (”Happy families are all alike; every unhappy family is unhappy in its own way.”) Success comes in many forms and can be surprising. I’ve come recently to the Patrick O’Brian naval novels. The few that I’ve read are joyful, fun, and compelling. The characters are happy and successful at working through their challenges.
“The characters are happy and successful at working through their challenges.”
Except that sometimes they have to choose to let members of the crew die (if the movie was accurate to the books). Also, there’s usually a sea battle.
What I am saying is that it is easier to show issues of faith in trying circumstances and it is much easier to maintain drama for the length of a feature film in such circumstances. I don’t know if it would be possible to do without a dark theme to keep the folk interested.
I am wondering if what the Baron is envisioning is more akin to Leave it to Beaver (one of the best shows ever, in my opinion). Gentle humor, friendly family dynamics, life’s little problems. I think that this would be fine in an episodic tv-show form. For instance, I could imagine PBS doing Jan Karon’s Bedford series on Masterpiece Theater or something. But I don’t think that it would generate sufficient interest to draw people into the theaters, pay $7-$10 bucks a person, and sit there for 2 hours. So, we fall back into the DVD crowd again.
“Leave It To Beaver”-style innocence isn’t quite what I’ve envisioned. You can have (and in fact need) drama and challenges in order to make spiritual progression meaningful (in real life or in movies). Going back to “The Prodigal Son”–it involves drug use and severe family problems, yet doesn’t let the dark material overwhelm you such that you’re gloomy and worn out when you’re finished watching it. “Millions” and “Whale Rider” are the same way–the challenges and drama are real, but still leave you feeling in a positive mood at the end.
There’s a time and place for darker endings (I am the guy who has “Raise the Red Lantern” in my Top 5 movies of all time, after all…) but, from an LDS cinema standpoint, I’d expect that to be the exception not the rule. If every LDS movie were like “Brigham City”, audiences would start to be depressed even before they stepped in the theater after a while…
Is Saints and Soldiers your example then? or is it too dark?
Also, to reiterate a question, when was the last time you saw any movie like Millions or Whale Rider that featured an adult protagonist?
I found Brigham City quite moving (although I agree with Carl that Dutcher is too manipulative). It did take me to a dark place, but it showed the way out, too. I didn’t leave it feeling depressed; rather I was uplifted. Ditto with S&S for that matter.
I left God’s Army and the Best Two Years amused. I have left most other LDS movies depressed, but it was more an issue of quality than subject.
I think John C. is on to something that television works better than movies for portraying uplifting spiritual progression. A comparison with Star Trek in the different formats comes to mind. For me, an average TV episode of Star Trek is better entertainment than most of the Star Trek movies; the movies are darker and more jokey with more spectacle and fewer interesting ideas.
Nah. It can be done in a full-length feature just fine. IMO, there are ways of portraying evil without evoking it–not a la “Prodigal Son,” mind you. That’s an terrible movie.
I think “Sainst and Soldiers” does pretty well on that count, inspite of its weaknesses.
Ok, I liked “The Other Side of Heaven”, thought that New York Doll and Napoleon Dynamite both qualified as LDS films (where are they on the list) and consider DVD/Video sales important (many movies exist just to drive those sales).
I’m amazed that anything in wide release didn’t break 2 million. Guess lots of stuff doesn’t.
That Dutcher might be wringing his hands, confused and upset at the lack of commercial success for his latest movie, is a fitting consequence of his lack of understanding of what Mormons want to see in a theater. He thinks he knows what they want to see, when in fact he only knows what he wants they to see. As if he is going to enlighten those ignorant Mormon masses with his insightful and brilliant movies.
Balderdash.
Brother Dutcher needs to stop running around with the film crowd and go back and hold some focus groups with jello-eating, overweight, financially strapped, FHE-holding LDS families if he really wants to know what his target audience wants to see. On the other hand, if his interest is in creating “art” with an underlying theme, and he’s willing to forego financial success or LDS popularity, then he’s on the right track.
Perhaps he’s forgotten–if he ever really knew–that there is a difference between putting one’s best foot forward and embracing hypocrisy. Most non-LDS folks don’t know enough about the LDS Church to distinguish between our clean laundry and our dirty laundry…and that only after they get over the shock of looking at our funny underwear waving in the breeze.
For me, having been born in West Los Angeles, baptized in the font at the Wilshire Ward, and been a member of the Los Angeles and Santa Monica Stakes for over 25 years, I get miffed when I see missionaries baptizing in the Santa Monica Bay or at Zuma Beach. I know, it’s just a movie…Dutcher’s interpretation of life.
But because his interpretation doesn’t jive with mine, I feel no compulsion to support his efforts. While I harbor no ill will to the man, and a relative of mine was actually involved in the making of SoG, I do hope that he fails financially so that he won’t continue to pass on his view on life as if it represents mainstream Mormonism.
Want to see a “serious” LDS movie? Go to the temple.
Movies are primarily entertainment. Not educational or spiritual, except in the most superficial way.
Re my own #7
I think it fits the bill, not perfectly, but comfortably enough.
We saw “States of Grace” at its last showing Thursday night and we had the theater to ourselves (I’m mildly curious about the ticket sales for the rest of the week it was here in the Valley of the Sun)
We liked it & plan to add it to our movie library.
IMO, the biggest problem with LDS cinema is that they are too Provo-centric. Where are the LDS movies about people living in Logan? No, the dance scene in The RM doesn’t count because that Best Western could have been anywhere.
I guess I’m stuck with Heaven or Vegas.