From: owner-aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com (aml-list-digest) To: aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: aml-list-digest V1 #878 Reply-To: aml-list Sender: owner-aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com Errors-To: owner-aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com Precedence: bulk aml-list-digest Thursday, October 31 2002 Volume 01 : Number 878 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2002 00:13:25 -0800 From: JLTyner Subject: Re: [AML] Book of Mormon Movie Casting Call Actually, the thing I notice about these casting calls seems to be: NO SAG ACTORS WILL BE ACCEPTED! Why? Because they have to be paid more? And for all you folks on the list who are big supporters of organized labor-What say you? In my experience, there is almost no industry that has more need of a union as does the entertainment industry. I have watched union rules knowingly violated on sets by people I knew were supporters of democratic causes by public reputation or inclination. I understand the need to save some bucks, but I'm curious-All you folks that are involved in casting-be it for plays for or by LDS people or in the emerging cinema end of Mormon Letters- Is it standard practice not to cast SAG members, and if so, why? Strictly financial? Or are there other components to such a policy? Kathy Tyner Orange County, CA - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2002 18:57:39 -0700 From: "D. Michael Martindale" Subject: Re: [AML] Generalizing from Experience Bill Willson wrote: > Writers need to be > careful that we don't create worlds, we are not willing to have our > grandchildren live in, or in light of the exponential advance of modern > technology, worlds we are not eager to live in ourselves. I can't disagree with this more. It still amazes me that people think they have the right to tell other writers what and what not to write. If we followed the above prescription, the vast majority of all our stories would disappear, and some of the most inspiring ones too. Who wants to live in a world where a man who steals a loaf of bread because his family is starving is caught and ends up serving nineteen years in a dismal prison, then can't make an honest living because he's a convict, so resorts to stealing again, even from a bishop who gave him food and a place to sleep? So you'd better throw out Victor Hugo's _Les Miserables_. Who wants to live in a world where a man who won't betray his people to aid an old friend who became a powerful leader in a conquering nation, is then framed by the old friend for the attempted murder of a government official, is sentenced to a lifetime of servitude, and has his family thrown into a dungeon where they develop leprosy? There goes _Ben-Hur_. I would hate to live in a world where every move I make is watched and every product I buy is manufactured by the government and is of pathetic quality; where I can't trust any piece of news to tell me anything remotely resembling the truth; where when the government says something is so, I am forced to believe it, no matter how false I know it to be. Goodbye Orwell's _1984_. Science fiction has uncounted stories of dystopian worlds, worlds we'd all hate to live in, which worlds were created by authors who wanted us to think hard about the consequences of trends they see in society, and ask ourselves if we want to live in such worlds, and what can we do to avoid it. "Cautionary tales" they're called. Throw it all out. How do we ever learn about the negative side of life, the negative consequences of sin, the dangers of foolishness or mercilessness? Are we allowed only to learn about them first-hand in real life because we have nowhere to experiment with cause and effect in a safe environment, through imaginary tales? And this because we mustn't tell tales that paint pictures of worlds we don't like, on the off-chance someone will take our vision and try to realize it? Must we remain in a state of blissful ignorance that Adam and Eve fell to rescue us from? Writers need to be careful that they don't AVOID creating such worlds. Truth must be told, and if truth is ugly, so much more the need to expose the ugliness for all to see. Unrecognized ugliness cannot be dealt with. If no story were ever written that depicted an ugly world, would the bad guys suddenly lose all imagination and never be able to think up the evil acts on their own? If we would just stop writing novels, perhaps peace would break out and all sin disappear. - -- D. Michael Martindale dmichael@wwno.com ================================== Check out Worldsmiths, the new online LDS writers group, at http://www.wwno.com/worldsmiths Sponsored by Worlds Without Number http://www.wwno.com ================================== - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2002 07:47:10 -0800 From: "Steve Perry" Subject: Re: [AML] SAMUELSEN, _Peculiarities_ I went to "Peculiarities" last Thursday at the Villa and was glad I went. I felt uncomfortable many times--not with the subject or the writing--but with the overwhelming urge to yell at the characters, "Stop it, you idiot, can't you see what this will do to your life?" What stopped me (besides the usual theatrical convention of not speaking to the actors during performance) was the fact that I found parts of each individual character I could relate to all too well. Well done, brother Samuelsen. :-) Steve - -- skperry@mac.com http://www.StevenKappPerry.com - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2002 09:37:43 -0700 From: "Mary Jane Jones" Subject: Re: RE: [AML] SAMUELSEN, _Peculiarities_ (Review) >> The most dangerous segment of the play is "NCMO" (somebody should ask >> Samuelsen what this title means; it's probably an abbreviation the hip >> people already know.) =20 >I don't know how many times I've heard my BYU roommates use this one so, >I feel qualified to respond: "Non-Committal Make Out"=20 And as I recall, there was some stink a couple years ago about some = students that had started up a "nickmo" web site, where people could go to = find willing partners. BYU and Provo City tried to get that shut down = pretty quickly. Mary Jane - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2002 06:48:33 -0700 From: "Paris Anderson" Subject: Re: [AML] The Bridge The biggest weakness I saw in the allegory was that the switchman's son really did end up dead. He wasn't there when the switchman got home. Of course, Christ wasn't Leaving the Big Guy forever. He was going home. "The Bridge" is a good story, but it's not a parallel story that is simpler and help us understand the bigger more complex story. Paris Anderson - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2002 09:24:21 -0700 From: "Eric R. Samuelsen" Subject: Re: [AML] Johnny Lingo Actually, though, we're mostly in agreement here. Kellene Adams: >What I do know is that the "we" that I know does not >continue to "accept unquestioningly the values of our (American, = >western) >society." In fact, the we that I know (and work hard to be part of and = who >happens to be the majority of people I know) is working hard to >consistently, carefully, painstakingly, and thoughtfully send messages, = both >subtle and unsubtle, that there is much more to beauty than what meets = the >eye--for both male and female--that each one of us, young and old, but >especially our youth, our children, our young men and women, are = absolutely >beautiful, absolutely divine, absolutely special. Of course. Count me in, I hope, as part of that 'we.' I just wish that = the majority of people I know felt this way too. That, unfortunately, is = not true. But that's the message we should be sending, either through = positive or negative examples. It's explicitly not the message I see in = Johnny Lingo, a film a lot of folks on this list were defending, probably = because they saw a very different message. =20 Tracie Laulusa: >He saw her inner worth, and because he did, and >treated her that way, it was reflected in her outward appearance. Her >outside came to reflect what he knew was on the inside already. =20 SNIP >Eric, you had a character in Singled Out who, I think, did not really >think herself outwardly beautiful, yet wanted her potential partner to >be able to see her as beautiful. And he did. If I remember right, in >the end he told her she was beautiful. What was he seeing? >Physically she wasn't "beautiful". But he came to love her insides, >and that lent beauty to her whole being. =20 Look, I'm a very unattractive man, physically. I say that without = self-consciousness or self-pity; it's just the way things are. I'm a = theatre guy, and very used to looking objectively at people, and when I = look at myself I see "character actor." Somehow, through some miracle, a = wonderful, beautiful woman looked past all that and saw in me someone = beautiful, and she enriches my life every day of it. That's the miracle, = the astounding phenomenon of love, and I thank God for it, that He gave us = this gift. I agree with all that. I just don't see it in Johnny Lingo. I don't see anything but female = objectification. I don't think it's a particularly loathsome film, = because it's too inept and silly to be dangerous. I find it a remarkable = mixture of atrocious acting, dreadful directing, horrendous writing and as = Thom pointed out, the wigs don't fit, all serving a horrid message. As = such, it's a perfect example of form serving content. Maybe a re-make = willl actually end up expressing all the positive values some of the rest = of you see in it. Power to 'em. I don't have much faith in that = particular artistic team, but you never know. But the big problem is that = for most folks I know, when we hear Johnny Lingo, we get the giggles. The = lingering horrors of the previous film will almost certainly color our = impressions of the re-make. =20 Eric Samuelsen - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2002 08:59:22 -0800 (PST) From: Matthew Lee Subject: RE: [AML] Single Bishops/ Sealings "Can a Bishop who's never been divorced give good advice on divorce?" That's a bit bogus. Can a Savior who has never sinned give good advice= on sin? Of course! I assume that President Kimball was never involved in= the vast majority sins he discusses in his book, The Miracle of= Forgiveness, yet I believe he does an excellent job covering the subject= matter. Isn=92t that what so many of you authors are trying so hard to= capture? An accurate feeling for those things that you have never fully= experienced?=20 Image how much more important is it that a priesthood leader be= enlighten beyond his physical abilities when helping someone who is= struggling to work out their our salvation. Thank goodness the Savior= "descended below all things, in that he comprehended all things, that he= might be in all and through all things," (D&C 88: 6 ), that the Spirit can= work upon the leaders of the church to give council about things that they= may other wise, know very little about.=20 In addition, all these questions about Sealing=92s are really touching= on Holy ground. The President of the Church takes the giving and the= cancellation of these blessing very seriously. It=92s important to= remember that when a couple is =93sealed=94 they have entered into a= covenant with God and not with each other. So for an individual to request= that the Sealing they took part in, by covenant, be canceled, it removes= from them any entitlement to blessings associated with the covenant. = Unless they have someone else lined up to enter into the covenant with them= again, what they are doing, in essence, is removing blessings from there= own lives.=20 And as far as the woman who requested that her sealing be canceled= because she didn=92t want to be with her former husband in the after life,= it must always be remembered that =93No power or influence can or ought to= be maintained by virtue of the priesthood, only by persuasion, by= long-suffering, by gentleness and meekness, and by love unfeigned;" (D&C= 121:41). If after all persuasion and long-suffering has been expended, and= she still does not want to be with him she will not be forced into doing= so.=20 It=92s this same lack of compulsion that allows the President of the= Church to cancel sealing blessings, even when it breaks his heart to do so.= =20 Thank you, Matthew R. Lee - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2002 12:10:02 EST From: Paynecabin@aol.com Subject: Re: [AML] The Bridge In a message dated 10/28/02 9:38:41 PM, dmichael@wwno.com writes: << The point of this parable was to teach us to keep praying for that which we desire. In other words, the merciless king represented God. >> Although I didn't much like the film we're discussing, I think this is a good point. I've always been tickled by the Savior comparing Himself with a chicken. It works, but don't play the analogy all the way out if you want to stay reverent. Marvin Payne __________________ Visit marvinpayne.com! "Come unto Christ, and lay hold on every good gift..." (From the last page of the Book of Mormon) - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2002 11:52:15 -0700 (MST) From: Melanie Dahlin Subject: RE: [AML] Lee Benson on _Charly_ I have been dying to say something about the and novel, Charly. I needed to watch the movie for a class, but I don't know if I would have otherwise. It would have been my loss, to be honest. Granted, the movie has its flaws, so does the book. (What movie or book is perfect?) But, let's not forget what this book, and film, has done for the Mormon genre, specifically Mormon literature. I recognize that Mormon literature has been around for a great many years. Between the 1960s-70s it achieved a little more momentum, but I think it was Weyland (well, for the most part) that has really made it---dare I say---popular? Someone needed to set a foundation for Mormon literature. Without the pioneers, how can we expand, and better, the doctrine? Without meaning to be trite, I compare Weyland's literature to Sigmund Freud. Freud was not the only man practicing and researching psychology, but he was the one who made it well-known. Today, many psychologists see Freud's ideas as "half-baked"; however, he set the foundation for others to build upon. That is why Freud is the father of psychology. Not necessarily because his ideas and style are accepted, but because he paved the dirt road. I believe Weyland, and others like him, have done the same. Let's give them credit for their efforts. Melanie Dahlin - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2002 15:53:26 -0700 From: Cathy Wilson Subject: Re: [AML] Inverting Stories (was: Johnny Lingo) Do you remember the old Twilight Zone episode where a young blonde, attractive in a sixties sort of way, is agonizing because of her ugliness? She's in a hospital, isolated for her hideousness. The half-hour proceeds with her agony, till at the end we see her caretakers, all thinking themselves very beautiful--with pig-nose-faces, scary and hideous indeed when you're a little kid. There's an inversion for us. Cathy Wilson - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2002 15:44:32 -0600 From: Linda Adams Subject: Re: [AML] Getting Started with LDS Screenwriting >>>At 05:04 PM 10/24/02, you wrote: >The last thing we need is one more Mormon businessperson pretending to be >an artist and cluttering up our movie screens. >As for books and such: beware of any screenwriting guru who preaches any >formula or structure for success. >Just write from the gut of your soul. >Richard Dutcher<<<< While I agree with Richard completely on principle, I remember Darvell from another writer's group (it's been a while--hello!) and I think I understand his question, since I've had the same one myself. It is, how do you write that gut story in screenplay format? I understand how to write poetry, fiction (short and long), and have tried straight drama (with no luck getting produced, yet, so I don't know if my two plays are any good, really); but the format of screenwriting baffles me. What are the basic differences between a screen script and a dramatic script (which I understand how to do)? What do all those puzzling abbreviations mean? (I've learned a few: CU is close-up, INT is interior, EXT is exterior.) How important are the physical descriptions, camera angles, close-ups, long shots, music in the background, and where is all that supposed to go in relation to the dialogue? Is it my job to come up with all that, or the director's? When I've written drama, I use brief set and costume descriptions, etc., just enough to communicate my intent. I figure any director or producer will have their own vision and interpret those things for themselves, therefore it's a waste of time for me to bother putting that on paper, if they're just going to change it anyway. (Things like, describing a character as blond unless that means something to the story.) So, if I were writing a scene taking place in McDonald's, for the screen, how much description do I need to put in? Just this? "INT: McDonald's. Lunchtime. Long lines. DEAN is sitting at a booth. JANE is still in line, annoyed. JANE Dean. Dean, come here. DEAN I'm holding the table. What's your problem?" - --Might be an incredibly boring scene there, but is that *what* you do? Is that enough? Or do I have to add: Trash on all the tables. Noisy. All but one table is clean and empty. Two registers are empty. Employees standing around doing nothing to move the line along. One employee obviously slow. Yada yada ya. I'd think all that is included by just saying, "McDonald's. Lunchtime." And the director can come up with those details that add to his interpretation of my script. I think that's what Darvell wants to know. I do too. How do I convert a story, novel, or stage drama over to the screen? Or take a new idea and write for the screen? I have at least two or three stories bouncing around my head that would be great movies. Movies *I'd* like to see, anyway, and I'm picky. And I think other people might like to watch 'em. But I don't have a clue how to set down what I see in my head in the right format for a film director to make sense of my vision. I have very little understanding of how a film actually *gets* made, from concept to finished product. Not to mention the artistry that goes into camera angles and drawing out storyboards. Is that the writer's job? What does the text of the script need to provide? And what books are out there that describe the filmmaking process in lay terms? That's what I want to know. Linda Linda Adams adamszoo@sprintmail.com http://home.sprintmail.com/~adamszoo/linda - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2002 17:16:44 -0800 From: harlowclark@juno.com Subject: Re: [AML] _Finnegan's Wake_ and _Ulysses_ On Mon, 14 Oct 2002 13:03:12 -0400 Robert Lauer writes: > 1. What is the ESSENCE of Joyce? > (Essence is a word with a particular meaning. If one says that > Joyce's essence is incomprehensible, But who says this? I've never heard any Joyce scholar say that Joyce is incomprehensible. My father's first book (I think) was a monograph called, "Modern and Classic: The Wooing Both Ways," about how certain works from the modern period retell classic stories. Eliot's work retells Dante's Divine Comedy, Ulysses retells The Odyssey, etc. How is that incomprehensible? It's well-known that Joyce is retelling the Odyssey, just as it's well-known that the Coen Bros. are retelling the Odyssey in _O Brother Where Art Thou?_ I haven't read a lot of Joyce so I won't try to defend his work, but my own work owes probably as much to Joyce as he owes to the English Metaphysical poets (Cowley, Donne, et al). For my essay "Lucid Dreaming," I took my epigraph from Samuel Johnson's comments about the Metaphysicals in his Life of Cowley, "The most heterogeneous of ideas are yoked by violence together; nature and art are ransacked for illustrations, comparisons and allusions; their learning instructs and their subtilty surprises; but the reader commonly thinks his improvement dearly bought, and though he sometimes admires is seldom pleased." A great deal of my work as a critic has involved yoking heterogeneous ideas together, also a lot of puns--really dumb puns, and chains of associations. I will start writing about one subject and a pun will suggest itself and I'll play around with that before I get back to the subject. Maybe that's what Attention Deficit Disorder does, constantly diverts my attention and makes it difficult to recognize what things are most important. Or maybe Attention Deficit is not a disorder but a gift that allows me to see how all things are inter-related, and how rich experience is. I make a lot of dumb puns because the puns are related in complex ways to the things I'm thinking and writing about. I believe the same is true of Joyce's later work. He's not attacking language, he's trying to convey the richness and complexity of even small moments. Same thing Thornton Wilder was doing in Our Town, but Wilder chose to show the richness of experience in simple things, while Joyce chooses to show the richness of simple things in complex ways. When Emily asks the Stage Manager if anyone ever grasps every, every moment, he replies, "Poets maybe." And people like Joyce. How does trying to grasp the richness of experience, the richness of intruding thoughts and memories, the richness and texture of the world around us and work it into sentences and paragraphs mean that one has chosen incomprehensibility as ones essence? > 2. A literary work must stand on it's own. As the venerable Mike Royko said, Sez who? > If the reader is told that he, in order to understand the work, > must read what critics have written or that he must > understand the author's culture, religion, nationality, personal > history. etc, then such an argument makes the case that the work > CAN'T stand on its own. Not at all. Consider the phrase "the dresser made of deal" in Wallace Stevens' "The Emperor of Ice Cream." What does it mean? There's nothing in the poem to tell you, except that Stevens uses a lot of images of temporary things. You might suspect that _deal_ means something different in the poem than "a bargain struck between two parties." But you have to know something about the author's culture to know what that something different is. You have to know that his culture speaks English and that within that language there is a word for a kind of very cheap wood, _deal_. (BTW, Leslie Norris has a wonderful story in _The Girl from Cardigan_ about cheap wood called, "A Piece of Archangel") How would you know that if you're not a carpenter? Look it up in the dictionary. Which is another thing you have to know about Stevens' culture. It's a dictionary-making culture, and a lot of poets use dictionaries as a resource to help their diction. Does that last paragraph sound insufferably self-righteous (or pedantic)? Let me rephrase it. Any work of art whose words or images we don't have to stop and think about stands on its own for us--we have enough cultural information to understand it. Every work of art will have an audience that doesn't have to puzzle through it, but every work of art will also have ideas and cultural details that will escape many audiences. I am 559/663 through the little green copy of Das Neue Testament, Luthertext, some missionary's copy, I bought years ago in a used bookstore. The Gospels are easy to read because I'm familiar with the English. The Epistles and Offenbarung I haven't read since 9th grade semerary, and they're harder to read, so I puzzle through them, and figure that when I read it again next year I'll understand better. It doesn't stand on its own for me. I don't know enough about the language, but often find that if I read a puzzling verse in English then read it again auf Deutsch I really did know all the words and the grammar if I'd been paying better attention. I'm willing to puzzle through because I want to learn and understand. When I took Steve Walker's MoBritLit class he told us what Marden Clark told his class years earlier, that if you're going to read Finnegan's Wake you should plan to spend about 100 hours getting into it. Steve told us he had read FW four or five (five or six?) times and still wasn't sure it was worth it. But he didn't say the essence of Joyce is incomprehensible. I've never heard anyone try to defend Joyce by saying that. I've never heard anyone say that who has taken the time to understand Joyce. BTW, I was looking through Marden Clark's copies of Ulysses and Finnegan's Wake the other night, lots of marginalia--which should be helpful, and I remembered one reason I hadn't read either one yet: The binding on FW is cracked. But, thanks to Paris Anderson and Michael Collings' class at last year's AML Writers Conference I now know how to repair it. > Also literature is written so that one can comprehend the author's > ideas through a personal reading of the work, without depending > on anyone other than the text itself. As Royko said . . . I agree that reading is personal, often deeply personal, but I also agree with what Lionel Trilling said in _Beyond Culture_, that modern literature specifically set out to engage its audience with the culture, not simply with the text itself. > Also punctuation is NOT a STYLE ELEMENT. That's what Charles Wentworth Higginson told Emily Dickinson. His meddling with her punctuation was one reason she didn't publish more poems in her lifetime. > As any actor or public speaker worth his or her salt knows, > punctuation is vital in recreating verbally not only the language > the author imagined but also its fine shades of meaning. Yes, and as many good writers know, some editors don't understand that they (the writers) know perfectly well what punctuation marks are supposed to do, and that writers rely on the audience's knowledge of punctuation to understand the effect a punctuation mark is supposed to have. Reminds me of a wonderful moment in the play _Wit_. I came across a video of the HBO production, after hearing about it on the radio. Emma Thompson plays a John Donne scholar dying of ovarian cancer. A rigorous, difficult teacher. Talking to us in her hospital bed she remembers the professor who introduced her to Donne, also a rigorous, difficult teacher, asking her if she thought the punctuation in Donne's "Death Be Not Proud" was arbitrary. The last line reads, in some editions, "And death shall be no more; Death thou shalt die." The professor says that's because the last line has two independent clauses, but the proper punctuation is a comma, (and death in lowercase, I think) "A comma, a breath, is all that separates this life from the next." At the end of the play the old professor is in town to visit a great-granddaughter, and stops by the hospital. She holds her old student, curled like a comma on the bed, and comforts her (wonderful, wonderful moment). > Language is an attempt to convey specific ideas. Yes. My language is often a way of conveying joy. As the Clown says to Cleopatra (and who could resist "If you want to flatter her / Say what Anthony told Cleopatterer"), when delivering the asp, "I wish you much joy in the worm." > When language is distorted the union of one individual > mind to another breaks down. Or builds up. Good puns not only unite words but people, because puns show us that words and ideas we might think unrelated are closely related, just as art shows us how much we share with other human(e) beings, even those very much different from us, even those we might think incomprehensible [Ah, I finally remembered the rhyme from _Chicago_, the one where the women are singing about the men they killed, and their reasons for doing so, "understandable, understandable, it's entirely understandable / comprehensible, comprehensible, it's entirely comprehensible /it's so defensible, it's not the least reprehensible." I was singing "Standerundable, standerundable, it's entirely standerundable" last night while carving pumpkins, and driving my niece crazy.] Harlow S. Clark ________________________________________________________________ Sign Up for Juno Platinum Internet Access Today Only $9.95 per month! Visit www.juno.com - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2002 16:49:36 -0800 (PST) From: "R.W. Rasband" Subject: [AML] Laurel Thatcher Ulrich and BELLESILES, _Arming America_ Michael Bellesiles, professor of history at Emory University, has resigned after having been accused of academic fraud. He wrote "Arming America", a book which argued that there was no widespread gun ownership in early America, contrary to conventional wisdom. The book was widely acclaimed by critics (and liberals) and won the prestigious Bancroft Prize in history. However some scholars (and some bloggers) could not confirm the existence of many sources Bellesiles cited. An investigating committee appointed by Emory has recently concluded there is a strong possibility the professor lied about his sources. A member of the committee is Laurel Thatcher Ulrich of Harvard University, the noted Pulitzer-Prize winning LDS historian. The report cites a possible bogus story of Bellesiles using records from "a Mormon branch library." A summary of the report is at http://hnn.us/articles/1069.html __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? HotJobs - Search new jobs daily now http://hotjobs.yahoo.com/ - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2002 19:45:13 -0600 From: "Kumiko" Subject: [AML] Box Office Report Oct. 25 02 Feature Films by LDS/Mormon Filmmakers and Actors Weekend Box Office Report (U.S. Domestic Box Office Gross) Weekend of October 25, 2002 Report compiled by: LDSFilm.com [If table below doesn't line up properly, try looking at them with a mono-spaced font, such as Courier - Ed.] Natl Film Title Weekend Gross Rank LDS/Mormon Filmmaker/Actor Total Gross Theaters Days - --- ----------------------------- ----------- ----- ---- 7 Punch-Drunk Love 3,308,223 481 17 Actors/characters: 5,861,261 David Stevens, Nathan Stevens, Michael D. Stevens, Jim Smooth Stevens (James Smooth) 39 Master of Disguise 159,727 226 87 Perry Andelin Blake (director) 40,032,054 58 Jack Weyland's Charly 36,608 26 31 Adam Anderegg (director) 388,032 Jack Weyland (book author) Janine Gilbert (screenwriter) Lance Williams, Micah Merrill (producers) Tip Boxell (co-producer) Bengt Jan Jonsson (cinematographer) Aaron Merrill (composer) Actors: Heather Beers, Jeremy Elliott, Adam Johnson, Jackie Winterrose Fullmer, Diana Dunkley, Gary Neilson, Lisa McCammon, Randy King, Bernie Diamond, etc. 64 Cirque du Soleil: Journey of Man 26,973 6 906 Reed Smoot (cinematographer) 14,215,755 66 Minority Report 24,756 47 129 Gerald Molen (producer) 132,014,112 74 City by the Sea 13,822 31 52 Eliza Dushku (actress) 22,295,473 93 China: The Panda Adventure 8,184 4 458 Reed Smoot (cinematographer) 2,903,323 108 Galapagos 3,179 4 1095 Reed Smoot (cinematographer) 13,766,610 113 ESPN's Ultimate X 2,794 8 171 Reed Smoot (cinematographer) 4,191,641 114 Handcart 2,790 6 17 Kels Goodman (director/DP) 56,623 David Greenslaw Sapp (producer) Mark von Bowers (screenwriter) Eric M. Hanson (composer) Actor: Jaelan Petrie, Stephanie Albach Chris Kendrick, Shannon Skinner, Gretchen Condie 120 Mark Twain's America 3D 1,455 2 1578 Alan Williams (composer) 2,279,281 123 The Singles Ward 1,113 3 269 Kurt Hale (writer/director) 1,249,570 John E. Moyer (writer) Dave Hunter (producer) Ryan Little (cinematographer) Cody Hale (composer) Actors: Will Swenson, Connie Young, Daryn Tufts, Kirby Heyborne, Michael Birkeland, Robert Swenson, Wally Joyner, Lincoln Hoppe, Sedra Santos, etc. HANDCART BOX OFFICE DATA IN THIS REPORT: We are pleased to report that this week we do have up-to-date box office numbers for "Handcart". (Thanks to Kels Goodman for sending them to us.) After three weekends, "Handcart" has grossed a total of $56,623 at the box office, which is more than one-sixth of its reported production budget. "Handcart" went against industry trends by doing better in its second weekend than in its opening weekend. 2nd weekend total box office for "Handcart" was 13% higher than 1st weekend, although the movie played in only 12 theaters the 2nd weekend, compared to 18 theaters the first weekend. This meant that per-theater revenue was 1.7 times higher the second weekend. Goodman tells us that they plan to slow down through the holidays (evident in that the film is currently playing on only six screens now) and make a new push on January 3 in places like Arizona, Iowa City, California, Montana and Idaho. He also tells us that "Handcart" has performed best in Canada, St. George and Evanston -- areas outside the Wasatch Front, where LDS genre films have been extensively available. Goodman feels the film will do well as it moves to other parts of the country. TEXAS: THIS IS THE PLACE - A new IMAX film is nearing completion. "Texas: The Big Picture" is being produced and directed by Scott Swofford, and photographed by T.C. Christensen (both are Latter-day Saints who have extensive experience doing Church film projects and are leaders in the IMAX industry.) The film is a documentary about the state of Texas, featuring locations such as San Antonio, the Hill Country, Dallas/Fort Worth, Houston, Austin and ranches and farms in West Texas and the Panhandle. It is scheduled to be released in April of 2003. Principal photography ended October 28. MORE TEXAS NOTES - And, as noted earlier, the Latter-day Saint-themed feature film "Suddenly Unexpected" wrapped filming in Houston, Texas last week and is in now in post-production. Crew members compared it to "My Big Fat Greek Wedding" and "The Gods Must Be Crazy." The production and artistry is top-notch. Additionally, Dallas-based Latter-day Saint filmmaker Joshua D. Smith premieres his new feature film "Zombie Campout" this week and as previously noted, "Handcart", a feature film directed by Texan Latter-day Saint Kels Goodman, is now in theaters in Utah, and will be expanding to dozens of cities outside of Utah. SLC FILM FESTIVAL CALL FOR ENTRIES - The 2002 Salt Lake City Film Festival was highly successful and plans are well underway for the 2003 event. Entrants in 2002 were from all over the world and from various backgrounds, but the films featured are all without gratuitous, vulgar, inappropriate content. Latter-day Saints who won awards at the 2002 festival include Scott Tiffany, Best Documentary for "Forgotten Voyage", and Mark Goodman, SLCFF Audience Award and Best Feature Film for "Someone Was Watching." If you're going to have a film ready by February 28, 2003, check out the details: http://www.slcfilmfest.org/2_entries/index.html PUMPED FOR THE ECLIPSE - The Eclipse Film Festival is just a couple weeks away: November 8th and 9th. The official website now hosts a fantastic TV commercial (available in 3 sizes of QuickTime), as well as radio spots: http://www.eclipsefilmfest.com. (This festival will be awesome, by the way - -- we've checked out the lineup, and we're very excited. Many of the names you see here on LDSFilm.com will be there as competitors or judges or other festival participants)... The TV commercial even shows a second of Christian Vuissa's short film "Daybreak", though as far as we know "Daybreak" will not be shown at the festival, only Vuissa's "Roots and Wings" will be shown. (Daybreak is a very nice-looking but weird little film, if you've never seen it. The whole thing can be downloaded from here: http://yfilms.byu.edu/finalcut/daybreak.mov But if you watch it, don't think that's what "Roots and Wings" is like. "Roots and Wings" actually has a story, dialogue and characters and is one of the best short film by an LDS director we've seen.) SMOOT ROCKS - "Jane Goodall's Wild Chimpanzees", the latest IMAX documentary by legendary Latter-day Saint cinematographer Reed Smoot opened this week (25 October 2002) in Los Angeles. The Toronto Sun highly recommended the movie when it opened earlier this year in Canada. Smoot's previous IMAX films include: Ultimate X; China: The Panda Adventure; Shackleton's Antarctic Adventure; All Access: Front Row. Backstage. Live!; The Human Body; Cirque du Soleil: Journey of Man; Olympic Glory; Galapagos: The Enchanted Voyage; Mysteries of Egypt; and 3 IMAX films nominated or Academy Awards: "Special Effects: Anything Can Happen", "Rainbow War" and "Ballet Robotique". His non-IMAX films include: Disney's Homeward Bound: The Incredible Journey, Gleaming the Cube, Russkies, The Wraith. His films for the Church include: Legacy (1990), The Pump, The Emmett Smith Story, Uncle Ben, John Baker's Last Race, The Lost Manuscript, Cipher in the Snow. Plus MANY more films. His films have grossed over $500 million at U.S. box offices. As is sometimes the case, especially with IMAX films, weekend box office gross totals for "Wild Chimpanzees" for this past weekend were not available. COMICAL COMPETITION - The Hale Centre Theatre in West Valley City recently announced the creation of the first annual Ruth and Nathan Hale Comedy Writing Awards, a competition looking for family-friendly three-act comedies. The competition is open to students from any of Utah's universities, colleges and junior colleges. The top prize is $1,000, with $500 for second and $300 for third. Scripts must be turned in by April 30. For more information, call 801-984-9000. ANNOUNCEMENT FROM MICHELLE WRIGHT'S ACTION ACTING STUDIO - Hello, Everybody! Thank you so much for your overwhelming response and support to our new acting studio! We have some great classes coming up! For our Director's Workshop, Thursday Nov 7th at 7:00 PM we have FRANK E. JOHNSON, DIRECTOR OF TOUCHED BY AN ANGEL! Frank has had a great career in episodic television and this a wonderful opportunity to spend some time learning from Frank before he begins his schedule on this season of Touched and his feature film in January. Space is limited, so you need to register ASAP. The cost is $149.00. Plus: We've schedule 2 more EXTRA'S CLASSES! This cost is only $25.00 and that includes the class, the digital headshot for the database, and adding your info into the casting database! Also you can now register automatically for each class right on the web on our secure order form. Thanks again for the support and see you all there! - Michelle K. Wright, http://www.actionacting.com, 801-299-3688 (Michelle is the casting director for "The Singles Ward" and "The R.M.".) - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ End of aml-list-digest V1 #878 ******************************