The Work and the Glory

I went to see The Work and the Glory last weekend at Coral Ridge 10 on March 12 2005 for the 9:40pm timeslot. I was not entirely certain what it was going to be about, and I think that pretty well describes how most people would approach the religion presented in it, which is that of the beginning of the Mormon church.

The movie is about an imaginary family called Steed who moves from Vermont to Palmyra in upstate New York. The movie centers around 2 brothers and how their lives diverge based on what choices they make along with what religion or lack of religion they decide to pursue. The movie does not have Joseph Smith, the founder of the Mormon belief system, as the primary character. He appears in the film at times and the ideas he has are the basis of what develops, but he is not the main story focus.

The roles are well-played overall by the cast, which includes Sam Hennings as Benjamin Steed, the family patriarch; Alexander Carroll as Nathan Steed and Eric Johnson as Joshua Steed as the 2 brothers; and Jonathan Scarfe as Joseph Smith (he played Jesus in the movie Judas for T.V. last year, so this is an interesting second role to take). The settings are relatively nice and the cinematography is decent. Unfortunately, the plotline could have been improved upon. First of all, a setting piece is expected to follow the mores of the time. There are certain scenes where prolific kissing is going on, which I found difficult to believe would be happening. People were a little less open to be constantly kissing, whether sneaking away to see a love interest or not, I doubt upon a first few meetings a woman would have been acting in the manner exhibited in the film.

Next, the fact the story chose an imaginary family is beyond me. There have to have been numerous accounts at that time by existing people who did know Joseph Smith. Could nothing be found to give a portrayal we could respect as more accurate? If a movie needs to resort to made-up characters who are the main ones for the film, this does not bode well for other ideas presented either if we are to be expected to follow those as being true. As such, I was not even certain how to take this film. Is the information presented accurate on the beginnings of the Mormon church? If so, why use an imaginary family to present this narrative?

Certain points of the film I did feel were good points brought across. First, Joseph Smith was presented as very likable and appearing to be very honest. I must admit it would be hard for a group of people to join someone who has been portrayed in other sources as a soundrel and liar. At the very least, there must have been something very compelling for others to accept this miraculous story of his and follow him even to the point of the ridicule of others and moving locations several times. You do not follow someone on a journey such as this, rejecting the regular Christian teachings of the time, when there is not something in that person's message to lead you. Jonathan Scarfe does an excellent job in the film in his portrayal of Joseph Smith, and perhaps had the film instead decided to follow the story of this character instead, it might have been far more believable and far better.

Also, the message at the end of the film is about tolerance with the ending line of the movie noting this. This line rings true in how the Mormon Church likely wants to be treated, and I do feel that message is coming from the reality of how they were little tolerated at various points in time.

Please feel free to comment on this review or on the movie itself at the forum thread devoted to it at this location.