NOTE IMDb
5,8/10
3,1 k
MA NOTE
Ajouter une intrigue dans votre langueA love story set during a tense encounter between a wagon train of settlers and a renegade Mormon group.A love story set during a tense encounter between a wagon train of settlers and a renegade Mormon group.A love story set during a tense encounter between a wagon train of settlers and a renegade Mormon group.
- Réalisation
- Scénario
- Casting principal
- Récompenses
- 2 nominations au total
Dave Trimble
- Dr. Willard Richards
- (as David Trimble)
Avis à la une
8irm8
This movie deserves better than it got. I almost didn't watch it after reading reviews and seeing that it had a '13' on RottenTomatoes. It is far better than that. Yes they tacked on a love story (although that was not badly done), but it follows the true history quite closely. And there is the rub for many of the Mormon faith. Even though the Church has been forced by facts to slowly and reluctantly admit to the truth, it has still tried mightily to suppress the incident. And you can see why. It was truly a sickening slaughter of innocents sanctioned by the highest authorities in the church.
Having read American Massacre, an historical account of the MM massacre, I found this a reasonably accurate depiction of events. A fascinating if disturbing bit of western history.
Having read American Massacre, an historical account of the MM massacre, I found this a reasonably accurate depiction of events. A fascinating if disturbing bit of western history.
I honestly can't say why this film doesn't rate higher than a 5.6 because it is certainly better than this score indicates. Now, I realize that it doesn't paint a pretty picture of the Mormon movement during this time period. But the fact is that this terrible event actually happened and pretending that the Paiute Indians were the only culprits involved simply doesn't wash. Likewise, the fact is that we may never know what Brigham Young knew--or when he knew it. God knows. And that's what is ultimately most important anyway. Be that as it may, while this film does capture some historical facts the director (Christopher Cain) and the writers also added some fictional scenarios quite liberally as well. For example, there is a love scene thrown in that clearly never happened. But it makes for good viewing and that's what typically matters most to Hollywood. That said, although I certainly don't wish to diminish the horrible crimes committed at Mountain Meadow, I also don't want to tarnish everyone belonging to the Mormon faith either. So for the sake of brevity I will just say that this was a very good movie with good acting which managed to keep my attention throughout the entire story. But this isn't an historical documentary and so it shouldn't be confused for one. In short, this is definitely worth a watch for those who can appreciate a film of this nature. I'll leave it at that.
This is a story that needs telling, and perhaps a bare documentary would have gone unnoticed. I was bothered, however, by the introduction of an unlikely horse-breaking scene, a subsequent act of remarkable generosity, and a love-at-first-sight romance. These run counter to the actual events and distort the nature of the massacre. Apart from that I liked the portrayal very much. It does a good job of portraying the distrust the Mormons had of the rest of the nation, including the government, of their resentment toward Missouri and toward the mob that murdered Joseph Smith in Illinois, and the failure of the government that had him in its custody.
Although the movie was shot in Alberta, the scenery is not unlike that in the Mountain Meadows area, except, of course, for the lake or river in which the young emigrant was able to bathe. I could be mistaken, but I don't think there is one.
Although the movie was shot in Alberta, the scenery is not unlike that in the Mountain Meadows area, except, of course, for the lake or river in which the young emigrant was able to bathe. I could be mistaken, but I don't think there is one.
I have been hearing many bad reviews for this movie, panning it for a perceived 'blanket condemnation of the Mormon Church.' What so many of these reviews refuse to take into consideration is the actual character of territorial Utah in the 1850s and the rest of the historical evidence.
The plain simple fact is that Utah at the time WAS full of zealous religiosity. Every statement made by Brigham Young in the movie comes from his published sermons. Utah territory was a harsh and repressive society, and the movie portrays this accurately.
This movie is in NO WAY a blanket condemnation of Mormonism, though it IS a condemnation of the Mormon Church *IN THE 1850s.* To say that this movie portrays them like "homesteading Nazis," is completely unfair.
John Voight's performance gives a perfect example of the sort of character found in Mormon authorities in the period, while his sons show us some of the various types of dissension, the outright rejection, and the horrified self-loathing obedience.
The only thing I can see wrong here is that they could have put some hostile people in the wagon company, as undoubtedly there would have been. I can understand why they did not however, in order to drive home just how terrible this massacre was. Whether or not Brigham Young was directly involved in the events is up for debate, but there can be no doubt that the teachings he espoused and the environment they engendered were a significant part of what caused the massacre.
In short, most of the negative reviews come either from Mormons or people who have very little background with regards to the history of Territorial Utah
The plain simple fact is that Utah at the time WAS full of zealous religiosity. Every statement made by Brigham Young in the movie comes from his published sermons. Utah territory was a harsh and repressive society, and the movie portrays this accurately.
This movie is in NO WAY a blanket condemnation of Mormonism, though it IS a condemnation of the Mormon Church *IN THE 1850s.* To say that this movie portrays them like "homesteading Nazis," is completely unfair.
John Voight's performance gives a perfect example of the sort of character found in Mormon authorities in the period, while his sons show us some of the various types of dissension, the outright rejection, and the horrified self-loathing obedience.
The only thing I can see wrong here is that they could have put some hostile people in the wagon company, as undoubtedly there would have been. I can understand why they did not however, in order to drive home just how terrible this massacre was. Whether or not Brigham Young was directly involved in the events is up for debate, but there can be no doubt that the teachings he espoused and the environment they engendered were a significant part of what caused the massacre.
In short, most of the negative reviews come either from Mormons or people who have very little background with regards to the history of Territorial Utah
I find it quite odd that so many folks have slammed this fine film. A masterpiece, no. A hateful 'attack' on Mormons, hardly. I know for a fact the LDS doctrine outlined in the film is what 'the church' holds. Why is this historical film off limits, I don't get it. The actors all did a credible job and Terrance Stamp was wonderful.This is a true Hollywood story. It is based on a real event. The Mormons murdered those folks on the meadow. It is no indictment on every living member of the LDS than a film about the crusades impugns every Catholic.The ending was a little over the top but it was a fine love story. All in all I have seen few films bashed this terribly that were so very good.
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesThe execution of John D. Lee was actually quite accurate. He was the only participant in the massacre that was ever tried, and after two trials, he was convicted. The army took him out to the massacre site on March 23, 1877 (nearly twenty years after the event occurred), and then ordered a firing squad to execute him. His body was buried several miles away from the massacre site.
- GaffesBrigham Young was born in rural Vermont, but in the film he is played by a British actor with a prominent and proper British accent.
- Bandes originalesLove Will Still Be There
Performed by Lee Ann Womack
Arranged and Produced by Steve Dorff
Written by Steve Dorff, Eric Kaz, Roger Cain
(p) 2007 MCA Nashville
Courtesy of MCA Nashville
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et suivre la liste de favoris afin de recevoir des recommandations personnalisées
- How long is September Dawn?Alimenté par Alexa
Détails
- Date de sortie
- Pays d’origine
- Langue
- Aussi connu sous le nom de
- Последний сентябрь
- Lieux de tournage
- Sociétés de production
- Voir plus de crédits d'entreprise sur IMDbPro
Box-office
- Budget
- 11 000 000 $US (estimé)
- Montant brut aux États-Unis et au Canada
- 1 066 555 $US
- Week-end de sortie aux États-Unis et au Canada
- 1 051 000 $US
- 26 août 2007
- Montant brut mondial
- 1 066 555 $US
- Durée1 heure 51 minutes
- Couleur
- Mixage
- Rapport de forme
- 1.85 : 1
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant
Lacune principale
By what name was September Dawn (2007) officially released in India in English?
Répondre