States of Grace

Mormon film to this point has been mainly "Mormon", but flightily "film". While some pictures have had strong points, for example, the subtle humor in "Napoleon Dynamite" or action in "Saint and Soldiers", most of the genre has been self-absorbed and self-serving. Even Dutcher's previous "God's Army" was aimed specifically for a Mormon audience and did not have any lofty design or style.

The self-proclaimed "Father of Mormon Cinema" has here created a film that could be accessible to a wide audience and should be better received. The characters are again missionaries, but share little similarities to the characters in "God's Army." The fact that it is already disappearing from theaters is due to poor marketing and advertising, and does not reflect the quality of the film.

Finally a Mormon character faces some real problems and really struggles. Finally Mormon characters make real mistakes and have to pay real repentance. Finally a Mormon story involves real non-Mormon characters and views them not as the oddity, but real people in the real world. And finally, Dutcher has a real vision and real message and actually directs this picture like no one has dared in the genre.

The acting in the film is miles above anything yet seen in Mormon film, as is the direction. Moments between Lozano and Carl, or any moment with the street preacher Louis feel honest and natural. The "gangstas" (as the ads so poorly state) seem real, not like your Mormon high school production or road-show. Even the character of Farrell, who was initially the weakest link in the film, shows his true colors by the end. Dutcher constantly alludes to action in his story and composition, and he creates some amazing pictures, showing that he may be the least accessible person off camera, but he is the most capable director of the genre yet. Carl's confirmation scene, while paying homage to "The Godfather", is amazing in its own right. The story occasionally bordered on cliché, but Dutcher never let it go that route, instead opting for some really difficult decisions for his characters.

I know that many Mormons will not want to see this movie because it has characters that have or will make mistakes. It has some uncomfortable situations and asks some tough questions. What they should realize, however, is that this is the first "Mormon film" that actually has something to say. Instead of laughing at ourselves and our Jello molds, why not show situations that really happen? Why not dare to put ourselves in the shoes of our fellow men? Why not realize that we are but one religion among many, all of which bring goodness into the world? Why not join others in their everyday struggles and know that we are not alone in this world? This film is the first to ask these questions and most successfully answer them. "States of Grace" is not the best film I have ever seen, but it is the best "Mormon film" I have yet seen and is among the best of this year. Open-minded, open-hearted, open-souled viewers everywhere should watch this movie. It may change how you look at things.

Let's start from the end - it was a good movie. At some point I thought it was heading to a "requiem for a dream" ending but something went wrong. Was it the weird final scene? Was it the lack of music? Was it the unbelievable characters? I don't know, still, as a non-Christian I found this movie to be good though my girlfriend that watched the movie with me said it was one of the worst films she have seen... I asked her why but she couldn't explain, she said "too much dialog, not enough action", and when a girl is saying that - you can guess what that means... So, going back to the beginning - it was a good movie but it could be an excellent one!

This film is the third "Mormon Cinema" film from writer/director Richard Dutcher. It presents a similar setting as his first film "God's Army" in that the main characters portrayed are Mormon Missionaries and their unique experiences in the real world. In fact in the predominantly Mormon communities in Utah this is being billed as a Sequel "God's Army 2: States of Grace" whereas it is assumed that outside of Utah it will be billed as simply "States of Grace". States of Grace is more appropriate however as this new film isn't a continuation of the last nor are any of the characters from the first represented (with one minor exception of the "Mission President"). As with prior Dutcher films, this one weaves into it believable, real life characters, believable faith, and a realistic gritty world setting. The theme of this film is represented in it's title "States of Grace" and deals primarily with real life redemption. We have the Missionary who is about to go home who has a closed book past, but carries the literal scars that hint to his background. We have his companion who is neither over the top good or rebellious bad, but just a generally believable regular missionary. You have their neighbor who is a good person has hidden her spiritual scars where no one can see them. You have the homeless street preacher whose at first seems to be just another crazy rambling loon, but has made bad decisions to get to the point he is. And you have the gang member whose past is not as important as his future and his decisions about the path going forward.

The film covers a little over a couple of weeks (three, almost four perhaps) and the events that bring them together. Some events are jarring, others are more subtle. But the lives of these individuals become intertwined with real life reactions.

There are no miracles or lights from the skies. No angels or demons. The Goodness portrayed in the film is very real and true. The Evil portrayed is very real and true. What happens to each of the characters and how they respond is very natural. I don't think it would be very easy for someone to watch this film and say "that's not true" or "that would never happen". The stories portrayed do and have happened.

The film is good. It is well done and the stories are well told and acted out.

That being said, the film suffers from the expected. It was done on a very shoestring budget and the creative control and external influences on the making of the film appear very centralized around Dutcher. There were some scenes that should have been cut entirely because they were duplicate of others or they spelled out plot direction that wasn't really in question (a little too "on the nose"). Also the dialogue, although being very natural, was sometimes TOO natural to the point were it could have used some "spicing up" at the writing level or some "creative editing" in the cutting room to liven them up. It seems like everyone in this film is a "listener" to everything anyone says that they are around. I don't think any dialogue ever overlapped or was cut short.

The film could have lost 10 to 15 minutes and it would have helped, rather than hurt it.

In classic Dutcher form the film evokes a deep emotional response at the end and does so pretty successfully without feeling too contrived or forced. It's not a happy ending, and it's not a sad ending. The ending as always is LIFE with a glimmer of hope that things can get better.

For the non-Mormon viewing audience, you should have no problems seeing this film. It's as "faith promoting" as the Thorn Birds is to Catholicism. That's not the films intent and there is no preaching as the "save all" of Mormon values or faith. It really is a good film about real characters and the Mormons could easily be of any faith as archetypes.

For the Mormon viewing audience, if you want any portrayal of the church you view to be a mirror image of those produced by the church, then you may have problems with this this film. But be assured the problem is not with the film, but with your belief on what all portrayals of Mormons should be. This film attempts to portray Mormon's in Real Life with the real challenges that exist. If you had problems with Brigham City because of it's positive AND negative portrayals of Mormons, then you will most likely have problems with "States of Grace" as well. You're better off sticking with the "I'll Build You a Rainbow" filmstrip.

My hat goes off to Richard Dutcher however as he has tried and succeeded to create an entertaining film that is true to life and itself.

There's much worse out there to waste your $5 off of than on this film.

It's a movie about strugglers (some Mormon, most not) and the grace of God; it is beautiful, and even though from a Mormon perspective, it is not an in-your-face Mormon flick.

If you liked the ending to "Brigham City" (sacrament scene) you'll like this even better - less Mormon, more universal, and absolutely moving.

I wish there were more movies like this - that cause me to think about my relationships with others, my commitment to Christ, and how happy I am to live in a land where I am free to worship as I choose.

I hope people will see this movie and not worry about whether it's just a bunch of "Mormon propaganda" - because it is not. The Mormons are not the good guys and the non-Mormons are not the bad guys. There's plenty of good, bad and in-between for all.

Good job to all involved!!!

I must confess I rolled my eyes when I heard this movie was being made. If it were not for the unanimous critical acclaim, from the few who have reviewed it, I would not have seen it. I also must admit there were a couple awkward but forgivable dialogue moments. But by the end of the film, I was stunned. I felt more moved by this film than any other I have seen in years, perhaps ever.

I imagine some will unfairly and erroneously think Dutcher was trying to justify sin and never get passed that criticism. But that's not the message. The message is that it doesn't matter who we are or how serious our sins are, it is never too late to find hope in Christ. That message could not have been conveyed if the worst sin the film addressed was someone shoplifting or breaking a minor mission rule. It had to address serious sins to show the reach and power of the atonement. This movie is not only the best Dutcher film, nor is it just the best LDS genre film, it is one of the best movies of any kind I have ever seen.