Day of Defense

There was a popular movie trope a few decades ago in which young people are passing through a hick town and run afoul of the corrupt local law enforcement. This movie was kind of like that, except instead of a broken tail light or a planted joint, the kids were caught with something much worse: The Book of Mormon. The sets the scene for one of the worst and weirdest movies I've ever seen.

The movie opens as our heroes, two Mormon elders, arrive in a small town that they have been warned "doesn't like outsiders". They hit the streets looking for victims - eh, I mean "converts" - and literally within seconds, the sheriff pulls up and informs them that in this town, you can't preach without a license from the Christian Town Council (CTC). When they propose applying for a license rather than simply leaving town, they are immediately arrested.

This is apparently the biggest crime that has ever happened in this town, because the sheriff hauls them directly into court, interrupting a trial that's already in progress and announces "We got us a couple o' Mormons here". Instead of having the sheriff immediately ejected, the judge clears her docket so she can focus on this grave infraction and the two are quickly put on trial.

Exactly what they're being tried for is kind of vague and nonsensical. They seem to be simultaneously charged with preaching without license, and applying to get such a license. In fact, they are effectively on trial for "not being Christian", and the plaintiffs are ALL the members of the CTC, who represent a bunch of other Christian faiths, which the makers of the film can't actually tell apart.

At this point, we are introduced to the other main characters, the two lawyers in town: THE prosecutor and THE defense attorney. We are given to understand that up until now, they've spent their entire careers engaged in egregious violations of legal ethics, in which the prosecutor dictates terms of plea agreements to the defense attorney, which he accepts without consulting his clients. In this case, however, the judge orders them to try the case.

I trust that everyone with half a brain realizes that if something like this actually happened, the ACLU would descend on the town and crush the CTC like a beer can under a redneck's boot, but the fact is that neither our intrepid elders nor the makers of the film are bothered in the slightest by this jawdroppingly unconstitutional law *per se*; they're just upset that Mormons aren't invited to the party. Indeed, the entire message of the movie seems to be that Mormons are Christian enough to join in persecuting non-Christian faiths. If anyone involved senses the irony, they don't show it.

As I mentioned before, this is the biggest thing that has ever happened in this town, and the result is way more drama than can possibly be believed. I guess the defense lawyer has never defended anyone convicted of an actual crime, because all people in town - including his own wife - are completely disgusted that he's defending two clean cut, extremely polite young men, who are accused of nothing more than sharing their personal mythology.

Now movies often get a lot of things wrong when it comes to the legal system, but they generally get the basics right. For example, they know you don't put two witnesses on the stand at the same time, allow your clients to cross examine witnesses, or a bunch of other bizarre things that happen in this movie. Seriously, it's bananas.

Without giving away any spoilers, they throw in a pretty serious tragedy at one point, and the characters respond with the sort of profound anguish usually reserved for a picnic getting rained out.

The guy playing the defense lawyer is a halfway decent actor, who does his best with a terrible script. All the rest are varying degrees of terrible, particularly the prosecutor, who's badly in need of some basic enunciation exercises.

In the end, there's a certain charm to the naive idiocy of this movie. I imagine the author lives in a small town in Utah - or possibly a bunker - and based the entire story on tales he's heard about lawyers, courts, and religions that aren't Mormonism.

In summary, this one definitely passes the "so bad it's good" test.

I am writing this review as a member of the same church as the people that made this movie, and as such I can tell you for a fact that this movie in no way expresses the views of our church or the vast majority of its members. Every Mormon I know who has seen this film, the trailer, or read the book upon which it is based, is disgusted by it.

Some background: the book "Day of Defense" was written in the '60s by a lay member of the church, and is considered a prime example of anti-anti-mormon literature. In other words, it uses the same tactics, logic and style as anti-mormon literature, but it is turned in the other direction. It is no more convincing than the average anti-Mormon literature, and even the people that are amused by it would never take it seriously.

The contents of the book consist of a context-less courtroom debate that goes something like this:

Christian church leader: The Bible says here that your church is wrong. Wise Mormon elder: Oh, yeah? Well here's where you're mistaken. Leader of another church: But what about this passage? Wise Mormon elder: Here is another glib reply. JUDGE: Well, it looks like the Mormons proved their case. I will now join their church.

It's entertaining, but ridiculous, and one of the most ill-suited books ever written for a movie translation.

The film fills in the plot holes with a town of mindless Christian straw-dogs, and plenty of bad dialogue, bad acting, bad directing, bad haircuts, and a type of synergy that somehow makes the movie worse than the sum of its terrible parts. It isn't even as amusing as the book it was based on. It's just terrible in every possible way. One of the worst movies I've ever seen.

If you're a Mormon, don't see this movie. It will make you doubt your faith because of the people that share it. If you're not a Mormon, PLEASE don't see this movie. It is the absolute nadir in the mostly embarrassing culture of LDS filmmaking.

God's Army was a pretty good Mormon movie, but if the man who made that film knew what would happen to the genre he popularized, I'm sure he'd have burned his camera and taken a job at Taco Bell for the good of humanity. Avoid this like Rabies.

I normally give passing if not good reviews to the Mormon cinema films, especially those chronicling the development of the church in the 19th century. But Day Of Defense is one frightening film in its concept and story.

Two young Elders one just finishing his two year hitch and another getting started come to a small white bread and I do mean white California town which reeks of red state family values.

This place attributes its Stepford like existence to the fact that they have a religious council acting as an extra legal body which issues license to preach. The Elders John Foss and Allan Groves no sooner start spreading the LDS message than the sheriff demands to know where their license is. They have none so off to the pokey they go and then to court before Judge Joan Peterson. When they demand a jury trial over the issue of licenses. The DA Brooks Utley prosecutes and the judge appoints Public Defender Andrew Lenz to defend the Elders.

The trial turns into a philosophical debate on just what constitutes Christianity. As for the outcome, well let's leave that alone.

I think the Iranians would get this film, but not any American who believes in free speech and freedom of religion. Note there's no synagogue or mosque in this town, I guess they didn't get any license or knew better not to apply for one. You'll look in vain for any Oriental, black, or Hispanic faces the last really interesting when you consider this film is set in California. And I sure wouldn't want to be a gay kid growing up here.

I guess all the citizens here got over their problems with Mormons that they had in 2003. I'm sure Ronald Reagan got 98% of the vote in his two national campaigns. And I'll bet Mitt Romney carried this place overwhelmingly in 2012.

The idea of religious council isn't really attacked, it's just that they're being too strict. Where's the American Civil Liberties Union?

Gentiles like myself will find this one frightening film.

This should stand as a warning to all LDS filmmakers about the perils of crafting films that can logically serve no other purpose than to bolster the belief of those who already believe. I can't imagine a single non-Mormon viewer of this film not coming away as having felt like missionaries had just been in their home. The gaps of logic in this film are so great as to make me question just how faithfully the script writers who adapted the book practice the religion. No missionary would knowingly be sent by the church blindly into this ridiculously perfect little Christian town as some kind of "challenge" if it knew of the strictures on proselytizing, and if the church did know of such a rule, it would never rely on mere missionaries to fight the battle for equal preaching rights. Since the whole point revolves around the missionaries being put on trial to prove they are "Christian" enough to proselytize in the town, it makes me wonder what kind of place has never heard of the First Amendment's freedom of religion and freedom of speech clauses? Indeed, where did the two Mormons go to school that they didn't know it.

And all that is to say nothing of the illogic of the actual trial and methods of "defense" itself. But do yourself a favor, don't go there.

I saw this film while on vacation to Las Vegas and I thought it was controversially appealing. Although I wouldn't say it was one of my favorites (some of the scenes lacked closure for me), the concept was so interesting and compelling I enjoyed it. The ending surprised me a bit, since not being a Mormon, I was sure how it would end, and it didn't end how I thought the writer would Beasley make it. There are some weak points but in I found the arguments good enough to keep my attention.

One thing I didn't like was that the relationship between one of the missionaries and the girl didn't go very far. I would have liked to see more of that, maybe.