How sad is this?

Good start, but then it gets ruined

Clever and entertaining enough to recommend even to members of the 1%

It's easily one of the freshest, sharpest and most enjoyable films of this year.

[CONTAINS MILD SPOILER] I have heard a lot of people say that they would recommend this film for Mormons and Non-Mormons alike. I do not agree. This movie, along with most other LDS-produced movies I've seen, contains many subtle biases toward Non-Mormons that often go unnoticed by those who aren't looking for them. The main one that comes to mind is the fact that the Sheriff and his "posse" decide that the best place to find the serial killer would be the place where the "drinkers" (code for Non-Mormon) hang out- so they go to a local bar and confiscate the beer bottles in order to take fingerprints. They then took those fingerprints and scanned every last one hoping to find someone with a criminal record. Needless to say, their theory was flawed and they were not able to get anything useful. I wouldn't recommend this movie to any of my Non-Mormon friends because I wouldn't want them to think that Mormons equate drinking a beer with being a serial killer. (Although that's not a huge secret here in Utah.)I've said it before- I keep waiting for one of these movies to come out that doesn't contain anything of this nature. I'm still waiting.

I finally saw this film last night after a friend from Arizona sent it to us, and I have to say I was quite shocked. It was a lot more downbeat than I was expecting. The tension was almost relentless, and we enjoyed constantly changing our minds as to the killer's identity. All in all it was quite intense and slightly uncomfortable. It attempted, fairly successfully, to question how faith can exist in times of horror and crisis, but it was still an unusual juxtaposition of the two. My wife commented that she didn't think there should have been so much emphasis on religion in a film like this. I was surprised that you're left feeling sad at the end of the film rather than uplifted, which is what you would expect from the director of God's Army. I'm glad though that he tried to do something different as it would have been very easy for him to just repeat the successful formula he had used in his first film, and I'm still looking forward to his next effort, Joseph the Prophet.

How many people out there have seen the movies with this plot?: "A small town is the setting for a complicated mystery involving murder (one or multiple) and the town is forever changed because of it." It seems to me that this branch of suspense fiction is running out of ideas. Enter Richard Dutcher, accomplished independent film-maker from the Beehive State, and his latest release "Brigham City". I viewed this movie late at night and I was surprisingly riveted (easily entertained actually) to the television screen and I stuck it out.Here are my reasons (spoilers): (1) Richard Dutcher anchored this film and he easily took away the best performance. (2) Although Dutcher's writing skills doesn't have the quirkiness of Joel Coen or the humor of Kevin Smith, it does work here. Dutcher's may not be a born screenwriter but he knows his way around his own backyard and his faith. (3) The best aspects of the film were the scenes dealing with faith. Any denomination of Christianity (if they claim to be or otherwise) has the same sorts of problems in all their churches. Services can get boring and lifeless and Sunday school can feel like regular school. Dutcher's smashed that aspect out of the park. (4) I like the message that this film sends you away with and it is "even the protectors are imperfect". Dutcher's pep talk in the town square was basically an incite to undermine the Constitution of the United States. The sequence just before the end is the other real bit of evidence to back up the claim. (5) Tayva Patch had the best female role in the movie. For some reason, she was the least annoying of the bunch. (6) Despite all the red herrings this movie throws at you, I didn't suspect the real killer at the denouement. (7) It was good to see a rather sanitized movie for once. Not everyone swears like Jay Phat Buds, not everyone is a sex fiend like Prince, and not everyone is a violent freak like The Terminator. For an indy film, "Brigham City" is a light that glows in a different color. Seven reasons give a score of seven.The downers included (more spoilers) (1) Wilford Brimley. He was on the screen for less than a minute at a time and his character had no development. He basically says "HI!" and then gets popped in the head. Was he a needed asset? My guess is no. (2) Near the end, where did this sudden revelation come from about the killer? There were plenty of plot holes here to keep a movie hater busy for weeks. Finally, (3) Did this film really suffer from an acting allergy? Even Dutcher's performance felt a bit grainy at times and he was the best one of the movie. It must be a matter of perception I guess.Overall, "Brigham City" is a thoughtful entry into a rather flamed-out genre. What keeps it afloat are questions of faith it brings up and the almost solid mystery story. It doesn't take a lot of brain cells to watch this film and it isn't paced out rapidly, so you could fall asleep to it. It is definitely an interesting peek inside the Mormon way-of-life (though possibly overblown, I am not an expert) and how tragedy affects it. I got to see a side of Americana that I hadn't seen before and I don't regret seeing it. Maybe someone else might like to give it a try on that note alone. If you do, you won't be too terribly disappointed. Here ends my rant!

I thoroughly enjoyed this one. I watched it knowing it wasn't going to be a light-hearted film, which was an advantage over many people I know who went to it thinking it was a happy ending sort of show. I must admit it was a little odd to see the goings-on of LDS church meetings and other LDS cultural aspects on the big screen, but it is territory that needs to be covered so that future movies that cover similar territory won't be weighed down with reviews about the LDS church rather than focusing on the movie at hand. I watched the DVD a second time with Richard Dutcher's audio commentary and, after that, I concluded that he is someone who is conscientious about finding the balance in film in regards to the religious issues dealt with, not too pro or too anti. I was quite amazed as to how resourceful he was, considering their meager budget he had to work with. The outcome was superb and he told the story in a simple, yet elegant way. I look forward to Mr. Dutcher's next film.