I enjoyed Brigham Young-Frontiersman immensely, however, I would not characterize the movie as an accurate portrayal of the personalities in the film. Although the events are accurate enough, the film does not do justice to the historical figures. Immediately noticeable is the positive light that Mormons are cast in, and I think this is necessary to make the film work given the subject matter and historical events portrayed. Nevertheless, being a card carrying Mormon, and having read a great deal of history and biography on the leaders of the Church, I cannot say that the personalities are true to history. I thought that Vincent Price cast as Joseph Smith was very strange, though my reaction to him in the role was heavily tainted by his later roles in the Roger Corman adaptations of Edgar Allan Poe's works (The Pit and the Pendulum, The Raven, etc.). Still, I felt that Price was not charismatic enough, and did not have the forceful presence that Joseph Smith surely had in life. Dean Jagger cast as Brigham Young was more tolerable, but not really as convincing as say Brian Keith in the Wind and the Lion, or George C. Scott in Patton. Furthermore, Brigham Young had a very powerful, direct, yet unrefined manner of speech that had it been carefully followed or mimicked, would have made the character much more convincing. His manner of speech is entirely unique and really gets a reader's attention. It is often very humorous as well. Hearing it in the film would have greatly improved the script, but the writers would have needed to immerse themselves thoroughly in his discourses and writings to carry it off.
Moreover, there are a host of perspectives or ways of looking at things that are unique to Mormons, not to mention a very distinctive manner of speech and phraseology regarding religious matters that the film failed to capture. As an active Mormon, I would have to say that as I watched the film I felt like an insider observing a film written by outsiders who had not properly done their homework. The film has many fine qualities and I give it a good rating. If the writing had been more true to Mormon thinking, speech patterns and their leaders unique personalities, it would have been all that was necessary to raise the film from good to great. All of this aside, I give the film three stars out of a possible four.
Moreover, there are a host of perspectives or ways of looking at things that are unique to Mormons, not to mention a very distinctive manner of speech and phraseology regarding religious matters that the film failed to capture. As an active Mormon, I would have to say that as I watched the film I felt like an insider observing a film written by outsiders who had not properly done their homework. The film has many fine qualities and I give it a good rating. If the writing had been more true to Mormon thinking, speech patterns and their leaders unique personalities, it would have been all that was necessary to raise the film from good to great. All of this aside, I give the film three stars out of a possible four.