John H. Groberg seemed to be a typical, Latter-day Saint young man in the early 1950s. He was from Idaho. He was going to school at BYU. He was planning to serve as a full-time, Mormon missionary and he was in love with a girl whom he'd have to leave behind if he served that mission. All of this is established early in the movie, along with the fact that, indeed, he went on that mission. He was assigned to Tonga and soon found himself in a whole different world than what he had previously known.

I haven't read the book... but I've seen the movie. And the movie seems too much like a book. The first few scenes are like the first few chapters, setting up the rest of the story. The end of the movie is like the last few chapters, wrapping it all up. Every other scene in the middle of the movie plays like its own, self-contained chapter. You could present them in almost any order. As such, the story doesn't really flow. It's a weak adaptation... too loyal to a book's format. {For example, when Elder Groberg first arrives in Tonga he is overwhelmed by biting insects. Five minutes later (and for the rest of the movie) the insects have completely lost their appetite for his flesh.} Nevertheless, the movie still manages to show development among a few, major characters. Even the romance angle between Groberg and his stateside girlfriend remains at play (through letters, narration and dreamy visuals).

While the movie doesn't completely ignore the fact that Groberg is a Latter-day Saint it certainly downplays the "Mormonism" of the characters. This guy could be any generic, Christian missionary going to a strange, faraway land. His struggles with language, culture and health issues are easy to understand. It may be less easy to understand why a guy would leave Anne Hathaway behind in order to enjoy years of painful, missionary opportunities. And the lack of this kind of insight is where the movie version of the book starts to stumble.

About two years ago, a Latter-day Saint filmmaker set out to tell a story of Mormon missionaries in a movie called God's Army. The movie was fiction but God's Army makes no bones about the fact that these guys are Mormons and they are determined to baptize people. A different set of filmmakers made The Other Side of Heaven and, this time, they spent a lot more money than the guy who made God's Army. The "slickness" factor is markedly increased. But they also downplayed the religion and made a bigger fuss about pretty scenery, culture clash, romance and more light-hearted material. The interpersonal conflicts are also a bit too gentle.

For those who've seen both movies, it's impossible not to compare them. But I'd be curious to hear a comparison from average viewers (who don't live in Utah and who don't have particularly strong feelings one way or another about Latter-day Saints and their missionaries). It should be noted that while the people who wrote, directed and produced each of these movies also happen to be members of the church portrayed in the movies, these movies are not made by "the church" in any official manner. (If you want to see a movie made by "The Mormon Church" there's actually a 5-perf 70mm production which plays every day in Salt Lake City and admission is free. That's a whole different review.)

The Other Side of Heaven will play well to Latter-day Saints who may be about the same age as John Groberg. So, expect to see a lot of senior citizens in the theatre. Younger Latter-day Saints may not relate to this movie, however. The way missionary work happened in the 1950s in Tonga is quite a bit different from the way it happens today (even in Tonga). In the years since the 1950s, Groberg has himself become a prominent leader in the Mormon church. Members of the church will certainly want to see his memoirs dramatized for the big screen. They may also go just to see a gentle and non-negative portrayal of their own religion. But the casual viewer will gain little insight into what makes Mormons tick, what they really believe, why they go out of their way to send missionaries to dangerous places where life is difficult, etc.

I believe the movie is rated PG, is 1.85:1 and has Dolby Digital sound. The movie has played well for about four months already in Utah, Idaho and other areas where there may be a large Latter-day Saint population. Even so, I doubt it's been profitable yet. According to reports, the budget was seven million dollars. Considering that there are fewer than six million Mormons in the whole United States, it'll be a tough road to box office success.

I don't know how many people on these forums will really take an interest in any of these homespun, Mormon movie projects but since Evans was requesting format information on The Other Side of Heaven I figured it was time to let the Film-Tech crowd know what this movie was really about.

Although, having seen HEAVEN, and the others, and having seen much mormon film drivel, I have to say that Richard Dutcher has a knack for making movies about mormons seem less like movies about mormons, and more like movies that have mormons in them. Much easier to watch and to swallow.

That isnt to say that Joe Smith was some kind of charleton. In all reality, he truly believed he was doing all the right things, and with the current director in charge, I am quite interested to see how he wants to make the take on this particular human bieng.

Excel Entertainment was a music company with no aspirations to be a film distributor until Richard Dutcher needed to reduce his own work load. So, very soon after God's Army appeared in Utah theatres in March 2000, Excel Entertainment took over distribution of the film for him (although Richard stayed very active in promoting the film and appearing at regional premieres for several months).

The people behind The Other Side of Heaven intended to promote their film on the strengths of Gerald Molen, who was one of the producers and who had a reputation in Hollywood. Ultimately, even his reputation wasn't enough and they couldn't find a big distributor so, as a last resort, they settled on the local, Utah distributor (Excel) to get their movie into theatres. They never wanted The Other Side of Heaven to look like a homespun, Mormon project which came out of Utah. None of it was shot in Utah and, in fact, only about four people who worked on the movie were themselves Latter-day Saints. The ambition to "go mainstream" also helps explain the "dumbed down" Mormonism portrayed in the movie.

Again, this is just the way it looks from where I'm sitting. I base this opinion on several facts. I filled in the missing pieces with amphibian DNA.

I have no idea how Richard Dutcher plans to tell the story of Joseph Smith. I'm sure Richard considers himself a fine, faithful Latter-day Saint and most people like his work. However, he has a tendency to really rub certain people the wrong way. He's made a couple of serious behind-the-scenes business errors, according to rumors I've heard. There are a number of behind-the-scenes people in the Utah film community who don't care for him at all... fellow Mormons who want Richard to "get what's coming to him" and become a miserable failure. (...but not me. I've never worked with him and I don't have an ax to grind. From what I can see, he's a great writer and director. I like to support that kind of talent. Perhaps he needs to hire someone else to take care of producer duties and make peace on the business end.)

I know several people in the theater and acting community that know him very well, and he is very highly regarded amongst them, and they love his work. Most of the acting community that are very tight and devout members actually are much more daring in life, as that is what acting requires.

I think that in time Dutcher is going to find his niche but it wont be here in utah. He will end up bieng one of the greater directors know to man, as his work is honest and thorough. Anyone who has seen his films know that he is NOT a mormon filmmaker, but rather a filmmaker that happens to be mormon, and THAT I think is what irks many in that he wont tell stories from the standpoint of bieng mormon, but rather instead just telling stories period.

From where you are standing, I agree with you. He has his difficulties, and hopefully gets them all patched up somehow. It is hard to live in Utah as a anything but a devout and blindly follower of the church without getting some flack for breathing the wrong way. I know of this myself, but like he, I don't just complain about it, I just strive on and do my thing.