Russ Richins, the producer for Six Days in August, and I traveled up to Ogden yesterday to record an interview with Sen. John D. Johnson for PoliticIt. I’m not sure whether PoliticIt has ever done a non-political podcast before, but ours was definitely not political. It was — surprise! — about Six Days in August. I can already sense your breathless anticipation; I’ll let you know when it’s out.
Incidentally, Six Days in August received a B+ from What To Watch (Oct. 11, 2024). I wouldn’t have been satisfied with that as a student, but I get the impression that, from the reviewer(s) in question — Andy Farnsworth is KSL’s Entertainment Editor — that’s a more than respectable grade. Their comments were quite positive. (I wish that I could share the audio file from their radio broadcast review, which is somewhat more full. But I haven’t figured out a way to do that.)
I’ll candidly admit that ticket sales for Six Days in August have been a little anemic. Not terrible, by any means, but also not fabulous. We’ve had overwhelmingly positive responses from those who’ve seen it — including some very important viewers whom I won’t name — but too few people have gone to see it. That’s disappointing. If, though, by any chance, you have watched it (and you liked it), please encourage others — friends, neighbors, family, ward members — to see it, as well. I don’t know how much longer it will run in theaters. If you have children or grandchildren away at school or living at a distance, consider buying tickets for them to attend. If I didn’t think Six Days in August worthwhile, I wouldn’t write this. I have nothing to gain, personally, whether you buy a ticket or you don’t. I won’t have made a dime from it. But I believe in the movie. That’s why I’ve devoted so much time and effort to it.
Happily, there was an uptick in attendance at screenings of Six Days in August yesterday (Tuesday). I was pleased to see that, and rather caught off guard by it. A fair number of people have reported to me that they were surprised by the film, that it was better than they had anticipated, that it had exceeded their expectations. I like to think that Tuesday’s small but distinct rise in ticket sales over Monday (Family Night!) means that word-of-mouth is getting out. That would be the key to greater success. Whether that’s really what’s happening, though, and whether Tuesday’s numbers represent something significant, though, I cannot tell. We’ll have to wait and see.
I call your attention to an important piece by C. D. Cunningham that appeared in Public Square Magazine: “The Associated Press’ Misleading Narrative on Las Vegas Latter-day Saint Temple: How did the AP misrepresent the popularity of the Las Vegas Temple? Their report ignored key facts, including majority support.”
And this piece, which was also written by Christopher D. Cunningham, is relevant: “Subtle Bigotry: How ‘Polite’ Society Marginalizes Latter-day Saints”
About two weeks ago here, I myself posted a blog entry entitled “Flawed Reporting About The New Temple Proposed For Las Vegas.” We have been seeing some shockingly poor journalism on this subject.
In yesterday’s blog entry, I wrote the following:
For the record, I do take Catholic accounts such as those of the visions of Lourdes and of Guadalupe seriously, and I’m still trying to form my final thoughts on them. I don’t rule them out in advance, on the basis of ideology or presuppositions; I think that it would be intellectually dishonest to do so, and I’m quite willing to entertain the thought that the Lord is working in many ways, even beyond his authorized, restored Church. But my confidence in the accounts of the Book of Mormon witnesses doesn’t depend upon what I may decide about, say, Marian apparitions.
Over on the Peterson Obsession Board, my anonymous Malevolent Stalker — who has taken notably great pleasure for the better part of two decades now in portraying me as, among many other bad things, an anti-Semite, a homophobe, a racist, an anti-Muslim, and an all-around perpetually angry religious bigot — reacted to the paragraph above. He insinuates that my use of that term Marian apparitions reveals my contempt for Catholic beliefs and religious sensibilities. (I gather that he imagines the term to be a pejorative one, suggesting that the claimed visions of Mary are merely imaginary or ghostlike.) But, of course, Marian apparitions is the term that Catholics themselves use to refer to appearances of the Virgin Mary. Out of respect and not wanting to substitute my own non-Catholic description, I borrowed the term from them. Here are just four examples, chosen at random from among very many that are readily located online:
- Dynamic Catholic: “Marian Apparitions”
- Ascension: “The Ultimate Guide to Marian Apparitions”
- Catholic Answers: “The Marian Apparitions You Don’t Know About: Our author looks at some of the lesser-known times Mary has appeared to offer love and comfort to her children on Earth”
- The National Shrine of Our Lady of Champion [Wisconsin]: “For more than 160 years, pilgrims have been coming to The National Shrine of Our Lady of Champion (once known as the Chapel at Robinsonville) to experience the peace of this holy place where The Blessed Virgin Mary appeared. Since Champion Shrine’s designation as America’s only Church-Approved Marian Apparition Site, the number of pilgrims who come to the Shrine from places across the globe has increased exponentially.”
I close with a couple of items that I’ve retrieved for your edification and indignation from the Christopher Hitchens Memorial “How Religion Poisons Everything” File™:
“Asheville church mobilizes 1,200 volunteers for post-Hurricane Helene cleanup”
Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In