We’re lucky to be seeing anything in cinema that rivals Meet the Mormons, but now we have in In Emma’s Footsteps.
Because Mormonism is supremely interesting to talk about over any other subject, it’s really not even possible for any other film to match the power of these movies.
In Emma’s Footsteps corrects us if we ever doubted the majesty of the journey of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
Now we know that Mormon prophet Brigham Young and Emma Smith, the widow of Mormonism’s founding prophet, Joseph Smith, actually got along rather well. Now we know that Emma Smith’s life was actually a mystery – that there were not records especially in archives of her son’s church, the Community of Christ, where we could have learned about her. Now we know that language in Utah Mormon culture was the same as it was a century-and-a-half ago, halfway across the country, even though it was a different church, according to the law.
Now we know that Emma Smith smiled at the prospect of eternal “sealing” even though that would have also meant that her husband would have been able to have intercourse eternally with around three dozen other women.
Now we know that Young took on the form and fashion of Joseph Smith and there weren’t any historical-revisionism issues to that. And that Joseph Smith III got a blessing to be the next prophet and there’s not an issue at all about a lack of an explicit passage of direct succession in that blessing.
Now we know, as far as we can tell, that Emma Smith didn’t join any religion once she stayed in the Midwest and didn’t travel with other Mormons out west—even though it’s fairly common knowledge that she joined the Community of Christ.
Now we know that Emma Smith didn’t have any issue with Joseph Smith at all, and definitely didn’t hate his practice of polygamy and adultery.
Boy, how we should revel in the revelatory scene at the end of the film, when Joseph Smith himself is shown in a dream that Emma Smith reportedly had. Since that account is definitely real, we should overlook his serious moral shortcomings.
Clearly, anyone who would question how the man who played Joseph Smith in that scene (I don’t know the name—he is not listed on IMDb) could do so in good conscience is just out to destroy the LDS church.
It’s unfortunate that a sexier woman wasn’t cast as Emma Smith—maybe they were going for historical accuracy, but hey, I pay the big bucks to go to the movies for a reason!
In Emma’s Footsteps is so opposite being propaganda. Surely, Lucy Mack Smith, on her deathbed, actually defended Young, besides many others, that vigorously – that folks should probably ignore the church’s own essays on historical issues (That’s aside from the research and findings from entities like MormonThink and Mormonism Research Ministry).
The film is so good, actually, we should ask why it’s not being released in a theater chain only in Utah already. Because the only question the faithful should be asking about it is when director Brittany Wiscombe will become the first woman to hold the Mormon priesthood (And be an apostle at that, because she’s clearly prophetic).
The film is so good, we should be asking why Candlelight Media Group isn’t the official filmmaking studio of the State of Utah.
Because in the Beehive State, our minds should already be made up for us.
Because if we had the right perspective, only films about Mormonism should be considered as the greatest of all time.