Accuracy and Other Aspects of Brigham Young

In going through Vincent Price's credits, I was so intrigued by his having played Joseph Smith in a movie, I immediately watched Brigham Young, a Hollywood epic from 1940 starring Dean Jagger as Brigham Young, which in many places plays pretty fast and loose with historical facts. It portrays persecution of people of the Mormon faith, which did occur, and the arrest of leader Joseph Smith in Illinois. In the film, it appears that the charge of treason against Smith was because of him promoting a new religion. Brigham Young (who in real life was not actually there) appears in court to give an impassioned argument for freedom of religion. The film is thought by some to be a statement about the persecution of Jews in Europe at the time it was made. The actual charge of treason occurred after Smith, as mayor of Nauvoo, Illinois, along with the city council, ordered the destruction of a printing press of a newspaper which had printed strong accusations against him and the church. This was followed by a riot. When threatened with arrest, Smith declared martial law and was charged with treason for resisting the state governor, none of which is in the film. His brother Hyrum was arrested with him, which if shown I missed it, but an actor is credited as playing Hyrum.

The portrayal of Smith's death is fairly accurate but not entirely. While in jail, a sympathizer smuggled him a small gun. When attacked by a mob, Smith fired back and is thought to have wounded three men, also not in the movie. In the movie Smith is mowed down in an impressive and dramatic manner while facing his attackers. He is said to have actually been shot in the back while attempting to climb out a second story window. He did in fact fall out the window and was shot after hitting the ground, which is in the movie, as are his last words as reported by eyewitnesses. The killing of Smith and his brother by the mob actually took place in the afternoon, but the filmmakers just had to have a night scene with torch-bearing villagers. I was today years old when I learned that Joseph Smith was running for president of the United States at the time, making him the first presidential candidate to be assassinated. This occurred on June 27, 1844, and according to the movie most of the Mormons, led by Brigham Young, left almost immediately. In reality they did not start till February 1846 and the last did not leave till September, so a date of June 1845 as shown on the grave of one of the pilgrims is totally wrong. Crossing the frozen Mississippi river as shown in the movie really did occur.

In the movie, a character named Angus Duncan opposes Brigham Young at every turn. He is fictional but could be a composite of people who fought over control after Smith's death. The main characters, Jonathan Kent played by Tyrone Power and Zina Webb played by Linda Darnell, are also fictional.

A friend of mine who is LDS watched the film and pointed out things such as that the houses shown for Smith and Young are in a totally wrong style too grand for the time and place. Another thing which is glaringly wrong is that the movie portrays many of those in the band led by Young as wanting to go to California after the discovery of gold there. The Mormons arrived in the Great Salt Lake Valley on July 24, 1847. Gold wasn't discovered in California until January 24, 1848, so people still traveling in 1847 would have had to have the ability to see into the future. Another quibble while I'm at it: the soundtrack repeatedly uses the song "Oh! Susanna," which was written in 1846 but not published until 1848 so could not have been familiar to anyone at the time portrayed in the movie. That isn't all the inaccuracies but is a rundown of several main ones.

Now for what was right about the film. Well, any film featuring Vincent Price is not a total loss. He looks gorgeous here and is particularly hot when swinging an ax at a tree. There is other good talent in the film which renders it watchable. The end is based on a real-life miracle for which the film seems to have the timeline right. The situation involved millions of crickets and the film does not disappoint, in fact, it amazes. I don't know how such an epic scene was filmed in an entirely realistic manner. I fear a cricket may have been harmed in the making of this movie, perhaps several crickets. As for whether it's suitable for kids, it is violent in places but no worse than many other old movies. The issue of polygamy is addressed in several places. Brigham Young is shown sometimes surrounded by several women but only interacts with one wife. This is kind of a surprising subject for a movie of that time and the entire film is surprising in that it was made. It is worth a look.