Tell us what you think.
Selected submissions will be posted here, so check back regularly.

12/24/03
Tempe, AZ

I am very disappointed with this broadcast. It was not a neutral documentary exploring the missionary experience, but clearly had a biased agenda against the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. The filmmaker did not show the opinions of returned missionaries with more positive experiences, but rather focused on a handful of disaffected and excommunicated returned missionaries. It was disturbing and distracting to hear these individuals pop up randomly throughout the broadcast and criticize the missionary program when their commentary seemed to have nothing to do with the documentary. While I would agree it is important to explore different perspectives and experiences, the film focuses too much on "different conclusions" without investigating the experiences and feeling of the great majority of those who serve missions. I except PBS to be more selective in broadcasting biased information.

12/24/03

I loved my mission experience. I didn't want to come home. I served the people of Chile with love for them and respect for their culture and spiritual beliefs. I served six years ago, and to this day, I believe in the truthfulness of this church and the missionary program.

My heart goes to the ex-missionaries portraited in this very "one-sided liberal viewed" documentary. But it has to be expected that of the milliones of missionaries served in times past and the millions of missionaries that will soon serve, there will be a percentage that don't "get the fire".

12/24/03
Brian
NY, NY

I'm not a religious person but I think the Mormon Church is a wonderful topic for a serious documentary -- but all we usually get is culture war stuff, like this film. A more skilled documentarian could have gained real insight into how young Mormon's manage to navigate their lives and maintain faith. That would have provided real insight into human nature and would have been something we can all learn from.

12/24/03
Nathan Everett

When you break this down, its simply a hit piece. This shows the weakness of the producer in not getting to the real story. The real story is that the great majority are truly dedicated to the work and not just niaeve-no-nothing teenagers, as they lead you to believe. The constant zoom on yawning during a meeting, highlights of human imperfections, and of course the disenchanted expert interviews, all pretty lame when you take a look at the big picture. PBS does some pretty cool programming, but they are just as bad as this producer by giving air time to this shoddy work.

12/24/03
G.D. Anderson
Puyallup WA

As a former LDS missionary to Taiwan I was impressed by the effort to be even handed exhibited by the filmmaker. As many of LDS submissions on this matter reveal, Mormons tend to view anything that is not an absolute glowing endorsement of their religion as "Anti-Mormon." This evidences a persecution complex they suffer from which dates back to the early years of the Church. In an odd way it reinforces for them the legitimacy of their religion. Wow, if persecution = truth, the Jews have Mormons beaten hands down. I loved the people I met in Taiwan. I didn't particularly enjoy peddling a religion I didn't really understand myself. I went because I didn't want to disappoint my parents. I also did not enjoy the conversion techniques we were forced to use in Taiwan. One particularly insidious method strongly endorsed by our mission president involved approaching people in parks and other public places and hoodwinking them into listening to an LDS missionary discussion by asking them if they would be willing to help us practice our Chinese. It was blatantly dishonest, but in an "ends justifies the means" religion like Mormonism, it was par for the course. The Mormons insist that there are millions of return missionaries that remain happy in the church. This may be true but it is impossible to verify as the LDS Church refuses to disclose the number of people who are formally resigning their memberships every year. This suggests the number is embarrassingly high. I hope more filmmakers take on the powerful LDS church to reveal the truth about it because one thing you will never get out of Salt Lake City is the truth about Mormonism.

12/24/03

I thought the film was objective and showed both sides. On the one side there were TBM(True Believing Mormon) missionaries and on the other side there were those who either left the LDS Church or were disaffected for whatever reason. You cannot get more objective than showing both sides.

I thought the comment by the German, regarding feelings vs. the promises in the Bible, were outstanding.

Congrats to the director on making this documentary.

12/24/03
Karina Stanger
Phoenix, Arizona

I agree with the other comments regarding the lopsided interviewing of returned missionaries on the film. The theme that is "painted"(or "tainted" rather)in this film is that all former missionaries realize their foolishness as they "mature". This is not an accurate portrayal of how most returned missionaries feel. I have been home for over six years now, and as I mature and gain education, I become more converted to the teachings of Jesus Christ and how they bring me happiness by living them. The website interviews that I read reinforce how I feel and seem more comprehensive than the film was. Most of the disgruntled members seem less excited and happy with their lives as those that are still active. I wish that I could have been interviewed as a returned missionary. I loved being a missionary. In my heart, and hopefully my actions, I still am a missionary.

12/24/03
Toni Simon
Chandler, AZ

I was very disappointed in the show. I am disappointed that PBS would broadcast such a biased documentary. Towards the end of the show, one (apparently bitter) individual spoke about preferential treatment by girls and employers for return missionaries. Of course. College graduates get preferential treatment as well. Anyone that accomplishes something great gets preferential treatment. A missionary displays dedication, self-sacrifice, service, and accomplishment. These qualities are sought out by society. What an awful anti-Mormon production by PBS. I will discontinue my support of them.

12/24/03
Sandy, Utah

I am saddened that PBS would choose to support and promote a program such as this. I think it is a wonderful idea to shed some light on a topic such as this however, if you are going to allow a filmaker to show their film you should make sure that it is a very fair and informative view.

First, in my opinion, the day to day activites were limited. Missionaries do much more than walking around and singing and I was dissappointed that this wasn't shown.

Second, and most importantly, I have never seen a so called "documentary" that was so one sided. If you are going to spotlight one side (ie: those that no longer accept or even have good feelings toward the church)you must show the other as well. In actuallity there are more return missionaries that had positve experiences and still accept the church than there are like the interesting men shown in the film. I can think of no other organization of young men greater than this, willing to give up 2 years of there life to serve others. That in and of itself says something.

I have no hard feelings toward the film or it's maker. I just would have thought that the makers of the film would have been a little more interested in the "truth" rather than a one-sided anti-mormon program.

12/24/03
Steve Duncan
Provo, Utah

I agree with the comments of Jason Manning of Fairfax, Virginia. PBS has the reputation of airing well-documented, balanced programs, but this program is among the poorest so-called documentaries I have seen. It was loaded with preexisting biases and was intended to present a certain outcome that supported the filmmaker's view. That is fine as a "Hollywood" production, but misrepresentative as a program ostensibly portraying the realities of missionary service in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. It is clear that she used the experiences of the elders and twisted them in such a way to support the conclusions drawn by the disaffected ex-missionaries. Is this the kind of program you want PBS viewers to support?

If the filmmaker set out to show the disaffected as the main characters and weavers of her program, it should have been labeled as such and not "used" the experiences of elders who stayed faithful to their beliefs.

12/24/03
Bryan O'Neil

I saw the film last night and thought it was a balanced look at the LDS mission experience. I was a convert to the Church and served as a missionary for the Church in the Western U.S. during the years of 1983-84.

One thing that I quickly learned after joining the LDS Church is that anything produced about the Mormon religion must be 100% positive and never reflect the Church in a negative light. Anyone who dares to question the official Church line is promptly branded with the lable "anti-mormon".

When I began to question some of the things I had been taught after listening to the LDS side for 15 years, I began to feel the sting of being called an "anti" myself. After I left Mormonism in 1997, I became critical of the Church and it's leaders. I had turned from a zealous convert to a zealous critic.

Today much of the anger I felt from the way the LDS Church deceived me is gone. But the scars will always remain. While this film was very interesting, I think that a film that explores the tensions between devout, practicing Mormons and former devout Mormons would be just as interesting.

Why can't active Mormons examine the flaws in their religion? Why must they distort what they really believe in order to gain converts? Why can't former Mormons move on and forget the LDS Church once they leave? Why do they see evil in everything the Mormon Church does?

I look forward to a film that will explore these questions.

12/24/03
Jeff
Dallas Texas

I have to agree with Jason Manning's comments, this film is not worthy of PBS, I was hopeful when first hearing about the film that it would be just a documentary on the life of a missionary, but it seemed to be more of an anti-Mormon message than that of an educational film. I am truly disappointed in PBS for allowing this film to be associated with them. I have known many Mormon missionaries and have never had a bad experience, I have even know several that were sent home early for various reasons, all of which are still active in the church, and still happy.

12/24/03
Lawrence Luther and family
Dallas Texas

I am insulted by PBS’s presentation of the so called "documentary" Get the Fire by Nancy du Plessis. This film is simply a negative propaganda film disguised as a documentary. Nazi Germany did this very well and fooled most a nation. PBS must have been duped into accepting it as a documentary, for there are apparent malicious motives. The high percent of comments by ex-Mormons and anti-Mormons does not validate it as true unbiased journalism. The director obviously has some personal issues that have slanted her production. By carefully observing her negative comments throughout the associated web site one can imagine what they are. What ever the case may be, it is certainly not a fair representation of the effects of the missionary program of the Church on its missionaries or on the people they willingly serve.

I was introduced to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints by two young missionaries serving in Dallas, Texas in 1968. When they first arrived at my home on bicycles, I concluded that "Mormons" did not drive cars. My only other knowledge of the Church that I could recall at the time was from the short paragraphs about the Latter-Day Saints in my high-school history book. I remembered they had "troubles" that forced them to travel west. I did not understand their story or their troubles, but figured they would be best avoided if encountered. These are perfect examples of how superficial observations can be very misleading and detrimental to those honest in heart persons seeking truth about any subject.

After careful investigation and prayer, I joined the church when I was 18 years old. Doing so caused most of my current friends to avoid me and they began referring to me as a “Jesus freak”. I was surprised at this response because I thought I would be able to convert many of my friends. Shortly after my conversion, I was drafted into the Army and served in Panama and volunteered for Viet-Nam. The moral teachings of the Church gave me great protection in these environments. After b eing discharged from the service, I served a two year mission in California. This was the most important and rewarding thing I had ever done.

I now have a wonderful wife that I hope to be with throughout the eternities, and four children. I sincerely hope my son will “volunteer” to serve a mission for the Church and tell the world about our Savior Jesus Christ and his atoning sacrifice that makes it possible for us to be resurrected and have eternal life in the presence of our Heavenly Father.

I appeal to all the honest in heart that seek the truth. Find out for yourself. Investigate and pray. Do not take the opinions of those full of "sour grapes" as truth. They do you a great disservice.

12/24/03
Heidi Page
Owensboro, KY

A few thoughts and comments: (1) That PBS is showing a program such as this is not surprising to me. PBS is only a public broadcasting service so long as the programs shown have a liberal bent to them. If "Get the Fire" had been a program showing the missionaries and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in a positive light, it would not have been aired on PBS; *that* would have been too conservative for PBS! (2) Programs such as this are only made about the LDS Church because the uproar and public outrage would be too great if it were any other church or religion shown in such a negative light. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the only church out there against which it is still publicly acceptable to ridicule, denigrate and denounce, and the like. (3) Programs like this only serve to strengthen my faith in my Savior Jesus Christ and my resolve to follow *all* of His teachings. If The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints were not true, would there be such an effort to denounce and discredit it? No. If this church was not true, no one would bother to try to convince others that it isn't. (4) The "Ex-Missionaries" shown are those who shouldn't have gone on missions in the first place. Granted, in the past, all young men were encouraged (and in many families, expected) to go on missions and that meant that many went who should not have gone, perhaps for reasons of a lack of testimony or other personal problems that should have first been resolved but were not. It is those who are the disgruntled ex-missionaries of today. Now, only those that truly have a strong testimony first are encouraged to go. If a young man (or young woman for that matter) has only a lukewarm testimony or has committed serious sins, then they shouldn't bother going on a mission. The missionary work is difficult; the Lord doesn't need those out there as missionaries who aren't equal to the task. He doesn't need missionaries who go to _gain_ a testimony or who only go because they are expect ed to go by family or friends (many times that doesn't work, as demonstrated by the ex-missionaries on the program); He needs missionaries who WANT to go on a mission and who ALREADY have a strong testimony.

12/24/03
Kandace
Las vegas NV

First of all, I am appreciative that someone has taken the time to document the sacrafice these young people make at a very young age. These young people give of themselves for two years, going without what most teenagers deem necessary, music, movies, friend, etc... Whether or not you believe the doctrine of the Church, one has respect these young people. They have excellent manners, willingness to serve and a smile for most of the people they meet. I would appreciate more airtime given to the thousands missionaries who have returned without the bitterness demonstrated by a few. One note: as I was reading through the comments I noted "STEVE" from Colorado indicated that each time he went to the temple he promised to take his life. He is incorrect. One promises to "give" their life to Christ. There is a huge difference. Again, thank you for at least acknowledging these extrodinary young people. I hope that next time people see a Mormon Missionary, they will have much more respect for their sacrafic es and the sacrafices of the families that support them. It is no easy thing to send a child off for two years with only four phone calls home during that 24 months.

12/24/03
Mike
Salt Lake City, Utah

I really enjoyed the show. It showed me a new perspective on missionaries and missions. I thought it was fair, if not skewed towards the mormon perspective.

I am sure there will be mormons who will be offended because they don't take kindly to any critisism. Interesting, because that is exactly what missionaries do to other religions.

I am from original mormon stock (4-5 generations) and was raised mormon since birth. All my immediate family are staunch mormons. That is how I know for sure the way they will feel. Mormons are ultra concerned of how they are percieved by others because they ultimately want to convert everyone.

Thanks for the show, it really is done well and is very important for people to see.

12/24/03
A.K.W.
HI

In response to the second question posed, I feel that it is an individuals right to share their beliefs in God and or any other Higher Power he/she may believe in. That's the great thing about being American or rather, a citizen of a free country; freedom of speech and religion is part of our constitution. It is also an individuals right to reject what is being shared.

I had the great opportunity to share my beliefs on an 18 month mission to Japan. There was a lot more rejection than acceptance but it only proved to make me believe more strongly in the teachings of the Church. I'd elaborate on it but sadly I wasn't one of the lucky return missionaries asked to participate in this "documentary".

12/24/03

It would have been interesting to have included at least one ex-missionary who was still a practicing Mormon in the documentary. While some former missionaries leave the Church, the vast majority remain active. Why didn't the filmmaker include footage of someone in Germany joining the church and asking them why? I'm grateful to have served a mission in Lima, Peru from 81-83 and I do believe the Book of Mormon to be the word of God. God lives, and answers the prayers of those who turn to Him. Ask and ye shall receive, knock and it will be opened unto to you, seek and ye shall find.

12/24/03
Ann Robinson
Chico, Ca

I am very disappointed in PBS for airing such unmitigated biggorty on their station. I used to be a contributor but I will not continue. Nancy du Plesses had an agenda, that is obvious, and to call this a documentary is rediculous. She has lost all her credibility and so has PBS for airing it.

I can't tell you how many missionaries I turned away from my door before I finally decided to listen to what they had to say. I finally listened and have happily been a convert to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints for over 30 years now. I love the missionaries, God bless them. They serve two valuable years of their lives serving their Father in heaven because of their love for Him and the Lord, and their love for their brothers and sisters around the world.

I found it interesting that most of the people writing in support of the church proudly gave their names, cities, and states, while those writing anti-mormon messages prefer to hide behind anonimity.

I suggest that people investigate for themselves. You don't need to take my word for anything and you don't need to take du Plessey's word for it, or anyone else's. If you want to know the truth you need to find out for yourself. And you can't make an informed decision without the information. God gave you free agency to learn and then decide or to close your eyes, ears, and mind, and walk away. Use your free agency wisely.

12/24/03
Adam Celaya
Foster City, California

My roomate and I were flipping through the channels and found this documentary. It had already begun but we quickly realized and commented to each other that the filmmaker's use of editing, mise en scene, and other film techniques made it obvious that she was not trying to be impartial. We thought nothing of it (after all, people can think what they want) until we realized that PBS was broadcasting this. PBS has stated that its purpose is "to enrich the lives of all Americans through quality programs and education services that inform, inspire and delight." How can a documentary such as this enrich the lives of all Americans? The "P" in PBS stands for public not partial. I have nothing against a negative view towards this church, but I do have a problem with a false representation of it. In presupposing that a mission is about "a boy becoming a man" the entire film is without substance. This film assumes that a mission is meant for the benefit of the person who serves it. If you made a documentary of the life of Jesus and then asked him what he got out of it you would be missing the whole point. He would probably say, "It's not about what I got out of it, but what I put into it." The mission of Jesus is found in the lives of those he blessed. Let me say this: a mission is a labor of love and selflessness. Any personal benefit that comes from serving a mission is secondary. Therefore, it doesn't really matter what these missionaries got out of their service, only what they put into it.

12/24/03
John Whited
Elizabethtown, PA

After having viewed the film, I went immediately to the website to see the "rest of the story".

I too am disappointed in PBS for using resources to air a program that was biased and one-sided, regardless of its "independent" nature. A careful reading of the contents of the website allows the inquisitive to see a more balanced view of the topic, however, too many people will not take the time to do this and will be left with an overall impression that is neither accurate nor fair. Many of us had come to expect much more from PBS.

In the comments section there are many statements that clearly outline the biases of the filmaker and the inconsistencies and ommisions. I will not repeat them but just wish to add that having served a mission and continued actively participating for 20 years after, it remains a great part of my life and faith and the film did not represent my experience well at all.

In the future, I hope that PBS will take the opportunity to air a fair treatment of this topic. We ar e not asking for a PR spot from the Church or a "documentary" slanted the other way -- just a fair representation of the experience with both sides presented with journalistic and intellectual integrity.

(However, if, like in sports, the referees' there at PBS would like to issue a "makeup call", I am sure the Church would be more than happy to give you a Church produced, "independent documentary" to air such as "Called To Serve".)

12/24/03
JoAnna
Oregon

found your program to be very very misleading. I have been a member all of my life, but i have seen the effects of living both ways; inside and out of the church. I have had friends converted, and brothers, and cousins and aunts 'and uncles serve missions and none of them have had such a horrible out look as ur program showed. I found it very offensive that you claimed this to be a documentary when in reality it just proved to be more like a chance to nit-pick at everything the producer had against the LDS (Mormon) religion. I think if you were to have chosen a better producer and someone not so predjudice to the Mormon religion that it could of been a documentary, but after seeing what i saw to night i am very disappointed in your choice to broadcast this program.

12/24/03
James Larson
Provo, UT

I caught the tail end of this program and had a hard time believing what I was seeing. I wanted to find out more and have studied the info posted on this site. I agree with those who feel that there should have been RMs interviewed who live happy and successful lives as faithful members of the church. They are the overwhelming majority.

I served in Ecuador as a missionary 2000-2002. I loved my experience there. It was one of the best and most rewarding of my life. It was one of the hardest of my life as well. I came out of it with a stronger knowledge of the truthfulness of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints than I have ever felt in my life. Though I didn't teach and baptize thousands I felt my mission was a success. The Doctrine & Covenants (LDS book of scripture) says that our joy will be great if we bring but one soul unto God. And that is the whole purpose of the mission experience - bring souls unto God. It isn't a forced conversion, though, and for that reason some people may be harder to teach than others. Germany, for example, is known to be deeply rooted in tradition and their culture making them harder to teach because they are not willing to be taught.

At times I too felt concerned with the preocupation with numbers, but you have to look at the reason behind the numbers. We weren't serving as missionaries so we could be on vacation in a foreign country for two years. We were there to work and when the going gets tough we need motivation. We also need some way to track our progress. There is no other way to measure how things are going and what adjustments can be made without tracking numbers. There is no way to realistically set and measure completion of a goal without numbers. You just have to see past the numbers to understand the purpose behind them - bringing souls to God.

The mission is not something that is right for everyone. It is for the spiritually prepared and strong. Church leaders have strongly encouraged a "raising of the bar" for missionaries. The mission is not a time to gain a testimony of the truthfulness of the church (though it is strengthened greatly as a direct consequence). It is to share that faith and knowledge you have already received. Growing up in mormon culture (especially in Utah)it is easy to coast through life never questioning anything and never searching for your own knowledge and confirmation of the truthfulness of the church. You just go with the flow and do what your parents say. Before serving a mission it is essential to have a true knowledge of the truthfulness of what you will be teaching - a knowledge that comes from God through his Holy Spirit. Study and prayer is greatly encouraged by the church before serving a mission so one is sure they are doing the right thing and that they believe what they are teaching. The church has many safeguards against unprepared missionaries. To serve a mission one must pass through several interviews with church leaders in which they state plainly that they know the church is true, Joseph Smith was a proph

et, and there is a prophet alive today that guides and directs us. For those that fall away, either they lied about those things before serving a mission or they are lying about their beliefs now. Either way their credibility is greatly destroyed.

The church and the Lord take a great risk in trusting the teaching of the gospel to young men ages 19-27. Problems with immaturity can arise and problems can take place. But for the most part these are young men who are undergoing a change for the good. I agree with the statement, „When a young man leaves on his [Mormon] mission, he is a boy. When he returns from his mission, he is a man." If you compare a young man who as served a mission to the typical young man who has not there are many differences. Naturally an employer will want to hire someone that has a true understanding of what life really is after living among the poor and in other countries and not somebody who only thinks they understand. If your daughter is looking to marry somebody would you rathe r have her marry a young man who understands life and has worked with many families for two years to understand the importance of good family relationships or somebody who hasn't? This is why preference in employment is given to RMs. They are more experienced and in many cases more mature. This is why church leaders encourage young women to marry returned missionaries. They have gained knowledge and experience that others haven't. And this is why church leaders encourage young men to serve missions. They know that a missionary who faithfully serves with all his heart will come back a much better person. I did.

It disturbs me to hear the church referred to as LDS Inc. The Lord being the perfect being he is will have an organized group of followers. He must ensure that all receive His teachings correctly from those authorized to teach in His name. That is the beauty of the organization of the church as it is. One, it is inspired. Two, it allows for a member in Japan to hear the same teachings as a member in South Africa on the same Sunday. The church is the same world-wide. Any other form of organization would not work.

The church does have many business interests as well that may make the church look like a corporation. You can refer to President Hinckley's remarks in several General Conference talks in the past few years regarding these. He explains very plainly why they are there. All are self sustaining - no tithing funds are used. In fact they make more money to allow the church to do many great things world wide, including humanitarian efforts. The church is working to bring souls to God, as I have mentioned. To do that money is needed and money is collected and used in the most prudent ways possible to further the cause. The reassuring thing about all of this is that all the money is spent on advancing the cause of the church and doesn't go to pay multi million dollar salaries to church leaders. They don't have salaries at all. Nor is there a board of directors and share holders. As members of the c hurch we receive the benefits of every penny donated to the church and so do many who are not members who benefit from the humanitarian projects of the church.

I hope that through many of the things that have been written viewers can gain a greater understanding of what the church missionary program is all about - greater than what was provided through the documentary.

12/24/03
Bree & Kristin
Fairfield, California

After viewing this short sided documentary my collegue and I, we found that it lacked many positive asspects that can be portrayed within the LDS life and mission experience. Between the two of us we have had 3 brothers serve honorable 2 year missions. One to Long Beach Californis spanish speaking, another to Sao Paulo Brazil, one to Forteleza Brazil. The film maker failed to protray ANY OTHER MISSONARIES besides ones from north America. We know first hand that our brothers have had companions within their mission that are native to the country they served in, as well as companions from all over the world.

12/24/03
Frederick Mullen
Glendora, Ca.

Let's be honest Nancy. You really have an ax to grind with this organized religion that you liberal east coast elitists detest, because it is a threat to the agnostic dogma that you've been fed in your upbringing. (Besides, since when is religion supposed to be disorganized?)I joined the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints in 1975. My mother is a lovely Polish American Catholic and my father happens to be a repectable Protestant Irish American. My brother-in-law is a great person who happens to be Jewish and I got my education at a Seventh-Day Adventist university and made lots of friends outside of my own faith. I grew up most of my life in Southern California and was born in Massachusetts. Needless to say, I have a very diverse background and I am not a stereotypical Mormon. I am still, to this day, the only Mormon in my family, except for my own wife and children. I served in the Germany Frankfurt Mission from 1976 to 1978 and it provided for me a great foundation for my personal life and career.

I love my wife and family and I feel that my membership in the church has made me a much better person. (I even left on my mission against my father's wishes.) I certainly did not leave to impress anybody but the God who gave me the strong epiphany to go and serve Him. Shame on you Nancy for being a glaringly ignorant one-sided liberal. I have a lot more respect for the true liberals who look at all opinions and not just those disgruntled ones you interviewed that you obviously hand-selected, in order to get your own dagger pushed into the church I love.

12/24/03
Russ Parr
Oregon City, Oregon

I must say, that as a former missionary and current member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, that I was mostly offended and insulted by this film. The extreme negative bias is very apparent. I watched the film expecting an honest and truthful portrayal of missionaries and of the church in general. Instead, what I observed was misleading and obviously skewed towards the negative. It is a shame that some people spend so much effort and energy in trying to tear down something positive and beneficial.

12/24/03
John
Long Beach, CA

In response to the third question/prompt, I'm sorry but if you didn't want to do a film about the Mormon church, should you really have picked the missionary program? That is the one program that is all about the church! Secondly, if this was about the experience of young people who had this great opportunity, then what were the older men in the film for? I understand the desire to show both sides of the story, but I think that with the access that the filmmaker had (which I think was quite impressive) that she could have found three or four missionaries who are still members of the church and content to be such. I think that the failure to do this calls into question the validity and objectivity of this documentary. I've seen tons of documentaries that were done in a way that was not biased toward one particular side, but this was not one of those. A mission is a rite of passage in a way. I have been a member all of my life and have struggled with the same questions that all of these ex-members have struggled with. I had serious doubts as to whether the church was inspired and even if there was a God or not. Here was one of the things that my mission gave me the time to discover--the crucial thing is that instead of desperately seeking out ways that things could be proven not true, I have prayed and tried to find out things that could prove that it were true. The question is are you looking for the negative or the positive? Either way, I guarantee that that is what you will find. In watching this film and reading the comments from the talkback segment I see that she made the missionaries look like unexperienced children that had not yet woken up, so to speak, and portrayed the adults, that were clearly bitter about the church, as enlightened individuals who have finally shrugged off their ignorance and stupidity. I have never understood the need to attack the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. I could tell (and this applies to most ex-members of the church) that they were clearly embittered by some negative experience that they had had and it appeared to me that they became fixated upon this until they could not let it go. Why not give a balanced view and show both sides. My mission was a great experience. Contrary to the all of the views of the adult "ex-missionaries" my mission was incredibly rewarding in all ways. My belief in God grew and I woke up and came to see that the "restrictions" and "dictations" that the church gives are quite the opposite. They are guidelines of how to live a happy life--free from STD's, the pain of infidelity, addictions to harmful practices and substances, and help on how to have a stronger family. Why weren't any of these positive views from older ex-missionaries presented? I'm used to people speaking out negatively against our church and I guess that it's natural for every church to get that, but for this film to be paraded as a documentary, I think it is not quite accurate. It seems to me that Ms. du Plessis should have tried to put a little less of her anti-Mormon bias into the film. Hopefully people that don't know anything about our church will go to satisfied members with their questions and not people who are clearly bitter and dissatisfied. I'd suggest making the church website a little more easy to find--www.mormon.org or www.lds.org.

12/24/03
Matt
Cypress, California

I am a little confused. Was this work a documentary or an editorial? It claims to be a documentary but the cut and paste rhythm of this piece screams editorial. I am a student of film. I also come from a large family of film gurus and our conclusion is that it must be an editorial. du Plessis writes, "I did not make a film about the Mormon Church. I made a film about young people who went through this experience and came to different conclusions." What were the conclusions of the missionaries in Germany? The audience only heard bits and pieces of their reflections whereas we heard plenty of conclusions by ex-mormon missionaries. The work seemed unfinished to me. We seemed to only be watching these young men and not really getting to know them. The majority of the "documentary" we saw these missionaries as goofy boys. We did not see when they were actually fulfilling their roles as spokesmen of their religion. I am not very familiar with the religious beliefs of the Mormon Church. I have seen the

ir young men around my neighborhood and live by one of their churches. I have met the members of this church and it seems to be that these young men go because they are eager to teach what they have grown to love. Recently I have discovered that the difficulty to become a missionary has heightened. Not only must they be worthy members. They must also know their religion, have already taken steps towards self-discovery, and be firm in their faith. I am looking forward to seeing more "in-depth and unbiased" news from PBS and hope that this "documentary" will not fortell what is to come.

12/24/03
Matthew D Miller
Palo Alto, CA

A worthy and interesting subject poorly executed. A documentary, by nature, explores openly the subject matter - be it beautiful or scandalous. I think it was a diservice to represent what a Mormon mission is like this way. Ms. du Plessis chronicles the experiences of three American Mormon missionaries while in Germany then, by proxy, presents what those experiences mean in the bigger picture through the words of former missionaries. The problem is that these former missionaries/commentators had all left the Mormon faith. Are we to believe that most Mormon missionaries end up having serious misgivings about their experiences? This is like having a republican chronicle the worth of the democratic party at the national democratic convention. I can only assume that, contrary to the film's objective of "not being a film about the Mormon Church", Ms. du Plessis has another agenda with regards to religion altogether.

12/24/03
Devin Grant
Sandy, Utah

It's obvious that the filmaker isn't a huge fan of mormonism. The underline tone is very negative. And I would agree that this documentary leans more torward an anti-mormon piece than an informative piece. There were too many unanswered questions and holes in the program. The most interesting thing to me was the deceptive nature of the individuals who had once served missions but now having left the church after discovering some sort of hidden conspiracy theory hidden deep in the halls of some smoke filled Church office with men plotting spiritual slavery. I'm so sick and tire of these losers who are so intelligent. What a joke. Everyone knows people who work for the Mormon "corporation" make next too nearly nothing for all the credentials and degrees earned at BYU. There's no profit for the Prophet. He lives in a little apartment. His associates have modest homes. Anyone who thinks the heirarchy is all about the money then tell the Church to quit sending all of it to Ghana and every other poor country on the earth. I'm fed up with anti-mormonism and deceitful films about mormonism.

12/24/03
Robert Shelley
Alpine, UT

I was disappointed with the objectivity of the film. It clearly didn't show all perspectives of the missionary experience. The filmmaker could have easily found an example or two from the hundreds of thousands of return missionaries who have remained faithful their entire life to the beliefs they taught on their missions and wouldn't trade those two years for anything.

She could have also found an example or two from the millions of people who have listened to the missionaries and joined the church and loved the difference it has made in their life. I recently had a man track me down from my mission 25 years ago in Argentina just to thank me for the happiness the church has given him and his family. There are millions out there who feel the same way.

I have never been more grateful for the happiness and joy that being a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints gives me. I have no problem with someone exposing the true experience of a mission. But if that was the filmmaker's intent, she missed the mark by a mile. Her bias is glaring to the vast majority of those who have experienced a mission for the church and to the millions of people who are grateful they opened the door to the missionaries.