It’s unclear at this stage what form The Testaments will take - whether it will be folded into the existing Hulu series or developed as a separate work.Ītwood, who appears on the cover of TIME this week, will release the highly anticipated follow-up to her 1985 dystopian novel on Sept.
Bruce Miller, showrunner for the Emmy-winning television adaptation of The Handmaid’s Tale, is involved in discussions about how to best approach the new material. They're being cheated.Hulu and MGM will develop Margaret Atwood’s new novel The Testaments for the screen, the partners told TIME exclusively.
People who ought to be watching a film designed to showcase the spiritual power of the Book of Mormon are instead being shown a fictionalization of the Book of Mormon designed to make them cry. It should therefore not be used in place of the Book of Mormon, which is exactly what's happening every time this film is screened.
"The Ten Commandments" is not the Book of Exodus. But a fictionalization of scripture is not scripture. I haven't heard any yet, but I'm sure testimonials are forthcoming from people whose lives were transformed by this film. What I want to know is: Does "Testaments" convince non-LDS viewers to take the Book of Mormon seriously as a sacred text? Does it inspire viewers-LDS or non-LDS-to live more Christlike lives? Let me clarify: I have nothing per se against fictionalizations of scripture, and I believe that God is great enough to touch people's lives even through cheesy fictionalizations of scripture. A good missionary film has to do more than make people cry. If I want to see a good tear-jerker, I can go to my local cineplex or video rental store. Afterwards, I heard this same teenager and her mother commenting, between sniffles, on how the ending always "gets them." OK. Dare I say that this film represents the literatures of men mingled with scripture? Walking into "Testaments" today (my second viewing), I heard an LDS teenager ahead of me say that she's seen this film six times. What we get in "Testaments" is part scripture, part romance, part courtroom thriller, part political thriller, part disaster flick, part family values entertainment, and part Indiana Jones-style adventure. In "Testaments," that dignity is seriously compromised. Most importantly, in my opinion, this film presented the Book of Mormon with the dignity owed to a sacred text. The film was moving and did a fine job of presenting the Book of Mormon as Christ-centered and as a companion volume to the Bible. I mean, that book's supposed to be scripture, and they turn it into this cheesy melodrama." In the south visitors center on Temple Square, they used to show a short film that, like "Testaments," set scenes from Christ's ministry in the Old World (as described in the Gospels) side-by-side with scenes from his ministry in the New World (as described in the Book of Mormon).
I'm reminded of a comment made by a character in LDS playwright Eric Samuelsen's drama "Gadianton": "It is pretty awful. I cannot say the same for "Testaments." This film is to the Book of Mormon what "The Ten Commandments" is to the Book of Exodus or what "Ben Hur" is to the Gospels-and I don't intend those to be flattering comparisons. And judged by the standards of that genre, I think the films I've listed above are well-conceived and well-made. But these films aren't trying to meet those standards. They're not calculated to win praise for their subtlety, or irony, or ambiguity, or provocativeness, or originality, or any of the other qualities that make for great cinema by the standards of literary criticism. Over the years, the LDS Church has made some fine missionary films: "Man's Search for Happiness," "Together Forever," "How Rare a Possession," "The Mountain of the Lord," "Legacy." True, these films are emotionally heavy-handed. At the risk of being accused of speaking evil of the Lord's anointed, I have to say that this film represents poor judgment on the part of the LDS leaders who conceived and approved it.