11/8/16

There is no doubt that the 2016 election was one of (if not the) most polarizing in the history of the United States. What "11/8/16" does is capture the initial, gut, visceral reactions of people on that day.

I really liked how the documentary tries to form a sort of narrative for itself by starting at the beginning of the day with all the families/people it profiles, and then following those people throughout the day as the balance starts shifting from "Hillary is going to easily win" to "this is going to be a tight race". This strategy really captures what it felt like on that day.

A lot of reviewers have mentioned the "liberal slant" of this documentary (and I think that's the reason for its very middling rating), and there is a definitive bias towards those who wanted Clinton to be victorious. However, I didn't feel that this at all ruined the experience. In fact, for the narrative of this doc to really work dramatically, it had to be focused more on that side of the story.

I enjoyed watching "11/8/16" because it was able to put me back into the whirlwind of emotions of that momentous day. Even though the candidate whose name I scratched on the ballot did not win, I'm fascinated by Presidential politics as a whole and thus am always interested in new perspectives.

I implore everyone to see this documentary. A wholly impartial snapshot of America, its people and their political thoughts. No matter who you are you will love and hate and every minute of this movie. And that is an excellent thing.

"11/8/16" follows 10 or so persons/families on the day of last year's presidential election. That is the entire movie and it's more than enough for any movie. What this movie nails is that it actually captures America. Of course you have your bleeding heart Trumpers and Clintonians. You have whites, blacks and Hispanics. But far more interestingly (and accurate) you have Sikhs, third party voters, non- voters, felons, and even an a man exonerated from death row who is voting in his first election in 30 years. Enough slices of America are covered to get some semblance of an understanding of America as a whole, which is only possible by investigating its smallest pieces and adding it up. This is the fundamental virtue of the movie.

Amassing as many viewpoints as is reasonable and cross-cutting between them doesn't allow the viewer to began an argument and make him or herself feel right. It only allows the viewer to listen, then to listen to another viewpoint, then another, then a viewpoint you had no possibility of considering before you empathize wholeheartedly with every single person on screen. Of course you'll disagree, agree and be indifferent, but it will be impossible not to empathize. There's not one single person in this movie (and dare I say America) that wouldn't have a new understanding of someone who is not in their social sphere. And that, to me, makes this the most powerful and best documentary of the year. It's at times laugh-out-loud funny, profound, academic, truthful and poignant. Five huge stars. On Netflix today.

A surprisingly compelling, even thrilling look at how the events of Election Day 2016 in the USA unfolded, following many people who all have distinct personalities and beliefs that become apparent to you as a viewer very quickly.

I think this was excellently constructed, and truly liked the diverse, multiple viewpoints it showed throughout. The editing and pacing was top notch, with a satisfying building of tension even when you know what the result is going to be.

Maybe could have done without the self-represented guy who ended up with quite a few votes. Also, I don't think it's fair to mark this down because there are people in it that you may find annoying- it captures and presents people who are right, left, and everywhere in between, and there may be an urge to get angry about the viewpoints that you don't agree with.

It may be fair to be frustrated by such people, but I don't think it's fair to mark the film down for that reason, because this seemed to me like a documentary that just said: "hey, here's how stuff went down on that day, in case you don't live in America, or in case you do and want to remember, for whatever reason."

Would also recommend Fahrenheit 11/9 (at least the first 1/3 or so) and Trumped (2017) for anyone else who enjoyed this.

I read the other reviews here. I did not notice it at the time but agree there may be a slight liberal bias here. Mostly I thought it was just a capture of a cross section of people in America's "election days". The real downfall here is that this movie is so boring. Having no point of view is great for a documentary, to keep their views out of it, but they need to have some kind of point. When I watch a documentary about the 2016 election, I don't really want to watch a guy play a ukulele for 5 minutes and talk about how great his girlfriend is for another 3. It is also quite repetitive. What would make a much more interesting documentary is the story of one of its subjects, for example the well spoken Alabama man who was voting for the first time after just being exonerated after serving 30 years on death row!

I wen't into this doc without knowing anything about the people that filmed it, the people they observed, or any other information about what was covered other than the election. Now, there is no interaction with the observed people by the documentarians, which I respect, but it was pretty obvious there was a message being pushed, which is that there are much less Trump supporters than Clinton supporters and they don't have any real problems to deal with. The documentary follows somewhere between ten and fifteen Clinton supporters and three to five Trump supporters (I can't remember the exact numbers but that's close). Now, right off the bat, that is a flawed portrayal. The MSM will never admit it, but there are more Trump supporters than Clinton supporters when you subtract illegal immigrants (an estimated 2-5 million illegals voted in sanctuary city states like California and New York). Other than that, I didn't have a problem with it because there wasn't direct intervention by the filmmakers, which I can't stress enough as the best thing a documentarian can do.