Recomptage

There are two immutable facts that were brought out in this excellent film: one, Florida looked absolutely ridiculous in the way they conducted elections; and two, the 2000 election was absolutely stolen.

Florida will forever be stigmatized by butterfly ballots and hanging chads. The fact that election officials in some sixteen counties refused to do the machine recount as ordered shows the incompetency of our officials.

The recount notwithstanding, the manipulation of the voter roles and the subsequent disenfranchisement of 20,000 voters by the clownish Katherine Harris, played perfectly by Laura Dern, casts a permanent stain on the legitimacy of the Bush presidency.

The fact that the details of this movie were well known did not detract one bit from its enjoyment. It was compelling and exciting and the performances of stars like Kevin Spacey, Tom Wilkinson, and Dern made you forget that you knew the ending.

As a political junkie I decided to watch this once again. I will admit that I am a Republican so I always watch Hollywood movies about anything political with a bit of a defensive posture. I was actually surprised how this movie was not too biased for Gore. The only exceptions were not highlighting how the networks calling Florida for Gore before the polls closed in the Western Panhandle impacted the vote in Gore's favor. However, that slight omission was forgivable because it is not sexy enough for the screen. The glaring bias was the portrayal of Katherine Harris by Laura Dern. As someone who knows many people in Florida politics, I have met Katherine Harris on many occasions and she is not the cartoon character that is portrayed by Dern. If the portrayal of Katherine Harris was more accurate I would probably have given this movie an 8 or 9.

I had no idea how convoluted and poorly-handled the 2000 presidential election in Florida really was until seeing this movie. I remember that there were comments in the news about hanging chads, etc., but did not know about all of the legal and other issues that are revealed in the movie. It makes you wonder about all elections in all counties and states, on any issue.

It was absolutely riveting the entire way through--just when you think it was going one way, there would be a reversal. Fictional movies wish they had this many plot twists. My least favorite topic, normally, is politics, so for this movie to make an election in one state riveting, is saying a lot.

The performances were excellent, particularly by Kevin Spacey. The dialog and performances were so natural, it was almost like a documentary.

Great job by all!

I could not turn away from this movie- not because the outcome was unclear or because I was unfamiliar with the events (I took a class in college the next year entirely dedicated to this debacle) I just found the acting so compelling.

The actors did a fantastic job- they created tension even when I knew what the Supreme Court would say- If you are a political junkie and have not been drinking from your respective party's kool-aid jug for too long you will enjoy this movie.

Those that take offense to this film clearly are delusional about their party or candidates- they can't acknowledge that their side will go to the same lengths as the other guy to win- Recount is not a social commentary on voter fraud- it is a behind the scenes look at the recount teams for Gore and Bush and how they strategized and plotted to WIN-

That does not mean Recount seeks to establish who WON the election- only that there were two camps who wanted to, which we already knew before the vote was so ridiculously close. And I don't see how the film could have done a better job showing us this-

If you were paying attention to the United States presidential election in 2000, then I suppose you must have a streak of masochism in order to watch this recapitulation--it is bound to stir up the powerful emotions experienced at the time, no matter what side of the divide you were on. Just read some of the reviews and comments to verify what a hot button issue this still is. If you were not paying attention in 2000, or you are too young to remember, then this film will certainly introduce you to all the major events and issues: hanging chads, dimpled chads, recounts, court cases, accusations of voter suppression, confusing ballots, the status of military votes, and so forth. The major players in this high-stakes drama are all here too, and documentary footage is inserted for believability. The film is definitely more than loosely based on fact, since most of the public statements are taken from the record. It's the extrapolations to what went on behind closed doors that is open to question.

This plays like a thriller, even for those who are familiar with the story. If none of this ever happened, then I think all would agree that this is a good movie with a great plot and fine cast. Laura Dern, as Florida Secretary of State Katherine Harris, creates a memorable character and Tom Wilkinson is a standout as Bush's legal adviser James Baker (Secratary of State under George H. W. Bush). Wilkinson captures Baker almost to the point where you could mistake him for the real person.

I think it came as a surprise at the time that the United States election process could ever be so fouled up. If there is a non-partisan message to be had from this movie it is that measures should be taken to prevent this kind of thing from happening again. While the 2000 election led to the Election Reform Act of 2002, the process is still far from perfect, especially since implementation details are left up to the individual states. Much controversy still exists over electronic voting machines, requirements for user ID, and so forth. And the current Coleman vs. Franken senate contest in Minnesota, now in its fourth month and still undecided, proves that extremely close contests are still messy affairs. Since there are so many arguments to be made on either side in such cases, I often think that such close elections should be decided by a coin toss.

It seems impossible to find a generally-accepted unbiased telling of the 2000 election. The reviews for all books I have looked into seem to split on party lines. Maybe it is impossible to be impartial on this one.