This Movie Can Only Be Described With One Word.

Lack of good storyline.

It’s an especially fun movie from a director and cast who are clearly having a good time allowing themselves to let loose.

I think this is a new genre that they're all sort of working their way through it and haven't got all the kinks worked out yet but it's a genre that works for me.

while i rate this an 8 out of 10 for the quality of the documentary - it's assemblage and presentation - it doesn't tell the full story of this election ... the true winning strategy was the severe shortage of voting machines at black voting precincts where the new voters who were registered by the kerry campaign and the solid black base of the democratic party go to vote ... full day, 12 hour waits were not uncommon and many many people were turned away because of challenges on their registration ... many people gave up and left ... it is a well documented fact that this was the case ... the white republican areas were well equipped and had little wait time ... this is only touched upon in the film ... it doesn't even start to cover the computer voting machine fraud that has also been well documented outside the mainstream media ... check out some other election fraud independent documentaries for more on this ... the state chair of bush's reelection campaign was also the president of diebold the manufacturer of the electronic/computer voting machines ... at a fund raising dinner he 'guaranteed' bush would carry ohio ... again, this was not covered or just glossed over in the mainstream media ... his guarantee was genuine of course ... so while this documentary is like a michael moore 911 documentary that goes to the edge of the truth, it doesn't want to get into it and really tell the story ... but for a documentary and as far as it went, it was good ... check out the following documentaries for more on bush election fraud and electronic voting machine fraud-- Hacking Democracy [2006] -- Stealing America - Vote by Vote [2008] -- Unprecedented - The 2000 Presidential Election (Fraud) [2002]so when you hear the old adage, 'it doesn't matter who you vote for as long as you vote' you'll know it really doesn't matter who you vote for since they will be voting for you ...

The movie fails to transcend the screen, and stays simply as a piece of film, a point in history.The movie focuses on a group of people attempting to change the outcome of Ohio in the 2004 Presidential Election. The film presents, in the beginning, the views of exclusively democrats, but gradually things open up.The movie's true fault lies in the fact the only take aways one has from the film are factual and concrete, no ideas to be applied to other situations. But in documenting the lives of these individuals during the 2004 race the movie succeeds.So Goes the Nation is movie for the truly politically motivated or those interested in the 2004 Pres. Election. 7/10

The film attempts to show the cutthroat decisiveness of one of the last vestiges of electoral battling in the 2004 Presidential race between Senator Kerry and the incumbent, President George W. Bush. The film follows the tales of three "characters": Miles Gerety-a carryover political activist from the 1960s movements, Evan-a 26 year old college student who believes that he can be a force of change in the political machine, and Leslie-a grass roots activist who takes the election to heart and gives the campaign everything she has. Miles and Evan have the majority of the screen time, and are both Democrats. The concept of the film is the reigning political philosophy that the heartland of America is the truest test of the fabric of the American public consciousness. The title of the movie is in fact, a variable of a political stance that exemplifies that theory…"As goes Ohio, so goes the nation." The filmmakers therefore follow the three campaigners across the state, from Cleveland to Cincinnati and even to the small, aptly named town of Middleburg, located in the heart of the state. Through documentary style footage, news footage and interviews, we are led through the tension and struggle that was the 2004 election. The film spans only 12 days prior to the election, yet traverses far more issues and miles in its travel. Stern and Deo attempt to work the documentary genre into an entertaining piece of work. The intention is to follow in the footsteps of the great political documentaries that came before them. Unfortunately however, the editing choice to attempt to bring the project to a level greater than the sum of its parts leaves the film feeling far more like a rallying cry for the Democrats than a non-partisan expose of the door to door and hand to hand politics of other film. Nation attempts to find the middle ground between the gritty realism of Street Fight with the intensity and drama of The War Room. There are indeed moments of rallies, door to door campaigning and even the occasional shouting match, but the overall effect of the editing is more Fahrenheit 911 than a true documentary. The fact that Michael Moore is featured speaking at a rally for the Democratic Party does nothing to dispel this notion. Much of the films actual campaign footage focuses on "guerrilla tactics" that the Republican Party used to entice those registered with their party to vote "appropriately". Those who fail to agree to vote with the party line are set up to be "revisited in a few days". The film is biased not only in its presentation of evidence regarding the electoral process of 2004, but even in the amount of time given to each party, or "character". While Miles and Evan's work receives lengthy screen time, Leslie's campaign activities on screen can literally be measured in seconds. The film is distinct, clear and focused…on its own agenda. Whether the filmmakers set out to make a rally cry for the Dems or simply made honest editing mistakes remains to be seen, but Hillary and Obama should certainly add this film to their volunteer packages for 2008.

When I went to see this movie, part of me was expecting an hour and a half of Bush bashing. That can be fun every once and again but what surprised me about this movie was the fact that it looked at both sides of the election. The Kerry/Edwards campaign was represented and so was the Bush/Cheney campaign. No one side was made out to look like it was perfect. Faults were shown on both sides and high points were shown on both sides. As far as cinema goes, I thought this was a great film. When I left the theater, I was physically tired as a result of what I had just watched. The viewer gets so much information in this relatively short span of time. The film itself is well organized and well constructed, without too much bias (would it really be possible to have a film be completely without bias?). Whatever your political stance, this is a film that can be appreciated for the questions it raises: questions about political strategy, specifically. Because it does not take a pro-Bush or pro-Kerry stance, it can appeal to everyone.