The largest issue for the film, and as a documentary filmmaker myself I am quite sympathetic, is that there is little footage of anything actually happening and the film has even less of a plot than even the average documentary. As a result, the majority of the film is a typical talking heads documentary with interviews covered by b-roll and a few excursions where they obviously set up a field trip day on which they would run around town with a candidate. I suspect that Occasion-Cortez's campaign was the most accessible since there is considerably more footage of her campaign than the others. The problems with not having more complete coverage are common to documentaries and one of the things that makes them particularly difficult to make and make well.
As a result of this lack of coverage it seems that the crew never blends into the background to the extent that the candidates no longer are so conscious of the camera. As a result you don't really get to see the person behind the candidate, behind the public persona they wear for the cameras and the crowds.
This a big problem, especially for a film about political candidates. Audiences that are already dubious of politicians and the games they play. It makes the entire films seem somewhat like a propaganda exercise.
Another great challenge for a documentary is to present a narrative arc. Real life doesn't arc in the way that stories do. It's one of the things that makes stories appealing but also inherently false feeling. A good story or documentary parcels out information and events in a way that is designed to evoke emotion and create a resonant journey for an audience to experience within a time frame.
"Knock Down the House" has a real problem here. None of the stories have a great arc to them. Each of the stories break down to something simple like, "I realized there was a need for political change, I decided to run, and I lost/won my race." When I say they break down that way, I am being kind. There is literally no tension in this film as to what is going to happen, who is going to win, or the opposition's plans to frustrate the candidates.
This is all not to say that the film doesn't have its moments. There are some great sound bites from the candidates and drop the mic moments that really land. I just can't help getting the feeling that those clips could have just as easily and effectively been used as social media posts or 30 sec pieces for the candidate rather than buried in a 90 min documentary of which only a few minutes are interesting.
As a result of this lack of coverage it seems that the crew never blends into the background to the extent that the candidates no longer are so conscious of the camera. As a result you don't really get to see the person behind the candidate, behind the public persona they wear for the cameras and the crowds.
This a big problem, especially for a film about political candidates. Audiences that are already dubious of politicians and the games they play. It makes the entire films seem somewhat like a propaganda exercise.
Another great challenge for a documentary is to present a narrative arc. Real life doesn't arc in the way that stories do. It's one of the things that makes stories appealing but also inherently false feeling. A good story or documentary parcels out information and events in a way that is designed to evoke emotion and create a resonant journey for an audience to experience within a time frame.
"Knock Down the House" has a real problem here. None of the stories have a great arc to them. Each of the stories break down to something simple like, "I realized there was a need for political change, I decided to run, and I lost/won my race." When I say they break down that way, I am being kind. There is literally no tension in this film as to what is going to happen, who is going to win, or the opposition's plans to frustrate the candidates.
This is all not to say that the film doesn't have its moments. There are some great sound bites from the candidates and drop the mic moments that really land. I just can't help getting the feeling that those clips could have just as easily and effectively been used as social media posts or 30 sec pieces for the candidate rather than buried in a 90 min documentary of which only a few minutes are interesting.