Is it possible to make a non-partisan film about partisanship? Even more pertinent: Is it possible to watch a film on such a politically-charged subject without getting riled up, one way or another? Kelly Nyks does his level best to present a balanced discussion in Split: A Divided America, a documentary that had its world premiere at AFI Dallas.

Walking a veritable tightrope between red and blue states, Nyks travels across the country, talking to a wide cross-section of random citizens, party leaders, political celebrities and media pundits. He winds up with a sincere, thoughtful inquiry into the neuroses of a fractured nation. In its own quiet way, Split is a polite rebuke to the idea that documentaries on political subjects must be adversarial -- or relentlessly one-sided -- to be worthwhile.
The political dialogue wasn't always so fraught with the potential for personal violence, according to a short animated clip embedded early in the film. Decades ago, Democratic and Republican neighbors could reportedly exchange views without fear of the discussion breaking out into fisticuffs or obscene name-calling. Maybe so. Within my lifetime, the tone of political discourse has certainly grown progressively more divisive, with aggressive, nakedly angry assaults being launched by one side against the other on a regular basis. In a Presidential election year, what can a documentary do about it?

Nyks began in California with a tiny crew: just himself, producer Jeff Beard and director of photography Tarina Reed. (In the post-screening Q&A, Nyks noted that the presence of a woman softened their approach and helped put their interview subjects at ease.) He asked each person he interviewed the same six questions about why the country is so divided along party lines, the role of faith and morality, and so forth, resisting the temptation to insert his own views or try to start arguments. The film then proceeds to consider each question as exhaustively as possible, given the 78-minute running time, arranging the sound bites into logical order and even adding sub-points to the discussion of each question.

If that sounds too much like a term-paper outline, it must be admitted that Split plays at times like an elementary school primer aimed at an adult audience. (It should play extremely well for school audiences of all ages.) Historical and contextual asides are either animated or presented as dirtied up archival footage, with occasional jokey profanities lacing the otherwise serious tone of the narration. Clips from television shows are overlaid with animation, reducing the politicians to cartoon figures.

In an effort to gussy up the material, to keep it from being perceived as too dry and boring, Nyks may have overreached. The stylistic flourishes tend to distract rather than enhance. Still, this is a case where such excesses might be forgiven. The subject matter is important and deserves the widest audience possible, if nothing else to try and spark a dialogue. As the documentary makes clear, many people feel their voice doesn't matter anymore, that things will never change, that no one will ever change their mind.

The film plunges almost directly into the idea that the country can be divided into "red" (conservative) and "blue" (liberal) states, breaking down voting figures into every imaginable statistical permutation and then looking at the merits of rural vs. metropolitan, coasts vs. the heartland, and so on and so on, even citing one stat that supposedly shows the relationship of the wild hog population to that region's propensity for favoring one political party over another.

The interviewees include better-known figures such as Al Franken, Reverend Jesse Jackson and Tucker Carlson, but it feels like everyone was given equal weight. For example, one expert claims that the country's "founding fathers" were profoundly religious, while the next asserts that they were clearly atheists. Each feels that their viewpoint is supported by incontrovertible facts, and wonders why other people don't see the issues as they do.

Will the documentary change anyone's viewpoint? No, but it's not trying to change minds, it's a plea to try and start talking instead of simply flinging beliefs across an impassable chasm. In the post-screening Q&A, Nyks expressed his belief that some kind of huge historical turning point, such as the Great Depression or World War II, might be required to overturn the deeply-held beliefs that seem to inevitably keep people from reaching non-partisan agreements.

Until then, Split: A Divided America raises uncomfortable questions that remain unanswered in the current political climate.

The film will be screening at other festivals in the coming weeks. For details, check out the official web site.