As you're preparing to write, watch the network coverage of election results and focus your ideas on some or all of the following:

how properties of cinema/TV (see below) contribute to what the election "movie" means:

   cinematography, editing, lighting, sound, mise-en-scene (i.e., literally what is on screen)

how this "movie" may reflect or relate to other movies and conditions we've observed this semester:

   e.g., "Medium Cool," "Conventioneers," "W.," the second presidential debate, John Patterson's article in the Guardian (on relation between movie narratives and political campaign narratives), the state of the economy (as it affects not just critics but virtually everyone), and the ongoing war between old media (including movie theaters and TV networks!) and new media (including web sites and blogs, give or take microcinemas)

ways to be lively and accessible to your fickle readers (who will already be inundated with election reportage by tomorrow morning!):

   e.g., humor, descriptive detail, opinion (thumb pointing on "movie" and/or candidates!), universality (what can everyone watching relate to, if anything?)

how the particular corporate advertisements(!)--banking? auto industry? movies(!)?--might help convey the semi-secret *narrative* of the election results (and what kind of story is being told here anyway? triumph? tragedy? self-congratulation? or...HOPE?)

how this "movie" might be classified as a genre:

   suspense thriller? screwball comedy? horror flick? frivolous entertainment?

how the network's/newscasters' opinions can be determined despite required attempts to be "objective" and "fair and balanced"