|
|
 
|
|
Author
|
Topic: SICKO
|
Gerard S. Cohen
Jedi Master Film Handler
Posts: 975
From: Forest Hills, NY, USA
Registered: Sep 2001
|
posted 06-29-2007 09:27 PM
Michael Moore's SICKO is a convincing and entertaining advocacy film about health care in the USA and abroad. It is cleverly structured to reveal the weaknesses in the present system in the US, and how they impact people with and without private health care, and compares that system to the strengths of universal national health care in Canada, the U.K., France and Cuba.
Moore begins with some patients severly hurt by the injustices he finds, then switches to people within the healthcare system who recant the responsible parts they played
from within the for-profit system of managed care and HMO's.
While some of the horrific examples resulted in unnecessary deaths, and there are many moments that elicit tears from the viewer, the film is lightened throughout with ironic situational humor. Moore cleverly anticipates all the cliche arguments against universal free healthcare that have prevented American legislators, medical professionals and the voters from changing the present system, and demolishes them with expressionistic visuals and interviews. While Moore appears less onscreen in this film than in his earlier ones, he still wears his green jacket and baseball cap, and cannot resist an occasional clip showing G.W.Bush looking like a shmuck, when it advances his argument.
Moore's method of advancing his argument varies from pinpricks of satire to plunging the dagger and then twisting it,
as in his reductio ad absurdum of his Cuban visit.
The film also explores the theme of democracy as meaning power to the people, and the use of fear, economics and insecurity by those in power to maintain it and the means of acquiring wealth. Thus Moore appears to be expanding his focus of sociological criticism, the way Martin Luther King did when he went from attacking racial injustice to economic, political and warfare oppression in his final days of life.
Since I have been working in the healthcare field for the past decade, as office manager and billing secretary for my wife's pediatric practice, and see the system's faults also as a patient and as a caregiver for my handicapped sister, I note several points lacking from this film:
First, those fortunate to have health insurance in the U.S. pay for it very heavily from every paycheck, which makes denial of service really theft of service, in my mind. Personally, the cost of my insurance is discounted by the very large civil service group to which I belong, plus my labor union, but many do not have such advantages.
Second, members of Congress and the Executive get free medical and hospital care, some for life, yet deny the same to their constituents.
Third, that the availability of insured health care varies geographically. In New York City, for example, no hospital may turn away a patient for emergency care for inability to pay. And the New York State Medicaid system works well now, and provides care (including free immunizations) for children not covered by or ineligible for private insurance.
The best way for advocates to push for universal care, it seems to me, would be to strive to include ALL children in a national plan to cover their medical, dental and hospital needs and then to gradually expand coverage to adults.
Seen at the Kew Gardens Cinema, Screen 5, 06/29/07 by 40 adults. Good image and sound.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dustin Mitchell
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1865
From: Mondovi, WI, USA
Registered: Mar 2000
|
posted 06-30-2007 01:54 AM
My wife would have a few things to tell you about the Canadian healthcare system, having been a cancer patient there for several years before she moved there. A few fun facts:
-When she moved from her mothers house to London, Ontario she was not able to find a general practitioner. The ONLY doctors in London, a city of 500,000 people, who were accepting new patients were pyschiatrists. The waiting list for general practicioners was 5,000 people long. Because of this she had to drive 2 hours every month to see her family doctor in her hometown so she could get her pain perscriptions renewed.
-When was finally able to get her hysterectomy scheduled (ovarian cancer) she had to wait a year-yes, a year-to have it done. There was even more waiting before that, but that had more to do with grossly incompetent doctors and not the system itself. When it was finally done, however, it wasn't even done properly. The Gynacological Surgeon who performed the hysterectomy was 'uncertain' if he had completely removed all the endometriosis in her abdomen. The hospital where the surgery was performed did not have a general surgeon so they weren't able to investigate the intestinal area for endometriosis. If they had tried to get operating rights at a hospital where there was a general surgeon to do that she would have had to have waited 2 years.
-So this past week she had lapriscopic surgery performed in Milwaukee which removed all the endometriosis that had not been removed in Canada. The surgery was performed one month after seeing the specialist and determining what the problem was.
This isn't exactly isolated either. I was listening to a CBC program a few months back on public radio about the severe doctor shortage in Canada. The expert guest on the program made the statement that even if 20,000 doctors could be graduated from medical schools in Ontario this year it would not solve the problem.
On more little anecdote before I end this message-in her hometown an elderly neighbor was determined to need hip surgery. Her surgery was scheduled for, wait for it, 3 YEARS later. She of course fell a few months later and died.
The American healthcare system is far from perfect. I have pretty good insurance but even then have a hard time making my co-payments. I don't need to wait hours in clinic waiting rooms or years for surgeries, however, and for that I'm grateful.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stephen Furley
Film God
Posts: 3059
From: Coulsdon, Croydon, England
Registered: May 2002
|
posted 06-30-2007 03:30 AM
quote:
I just want to say that I don't have any respect for Michael Moore, because his films are promoted and perceived (by many) as documentaries, when in fact they're biased opinion pieces. [QUOTE]
They are documentaries. They present chosen facts in a way to promote Moore's chosen viewpoint, but they are not works of fiction, like 'Superman', for example. Many documentaries present, and promote, a particular viewpoint. The political left has long used film to promote its views and aspirations, for example the Russian 'Agit-prop' trains, and the co-operative movment it Britain, which was a major producer of documentary films. The political right does not seem to have used film to the same extent.
quote: Mike Blakesley
I haven't ever seen this movie, nor his previous one, but I don't want to, because I like to stick to the facts in this kind of thing. I agree the health-care system is in serious need of some kind of revamping.
You seem to be saying that you don't like a film which only puts forward one point of view, and you don't want to watch a film if that point of view is different to your own. Would you watch a film which promoted a point of view which was broadly similar to your own, or only one which put forward both, or all possible, points of view? Why would a film which promotes a point of view different to your own be less worth watching than one that you agree with? Watching a film that you disagree with may cause you to change your mind; watching one that you do agree with will not, therefore, if anything, watching one that you disagree with may be more important. This applies whatever your point of view happens to be, it's not promoting one side, or the other. Is every documentary you agree with good, and every one you disagree with bad? I think that 'Triumph des Willens' was a good film; that certainly doesn't mean that I agree with the nazis.
'Sicko' may be a good or a bad film, that is a matter of opinion, and since I haven't seen it I can have no veiw on the matter at present.
[QUOTE=Lyle Romer] . Another film-maker could very easily make a documentary that shows how poor the universal health care system is in Canada, the UK and Cuba and how great the American system is.
Of course they could, and are welcome to do so. If they do, as somebody did with a film oposing the view put forward on Moore's last film, then I would recommend watching both.
Moore believes that there are things about his country which are not good, as will be the case with any country. His aim is to bring about change to those things which he believes are wrong; I see nothing wrong with that. I do not agree with some of the things Moore does; for example his behavior at the Republican convention, where he was present as a journalist, to report on the proceedings; I believe the way he spoke out, and made gestures there was quite wrong. Agian, it's not a political thing, the same rules should apply to all sides.
Putting forward a point of view different to your own is not a bad thing; putting forward any point of view in certain ways may be. Whether Moore's methods of presentation are good or bad is a matter of opinion; I think there is both good and bad about him.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chris Slycord
Film God
Posts: 2986
From: 퍼항시, 경상푹도, South Korea
Registered: Mar 2007
|
posted 06-30-2007 04:01 AM
quote:
They are documentaries. They present chosen facts in a way to promote Moore's chosen viewpoint, but they are not works of fiction, like 'Superman', for example.
Guess you hadn't read about the fact that Bowling for Columbine (you know, the one that won the Best Documentary Oscar) had audio from different sections of a speech and sometimes from 2 different speeches altogether combined into one audio sound.
So, while it's a documentary in the sense that he clearly took only words that were actually said; it's not a documentary in the sense that he created speech that never occurred.
Hell, when he was interviewed on CNN a while back about his book "Stupid White Men" he was asked about the inaccuracies in the book. His response? "You know, look, this is a book of political humor. ... How can there be inaccuracy in comedy?"
So in the end, I just can't trust the guy. Why should I pay to get a book from him or pay to see his movie (or even "pay" my time since I can see it for free) when he doesn't even take his work seriously enough to even be accurate?
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lyle Romer
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1400
From: Davie, FL, USA
Registered: May 2002
|
posted 06-30-2007 06:19 AM
quote: Cameron Glendinning
What does interest me is the fact that left wing information (humanist) now costs money where right wing (facist) info is free to all.
I can not let this commment go without a response. Apparently you have never heard of NPR (National Public Radio). This is a publicly financed and FREE network which is very left wing. Additionally, the vast majority of members of the media (including news anchors and reporters) are registered democrats (or the "non-facists" in your quote).
quote: Cameron Glendinning
Its a well known fact around the world and Americans might be very surprised how much better off Canada, UK, Canada, Cuba and Australia really are.
Fact is a word thrown around very loosly. I know that the Canadian health care system has a lot of problems and that many weathly Canadians end up coming to the US to get medical care. Also, the life expectancy stats thrown around to say how bad our health care system is also include murders (which have nothing to do with health care). Additionally, Americans have a tendancy towards obesity and unhealthy eating habits (which also have nothing to do with health care) which affect life expectancy negatively as well.
quote: Stephen Furley
Of course they could, and are welcome to do so. If they do, as somebody did with a film oposing the view put forward on Moore's last film, then I would recommend watching both.
The problem is that Moore's "documentaries" are put forth in the media as a great argument for his cause (whatever that cause happens to be) and are a must-see for all. The rebuttal documentaries are presented as some right-wing cook that just can't take the truth put together a video and stuck it on the internet.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cameron Glendinning
Jedi Master Film Handler
Posts: 845
From: West Ryde, Sydney, NSW Australia
Registered: Dec 2005
|
posted 06-30-2007 07:08 PM
Very interesting point Bobby re drug company and their advertising budgets.
quote: Tristan Lane
Lyle, Cameron,
Take the debate elsewhere. You CAN let comments go without response.
Sorry Tristram and Lyle no offence ment, no need for debate, I would like to say that my comments re left and right wings is poorly written, I have simplely taken it to the lunatic fringe absolute extreme ends of the political spectrum. Most people/ polititions sit firmly in the middle with leanings one way or the other, enjoying the benifits of both political worlds. Just because you relate to left wing politics doesnt make a person a union loving commie, nor does relating to right wing make those people a facist! I'm very sorry that I did not make that very clear in the earlier post!
I have found myself occasionally working for the man Micheal Moore claims as his leading influence" John Pilger " an Australian who mostly works in London, he has made close to 50 documentry films since the 1960's with outstanding levels of jouralistic integraty. The difference between them is chalk and cheese! To quote John Pilger on Micheal Moore. " He is an entertainer, I am a Journalist". hence my infotainment quote before, A term I first heard whilst working in the camera department of a TV station 20 years ago in reference to the effect ratings and advertising was having to way news was being being produced.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
|
Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2
The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion
and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.
|
Home
Topic Closed
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic