The other day, I went to see the documentary "The Waiting Room" on an assignment for my journalism class.
Ironically enough, I spent about half an hour waiting around in another kind of waiting room - the lobby. Not only was the line simply moving slowly, but once I started getting close to the register... The till broke down. Eventually she started taking the people who had debit, so I was able to get in, but I'm not sure exactly what happened after that. Regardless, I ended up getting into the theatre about fifteen minutes late - thankfully they held off starting the movie.
Educationally, I thought the documentary was interesting and thought-provoking, though a little lacking in detail.
Being someone that doesn't know very much about health care systems (particularely the American one), it would have been nice to have had a little more information provided. Not saying that I would have liked a big, boring monologue describing it, but maybe just some woven in facts, statistics, comparisons to other states, and such would have been nice - just to give me a better idea of what was happening on a larger scale.
I think the most interesting and shocking thing I learned was with the man who had bone spurs. His wages were far, far below minimum wage, his daughter and grandchild was living with him, and he had his health problems.
What probably struck me hardest was not just the fact that he had to pay for his consultation there - which would be "free" here in Manitoba - but that he went to the hospital, waited all that time, only to find out that they couldn't do anything for his bone spurs but give him pain killers.
Also the fact that the coverage the man could potentially receive was based on income was rather sad, knowing that the man likely did not have enough income for either of the proposed options.
I have to say, knowing that as long as I have my health card I can go to the doctor for a check-up is a great comfort to me.
Film-wise, I found that the documentary was put together well, considering the material.
I liked that everything was incredibly personal - none of the patients really seemed like they were being interviewed. Rather, it seemed like they were simply having a conversation. I found this to be a lot easier to connect to, in a way. It felt more real.
Also, by having a well-balanced focus on the nurse, the film was given a nice comedic relief. Not enough to be a mockery, but enough so that it wasn't just straight depressing.
On the downside, I found some of the structure to be a little confusing. For example, near the beginning of the movie, we were shown a few shots of a man who had hip problems. But then he just disappears from the movie. Same with the man who had a bullet stuck in him. I understand that the movie could not include so many entire stories, and that it was showing the range of people that are stuck in this waiting room, but I would have had a bit of comfort in even just having a shot of them finally getting to see a doctor or something.
I also found the final scene with the man who had bone spurs a little weird. There was one shot they had of him talking to the nurse. Other shots of him just standing there looking stressed were cut in between. I liked the effect of this, except for the fact that the conversation audio just continued as normal over-top of the shot changes. I found this distracting from the conversation, as I was busy realizing "wait, he isn't actually talking in this shot". In this way, I found that the story got a little lost in the art.
Overall, I found the film to be alright considering the somewhat dry (though always headline-making) subject manner. They had a good balance to the content of the film, and I enjoyed many of their artistic decisions - such as the music (or lack there of), the stories they chose to focus on, and even some of their obviously art-directed shots.
Some sources I used ;;
http://www.fraserinstitute.org/publicationdisplay.aspx?id=2147484001
http://lois-laws.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-6/page-4.html#docCont
No comments:
Post a Comment