Which type of narration, silent or active, is most effective? Why?
In my opinion, despite preferring such documentaries as SiCKO, Inside Job, Supersize Me, An Inconvenient Truth, Food, Inc. and Fahrenheit 9/11, as a whole, silent narration is the most effective for documentaries. While I appreciate the actively narrated documentaries and opinions of such filmmakers as Michael Moore and Al Gore, I believe that their opinions can, and often do overshadow the documentaries they create. In the case of Moore, for example, most of his well-known documentaries begin with him having some sort of opinion. In creating the idea for SiCKO, Moore likely had some sort of negative experience, whether it be first- or second-hand, which fuelled his desire to create a film pointing out the inadequacies of the American health care system. With an already biased opinion, Moore never strays from his beliefs throughout the film and in the end, chooses to edit the documentary in a certain way and include only certain facts in order to make it appear as if his beliefs are 100% factual. With this skewed view of a documented topic, it entirely depends on the viewer’s personal opinions whether they will like the biased documentary or not. Essentially, actively narrated films primarily present the viewer with the opinions of the filmmaker and the facts they use to support their beliefs, meaning that viewers are not given much of an opportunity to formulate their own opinions.
Comparatively, silently narrated films focus much more on visual images, as well as the words and emotions of the people documented in the film. Without a constant narration by the filmmaker, viewers are afforded the opportunity to watch the film’s characters and view them as they w...
... middle of paper ...
... is much more difficult for me to be able to relate to the lives of the people shown in My Flesh and Blood. Conversely, I have had numerous encounters with North American and African (South Africa and Malawi) health care systems, thus allowing me to better relate to the stories within SiCKO. Having observed health care processes and conditions that run from one of the best (Canada) to one of the least resourced and funded (Malawi), I am able to understand many of the flaws pointed out by Moore in his film, as well as possessing my own perspective of what I would consider to be a poor health care system. Additionally, as one who consistently enjoys debating various topics, I am given a much greater opportunity to do so through the film SiCKO compared to My Flesh and Blood, likely reflecting my stronger emotional attachment to Moore’s film and the effect it had on me.
Dr. Paul Farmer’s vocation is providing healthcare to those less fortunate. He medically treats the Haitians for TB. Paul devoted his whole life to helping the Haitians with their healthcare problems and living conditions. He gave them proper medicine and was able to do this through global fundraising and fighting the large pharmaceutical companies. But unfortunately, with this came sacrifice. Paul had to stay in Haiti for months at a time; he was unable to see his wife and kids. Because of this, his wife eventually left him. But Paul was so devoted in his work in Haiti it appeared he did not care about his personal life because Paul’s work was his life. He considered the people of Haiti, which were his patients, his family. He wasn’t paid for his work; money didn’t matter. All the medicine and food he got was paid from various fundraising efforts. Because of this, he still did not receive eno...
Lehman, Peter and Luhr, William. Thinking About Movies: Watching, Questioning, Enjoying. 2nd ed. Oxford: Blackwell, 2003.
Sicko is a 2007 documentary produced and directed by a well-known American filmmaker Michael Moore. The film investigates the United States healthcare system, focusing mainly on the pharmaceutical industry and health insurance. Michael Moore believes America’s health system is morally corrupt as he continuously argues the fact that the American medical system is aiming towards governmental funds rather than the rights of American citizens. Throughout Sicko, Moore claims that the U.S. should adopt a universal health care as he unfolds the deep flaws of the American healthcare industries and compares health care conditions to other countries. Moore supports his argument very effectively through the use of three rhetorical devices—pathos, ethos, and logos.
...ealth care. However, if capitalism is to remain in America, universal health care system may never happen since there will be innovation and competition between the private companies. Also, universal health care system may result in high taxes and long wait lines. Yet, Moore’s usage of rhetorical techniques appeals the positive aspects, such as extended health care and reduced medical costs, more than its negative aspects to the viewers. In fact, he uses emotionally affecting interviews to make them feel genuine sympathy towards the victims of America’s irrational health care system. At the same time, he presents logos that unveil the reality of greedy health care companies and uses ethos to backup his claims. As a result, Moore’s effective use of pathos, logos, and ethos eventually evokes urgency for universal health care within the audience by the end of the film.
The film can be seen to appeal for interest emotionally, the way of pathos appeals but then it occasionally showcases scenes that engages us or simply throw us into disbelief and maybe even irritate us. Multiple scenes in the documentary had provided some laughable moments or few chuckles that would help relax the tense atmosphere of the viewers, despite the serious matter in discussion. The best aspect of film is truly the disbelief factor; refer to the textbook long list preexisting condition that denied health insurance to many applicants, basically, the need of a master’s degree to apply for health insurance. That and considering the emotional scenes, makes Sicko a much more impressive and captivating documentary than that of its
Moore reestablishes his ethos by just having people tell their stories and not just himself merely saying what he believes. Additionally, the pathos and logos intertwined within in the stories told by the interviewees creates deep personal connections between the audience members and the story tellers themselves. The use of all three aspects of rhetoric renders the audience feeling that action on the subject is urgent. The audience no longer wants to feel like they need to make sure they go to the right hospital to get treatment but just the closest. They no longer want their country to be looked at by citizens of other countries as a burden to come to because they need special insurance just in case they are injured while they are here. Therefore, Moore has effectively changed the way the audience thinks about how healthcare is run in
A man accidentally cuts two fingers and he had to choose between one of the two fingers because the hospital told him he could only afford to buy for one finger,similar example are shown throughout the film to affect the audience’s emotions with tragic true stories. Old people are shown in the film being kicked out of hospitals because the hospitals know they can pay them, this shows the sick old people being helpless. A little girl dies in a story shown to the audience by Moore to show how bad the system is, the little girl gets sick and her health insurance company tells her mother that she couldn’t go to the closest hospital because it wasn’t covered by Kaiser and instead was forced by Kaiser insurance to go across town to an approved Kaiser hospital, this is a big emotional low in the film for the audience’s emotional, it makes the audience have empathy for the dead child.
Neill, Alex. “Empathy and (Film) Fiction.” Philosophy of film and motion pictures : an anthology. Ed. Noel Carrol and Jinhee Choi. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing, 2006. 247-259. Print.
Michael Moore depicts the American health care system as one that contains many flaws. He goes on to show different people who have not been able to afford the ridiculous sum of money to perform certain procedures. While scrutinizing the American health care system Michael ventures to Canada, France, Cuba and Great Britain in an attempt to compare health insurance and pharmaceuticals. The audience is invited to believe that America has the worst health care out of all five countries. Through this documentary film Moore suggests the causes for this predicament blaming the government for accepting bribes. Using the voices of different members of major insurers he is able to paint viewers a picture of the devastation people face. Moore uses unbalanced arguments and evidence to convincingly impose his biased opinion upon his audience. This is seen through a majority of Sicko. Moore positively portrays the health care systems of other countries, produces incorrect information and does not declare laws that have been put in place; he also uses editing techniques to show false images.
As an audience we are manipulated from the moment a film begins. In this essay I wish to explore how The Conversation’s use of sound design has directly controlled our perceptions and emotional responses as well as how it can change the meaning of the image. I would also like to discover how the soundtrack guides the audience’s attention with the use of diegetic and nondiegetic sounds.
Since the creation of films, their main goal was to appeal to mass audiences. However, once, the viewer looks past the appearance of films, the viewer realizes that the all-important purpose of films is to serve as a bridge connecting countries, cultures, and languages. This is because if you compare any two films that are from a foreign country or spoken in another language, there is the possibility of a connection between the two because of the fact that they have a universally understanding or interpretation. This is true for the French New Wave films; Contempt and Breathless directed by Jean-Luc Godard, and contemporary Indian films; Earth and Water directed by Deepa Mehta. All four films portray an individual’s role in society using sound and editing.
I interacted with more people than I could count - all the while astounded by how many clinics were needed to give the underprivileged basic medical needs. This required participation in interviews on patient history and diagnostic discussions with supervising physicians. Daily, I saw the eyes of the little boy in young patients; I was reminded that it was possible to make a difference in these other countries. I had another opportunity that I did not with the little boy: I was able to form relationships with many of the terminally ill patients while serving tea and talking in hopes of boosting
Today, most movie goers categorize ‘silent films’ into one genre and discard the stark differences that make Arrival of a Train at La Ciotat, The Great Train Robbery, and Broken Blossoms vastly dissimilar. In my opinion, these films clearly illustrate the evolution from silent film projection on a cafe wall to the birth of the hollywood that we know today. The profound contrast is most apparent in their stories, their performances, and the emotional response each film invokes. Collectively these films provide viewers with a clear perspective on how early film progressed from silent stills into what we call today, The Classical hollywood “silent” film era.
Each featured film uses certain styles and techniques to bring forward a certain feeling of emotion. Featured films either have visible or invisible dialogue; known as either diegetic or non-diegetic. The Film, Phantom of The Opera, brought forward this realization, the uniqueness about the
Sound is important in film and how it is used to drive a narrative progression. I will analyse how and why in this essay. Covering the history of sound in films and the essential component it plays in the film industry.