Fredrick Wiseman has intervened in this film with hand-held camera shooting style which, reveals both of himself and the camera's presence. In the film, Wiseman is both the observer and one of the inmates in the hosipital. He is observing the happenings in hosipital while experiencing the inmates' life through the camera.
And with the hand-held camera style, he's forcing(or guilding) the audiences to look at those specific inmates' daily images that he wants them to focus. Wiseman is involving in the whole event and observing how the patients are being treated by the hosipital workers via his camera. The daily life happenings between the patients and hosipital workers are showing the audiences how patients are losing their basic human rights due to their illness. The patients' daily activities are restricted and they have to follow the instructions from the hosipital workers. Their free-will is controlled and some of them are still not knowing it. Instead of telling the audiences what Wiseman's mind is thinking, he is showing tons of images of how the patients are treated badly by the hosipital workers...with the hand-held shots, the inhumane environment and atmosphere of that hosipital are revealed.
What's more, a lot of discussions have been raised to argue if Wiseman is destroying the patients' human rights in this film. It's such a paradoxical situation since this film does showing the audiences the restricted life of mentally ill patients and how unfair they are treated by those hosipital workers; which, raises a lot of social concerns towards the patients. But in another hand, Wiseman is bringing the audiences to the patients' very priavte life which, the patients are not even realizing a "NO" could be an answer for his shooting...Is he making a move that harms the patients? Is he labelling the ones whose in a weaker social position? Are there any footages of the patients' life that he didn't show?
And with the hand-held camera style, he's forcing(or guilding) the audiences to look at those specific inmates' daily images that he wants them to focus. Wiseman is involving in the whole event and observing how the patients are being treated by the hosipital workers via his camera. The daily life happenings between the patients and hosipital workers are showing the audiences how patients are losing their basic human rights due to their illness. The patients' daily activities are restricted and they have to follow the instructions from the hosipital workers. Their free-will is controlled and some of them are still not knowing it. Instead of telling the audiences what Wiseman's mind is thinking, he is showing tons of images of how the patients are treated badly by the hosipital workers...with the hand-held shots, the inhumane environment and atmosphere of that hosipital are revealed.
What's more, a lot of discussions have been raised to argue if Wiseman is destroying the patients' human rights in this film. It's such a paradoxical situation since this film does showing the audiences the restricted life of mentally ill patients and how unfair they are treated by those hosipital workers; which, raises a lot of social concerns towards the patients. But in another hand, Wiseman is bringing the audiences to the patients' very priavte life which, the patients are not even realizing a "NO" could be an answer for his shooting...Is he making a move that harms the patients? Is he labelling the ones whose in a weaker social position? Are there any footages of the patients' life that he didn't show?
Titicut Follies's giving the audiences a visual experience(/tour) to explore and understand the patients' life in the hosipital. The majority of this film is showing the private life of how the patients are treated inhumanely and the director is guilding the audiences experiences in this visual tour. Apart from following Wiseman's intervention in this event, audiences should really keep their mind calm and critical while watching a film with such a controversial topic...
