Analyze

It is made and sustained through interviews of people who were there in the powr plant during the event, the surrounding citizens in the villages, Americans who came to intervene on their citizens, and people in Japan's government. Film footage is used to support the argument. The scientific information that is provided for support in the film was saying the levels of radiation around the plant as the situation became better and worse, the structure of the power plant (briefly), how to stop a nuclear meltdown.

The narritive is given a semi action film feeling. The documentary not only follows the events throghout the catastrophe, but also follows the story of a man whom lost a majority of his family from the natural disaster as well. His story acts as a binding agent, giving the story a better flow and emotional connection.

This film is designed to have an emotional appeal. Very little scientific evidance is provided, and most of what we see are images and naratives about the effects of ebola from the public's perspective. Powerful images and stories, such as the death of a pregnant women on the side of the road, the closing of hospitals, and the turning away of patients are predominantly displayed. Much of this movie is told from the perspective of a student of the University of Wisconsin, and there was a large amount of dialouge about how he tried to get his family out of the effected zone. The only notable statistics given in the film was at the end, when the number of effected and the number of deaths were compared. 

The argument is made using footage from the events occurring in Monrovia during the Ebola outbreak and subsequent months, which allows for the audience to truly understand the difficulties and horrors caused by disease. The film did not include much scientific data on the virus, only stating that 11,000 people had died and over twice that many had contracted the virus. Due to the public awareness of the Ebola epidemic, as it occurred so recently, and the graphic footage included, the film invokes feelings of horror and sadness for the many who couldn’t be helped.

The narrative in this film is an emotional one, rather than a scientific one. For the most part, scientific knowledge is common, as the outbreak occurred recently. The only scientific information given was at the end where the statistics of how many deaths occurred in Liberia are given as well as the amount of people who contracted the disease. The primary appeal of this film is that it plays into people's emotions. The narrator is a student at the University of Wisconsin, who discusses his struggle with getting his family to the United States and out of the infected areas. Through graphic footage, as well as this story and narratives from people within the community, we are given an emotional framework with which to empathize. 

This film appeals to the viewers from an emotional aspect. The documentary follows a family and is told from the father's perspective, a student from Wisconsin. It shows a first person experience of what it was like to deal with this situation and the climate and magnitude of the situation in Liberia. The documentary isn't scientific or statistics heavy. Rather it has testimony from natives of the area and footage of bodies and the lack of hospital effectiveness and government protocol. The stories and narratives from locals is what really captures the attention of viewers and accurately portrays the hardships faced. There were a few parts at the end where numbers of those infected were mentioned, yet the the narrator's account of what occurred as well as other local's stories is what really drives home the point of anguish and despair seen during those hard times in Africa. 

The argument is sustained by some big number facts but mostly through interviews with people on the ground and involved in the community of central Liberia.

                Very little scientific information is provided by the film. The main goal of the film is to highlight the social aspects of the disease.

                The film appeals emotionally, starting with following the personal story of the Urey family that becomes divided between the US and Liberia. Throughout the film, there is much appeal to the viewer’s emotion when presenting the difficulties and challenges in this case, such as law enforcement shooting the legs of a boy during civil unrest.

The narrative is maintained through both very real, detailed descriptions of actions taken for both specific cases and the handling of large groups of patients. It also goes into some lesser known events of 9/11, such as the triage camps being destroyed by the collaspe of the towers and how the situation evolved throughout the two crashes and collaspes that day. It appeals to the emotion of the viewer in many ways. It discusses the incrediable physical and psychological damage that the victims sustained during the disaster. It then handled the emotional trauma and determination that the first responders and doctors had to deal with when they saw their gore and chaos of their city all around them while needing to maintain their professionality and ability to care for their pateints. It also later in the film talked about the first responders who lost their lives in their dedication to save others, with direct emotional appeal through the portayal of one first responder who lost a long time friend becoming choked up remembering his fallen friend once again.

The first hand interviews from first responders are compiled in a way that goes through the stories of what heppened, how health information was released and changed. The first repsonder stories are intermixed with testimonies from the EPA workers, showing differences in the science that was found and the press releases disclosing the health concerns. Many tear up upon realizing how their health will hurt their families. The doctors in the area caught onto the trends in poor health and started a monitoring program to make sure everyone got the medical screening and help they needed. The lives of all of the first responders and their families were changed drastically from their public service.

First responders share their experiences, how they responded, how they realized there weren't going to be many survivors. Many of them suffered from health issues afterwards. The air was very toxic and led to cancers. It makes you wonder how other safety information is given to first responders. They weren't even doing a rescue mission at the point that asbestos was being hidden in reports, so their lives should not have been risked like that for simply cleaning up rubble. Was it worth it for them to shovel the debris and pull out parts of bodies at that point, while putting their well being and lives at risk? If they had waited a few months for the dust to settle and be cleaned up, would that have saved many of the first responders? Offices in the area and houses nearby weren't inspected until even later. Schools opened as a sign of American strength led to asthma, bronchitis, etc. Are those lives worth the public image?