The Hospital

1971 US
Dir: Arthur Hiller
Str: George C. Scott, Diana Rigg, Barnard Hughes

I got egregious treatement when I went to the hospital
recently.
Recently, I went to the hospital for the first time in ages because my throat swelled. Then, I noticed many systems had changed since the last time when I had been to the hospital long long ago. I couldn't even figure out what I should do next. After waiting three hours, the only thing the doctor in charge did to me was one touch to my throat. Then, he wrote a paper for me, and handed it to me without saying anything. So I asked him what I should do with that paper, and his answer was I should bring it to a certain counter to get a prescription. Obeying his instruction, I searched for the counter I should go, but I couldn't figure out which counter was the right one, because I couldn't understand the new system. Finally, I found it, but all the persons inside the counter were either gazing at a computer display or waiting for some document to be printed out from a printer. So I asked one of them about what I should do with the paper, his answer was I should put it into the box which had no label designating what it is. Then, I waited and waited, and finally my name was called, and got a prescription, again without any instruction. At this point, my patience was completely gone and sheer anger climbed up from the inside of my body, and I shouted and shouted and shouted with my eyes bugging out, "what kind of hospital are you running here!" being completely oblivious of the fact my throat was swollen.
The relationship between a doctor and his patient can't be
told in usual terms of human relationships.
I presume this is one of the adverse consequences of medical reformation in Japan. Prior to it, even general hospitals had more care about patients. But, as a result of this reformation, I think general hospitals seem to have become one of those business companies whose sole purpose is to secure maximum profit. Though I don't know much about American medical systems, I think this might be one example of backfired results of the maladjusted imitations of American systems in Japan. Before that, we had never got any prescription in hospitals because medicine had been delivered in the inside of hospitals. Doctors had had more care to his patients. Everything was gone. As you can see in the movies like The Doctor, the relationship between a doctor and his patient can't be told in usual terms of human relationships, for such a situation that a patient must rely upon his doctor would allow the doctor to gain domination over the patient if he tried to. If a doctor wanted to abuse his power over his patients, he surely could do it. And, the feeling of powerlessness in patients' part would all the more increase if they were treated like commodities. This very feeling I felt when I went to the hospital recently.
The movie The Hospital handles one big problem of general
hospitals.
The movie The Hospital depicts the problem of general hospitals very well, though the subject of this movie is not the one concerning the problems arising from the relationship between a dominant doctor or hospital and a helpless patient like the movie The Doctor. But, anyway, The Hospital is handling one big problematic aspect of general hospitals; that is, specializing and subdividing the capabilities of hospital functions too much to such an extent that no one can handle a patient as a whole entity and a person having their own personality. Rather fragmentation might be the right word for expressing it. Also, the movie depicts identity crises of a doctor whose confidence is constantly being endangered by the malpractice of the hospital he belongs to. But, in this review, I will drop this aspect because there are many other movies handling identity crises and there will be ample opportunity to describe it in other reviews, though it should be added that the performance of George C. Scott who plays the doctor is unworldly powerful.
This rather crazy story is unfolded in the next way.
The story has George C. Scott as a chief doctor in a general hospital. He has his own problems as well as the problems with regard to the incompetence of hospital staffs. For example, a young intern practices certain activities with a nurse on a hospital bed that he thinks happens to be vacant, and, next morning, he is found dead because a nurse thought there had to be a patient on the bed without knowing that particular patient had died and been brought into a hospital morgue and, instead, occupied by that amoral intern, and treated the intern as the patient who was no longer there, and shoot some injection that was fatal to him. And list goes on. Meantime, a patient (played by Barnard Hughes) is sent to the hospital, who seems to be in coma, being attended by his daughter (played by Diana Rigg). Thereafter, several accidents happen. Doctors and nurses die one after another ostensibly by the malpractice of incompetent hospital staffs. The chief doctor George C. Scott gets angry at their incompetence, and his anger seems to be all the more amplified by his own inability to handle his own matters properly, which means, by then, his family has been completely dissolved, and he has been on the verge of nervous breakdown. He is even thinking of commiting suicide by shooting a poison to himself. But somehow he recovers his confidence by sleeping with the daughter of that comatose patient. Finally, he finds out all those doctors and nurses including the intern were murdered by that patient (Barnard Hughes) who thought a patient who he was considering was the reincarnation of the God himself had been murdered by the malpractice of the hospital, and had decided to revenge his death. As he, himself, had been a doctor, he could set the stage for the murders in such a way as ostensibly seen as if the deficiencies in the systems of the hospital caused their death. Though once Scott thinks he should run away from this problematic hospital with the daughter and the father, he reconsiders and decides to stay at the hospital, because the hospital is about to crumble down by the resignation of the director who has been fed up with his job that demand him to do hard tasks of reconciling lobbyist activities with the demand of higher authorities, and, therefore, someone must assume responsibility in his place.
The Hospital is exaggerating the negative aspects of general
hospitals too much. But, by that, you can easily grasp the
problems general hospitals have.
What a crazy story! Surely, this movie is exaggerating the negative aspects of general hospitals too much in the same way as the movie Network exaggerates the negative aspects of TV media too much. But, I presume both movies have some truth in a respective area and has succeeded in making the aspects easy to see to viewers by extremely magnifying what, otherwise, is very difficult to grasp, though there is a difference between these two movies in that, while Network is meant to be a serious drama, The Hospital is meant to be rather a black comedy also having the element of a murder mystery. Briefly saying, The Hospital's main focus resides in pointing out the problems of general hospitals through a comical approach and the pretense of being a murder mystery, which might not be so appropriate for handling such a serious matter. But, anyway, caricaturing serious matters is one traditional way of criticism, and probably that is the main objective of this movie. Thus, what is criticized here is the fact that general hospitals has been subdivided into too many secluded sections both in the meaning of the specialization with regard to technical aspects where each individual organ is handled in a specialized section or by a specialized doctor solely dedicated to that particular organ, and in the meaning of the bureaucratic specialization with regard to the handling of each individual patient as a living soul. If there still remained some elements by which patients were to be handled as an integral whole, the problems wouldn't be so serious. But if there remained only each subdivided element without any higher organization connecting all these fragmented particles, that would be totally opposite to the notion of human health that requires holistic approach.
Human body should not be handled as the congregation of
each indivisual element, but should be handled from the
more holistic view point.
As for the former aspect, it has been pointed out by many eminent researchers of human health that human body shouldn't be considered to be the mere congregation of individual body parts and organs, but should be considered from more holistic view. As a certain physiologist said (I forget who he was), if a certain individual organ worked perfectly without any interference from higher level organization, it wouldn't be healthy at all in terms of a whole body, and certainly cause the destruction of delicately balanced equilibrium, which would eventually lead the whole body into the state of illness. In short, an organ being perfectly functioning isn't necessary desirable for the health of an entire body. As for another example of the influence of an individual-element-oriented thought, I can come up with the next example. We are usually thinking fever is not a good symptom for human body. But actually fever is a normal reaction of human body responding to undesirable influences from the outside. If, in such cases, there were no reaction at all, it would mean the system that is supposed to protect the human body from the outside is not functioning and only such state is dead. Therefore, just concentrating on the effort to cool down the fever is rather preposterous, for cutting off one element from a whole situation is not adequate as far as human health is concerned. The most important aspect shown here is, such a thing like human health must be considered in the terms of gestalt. Not individual functions, but the functions controlling each individual function to form a whole balanced system must be prioritized in considering human health care. Therefore, too much subdivision of hospital capabilities according to the function of each individual organ is detrimental to the health of patients as a whole. The Hospital depicts this point ironically by showing a person who, for his own vicious purpose, takes the advantage of the gaps of this too much specialized systems of general hospitals, knowing the fact no one would handle a patient as an entire person, and therefore no one would know exactly what state a patient would be in if he placed a person in such a marginal state as is difficult to determine the area where the case should be handled or no one would know what treatment other doctors and nurses had done to him before, and, thus easily succeeds in accomplishing his intention of committing crimes without risking the possibility of getting caught red-handed.
By the bureaucratic specialization with regard to the
treatment of patients, paitients will surely feel they are
treated like a commodity.
As for the latter aspect; that is, the bureaucratic specialization of the interfaces dealing with patients, it's obvious that it causes patients great anxiety as I said in the first paragraph. Because, in this way, patients will surely feel they are treated like an object or rather like a commodity. This is what I felt when I went to the hospital recently. The relatively recent movie The Doctor depicts this aspect very well, though The Hospital doesn't seem to place much stress on this aspect, for, firstly, the view point of The Hospital never resides in a patient view point that is absolutely necessary for illustrating the powerlessness in the part of patients (In the case of the movie The Doctor, the view point is placed on a patient side in spite of the title, for it depicts the case a doctor suddenly is placed into the situation of a helpless patient), and secondly, as the inefficiencies of doctors and nurses are shown rather comically as a method of caricaturing the intrinsic problems of general hospitals, one can't feel bureaucratic efficiencies here, which might be one element of having patients think they are powerless if this aspect alone was solely stressed. Regarding human health care, heavy reliance upon this bureaucratic efficiencies might become completely inefficient if all other aspects were ignored. Because, human health care handles human beings that have capability of responding to the treatment they've got, not commodities.
What a powerful actor George C. Scott is!
By the way, there is one another thing I want to say about this movie. That is the powerful performance of George C. Scott who is one of my most favorite American actors. Ostensibly, he looks just another ordinary middle aged actor. But, actually, he is a dynamite. In every movie he appears, he seems to be acting with his maximum power he can muster. Without his presence, The Hospital would have been a completely different movie, better or worse. For example, it might have been a more light comedy had it not been for his explosive performance. This is his power, and I admire this strength, even if it might ruin the original intention of the movie he appears. I presume, among recent actors, there are very few who has this strength that might even ruin the original scheme of a given picture single-handedly. Recent actors may have either dirtiness or freshness or whatever characteristics a given movie's scheme requires him. But, George C. Scott can ignores and even destroys this scheme. Probably, his denial of receiving Oscar with the movie Patton is the result of his characteristics. I think, in his case, this denial of Oscar is not the act aiming for reputation as some reviewers have said about his act, but his manifestation saying he will never accept what he thinks is not appropriate for his life. I'm not saying Oscar is worthless. I am saying even Oscar should be rejected insofar as it be considered to be inappropriate for one's life, for receiving something could mean that the person receiving it must accept the logic of the side giving it at least psychologically, and Scott was too strong to accept it. And, by this very power, he can make movies turn into the ones having the unique tinge other actors could have never given, both in good and bad meanings.
The Hospital is an unsual movie concocting various aspects, and
offering us some interesting view points.
Finally, as a conclusion, I would like to say the next thing. That is, as this movie has many different aspects concocted such as social aspects with regard to running a general hospital, a serious personal drama given by the stunning performance of George C. Scott, black comedy elements, and even an element of a murder mystery, it's rather difficult to grasp the overall tone of this movie. Even such promiscuous concoction of different elements could have made the movie totally pointless and inconsistent one. But, anyway, in my opinion, in all these aspects, this movie comes up with rather excellent and unusual ones. First of all, there are not so many movies that are handling the inside of a general hospital like this movie. Though I think the movie couldn't be everybody's favorite, it's clear that the movie is unusual and offering viewers some interesting view points.

Go Back to Movie Reviews Main Page