Review of Waiting for "Superman" (2010) by Rafael T — 02 Jul 2011

The good documentary will chronicle the events which comprise an important issue, explaining exactly what is happening and outlining its significance. The excellent documentary will not only accomplish those goals but determine how the events transpired and suggest how the issue might be resolved. Due to the visual medium, it does not hurt to grab the audienceâ(TM)s attention with a hint of humour or a drop of drama.

Two films - Waiting for Superman and The Inside Job - entertain and inform viewers. While both raise interesting questions, only one provides answers and proposes the next steps to be taken. The formerâ(TM)s report on public education brought to light some pertinent problems within public education but the latterâ(TM)s in-depth investigation of the global financial crisis that achieved greater success. Society must remedy these difficulties within the education and financial systems in order to move forward in the twenty-first century, a proposition easier said than done.

It is true that North Americaâ(TM)s public education system is troubled. Large school boards and teacher unions have led to certain inefficiencies throughout the system and not all schools are performing optimally. However, there remain a number of success stories in both Canada and the United States.

The filmâ(TM)s title, Waiting for Superman, stems from a quote by Geoffrey Canada explaining his disappointment as a child when he first learned that Superman did not exist. Since Superman was a fictitious character, Canada wondered frequently about who would save him and his family. The film follows several families as they try to help their children, culminating in a final montage as the students attend lotteries to determine whether they can enroll in chart schools.

Statistics show that university attendance is based more and more on family finances, a gap between rich and poor that widened from 2007 to 2009 as the sub-prime mortgage bubble collapsed, nearly bringing down several major financial institutions and destroying billions of dollars in wealth. The U.S. unemployment rate now stands at 9.6% and the country faces a massive deficit. The Inside Job alleges that this meltdown occurred because of increased fraternity between the world of finance and the Federal Government. Goldman Sachs would lobby for financial deregulation, assume a number of high-risk investments which would sour, and subsequently ask for a bailout package, which would be distributed as bonuses to executives.

The documentaryâ(TM)s interviews were well-researched, clearly explaining an issue which could have been dry and complicated. Academics and economists appeared out of their league, outright incompetent, or lacking any sort of a moral centre. An example which illustrates this ignorance and arrogance would be the interview clips with Frederic Mishkin, a former governor of the Federal Reserve System. Mishkin was paid $200,000 by Icelandâ(TM)s Chamber of Commerce to write a report titled Stability in Iceland. Not only did he refuse to disclose any conflict of interest but when Iceland completely imploded within a year of publication, he renamed the report Instability in Iceland on his curriculum vitae. When pressed by the interview, Mishkin blamed the discrepancies on typographical errors.

Like The Passionate Eyeâ(TM)s documentary about Brooksley Born and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, The Inside Job highlights the words of someone who attempted to warn that you cannot create money without risk. Born wanted to control derivatives only to have her reputation destroyed by U.S. Treasury officials who further deregulated the securities. Like Born, I.M.F. Economist Raghuram G. Rajan was shouted down as a Luddite by Alan Greenspan. Hinsight is easy enough to provide; the financial crisis could have been prevented has dozens of individuals with foresight been acknowledged.

The Inside Job also addresses the renewed push towards more financial deregulation, warning that another great disaster may be around the corner. Canadians should remain thankful to Paul Martin for his policies in the late 1990s which saved Canada from a collapse similar to what was experienced by the neighbour to the south.

In finance, education, healthcare, or any other field, one can only hope that elected officials take the time to carefully analyze issues, rather than relying upon doctrine or catch phrases. Things may have hit a new low, but it is never too soon to start turning it all around.