An online space for our community to extend our engagement w/ education and popculture
Sunday, August 17, 2025
October 9…Bulman Revisited
Think back to Bulman’s ideas about Hollywood and high school. If possible, share something that you think he got right and also provide critique of some aspect of his ideas.
I believe that he was right about there is no such thing as individualism. After watching recent movies suggested in class, I’ve seen a common theme in understanding pop culture films surrounding schooling. The “theme” of the movies are always the same “feel good” lesson. The concept of individualism does not exist because we take inspiration from somewhere. - Jayla Alston
Amiya- Bulman makes a good point like Hollywood does tend to blow high school drama way out of proportion. But I think he misses how some movies actually connect with students, showing real struggles like bullying or figuring out who you are. That kind of impact matters too.
I really like this point. The idea that individualism doesn’t fully exist makes a lot of sense, especially when you notice how school movies repeat the same “feel-good” lessons over and over. Like you said, even when films push individuality, that idea is still shaped by shared stories and inspirations, which shows how connected our thinking really is.
Bulman is right about Hollywood school movies being unrealistic and dramatized, but he also argues that these movies convey an important message, which is why we should watch them. Movies do this on purpose because they'll never get school right, as it is different for everyone, so they exaggerate it to focus on one thing that someone can relate to or understand. Bulman recognizes this and says that we should understand the parts about like adolescence, class, or identity.
I agree with Bulman on the idea that individualism in Hollywood films is depicted vastly different between the social classes and culture. How they depict education in different ways and separated by social class. However, he doesn't factor in the other barriers like economic inequality, race, or gender, he mainly talks about social class. - Kayla
One thing Bulman got right is how Hollywood often exaggerates or simplifies high school life to fit certain narratives — like the “popular vs. outsider” trope or the idea that one teacher or event completely changes a student’s life. These storylines do reflect some real experiences but are usually dramatized for entertainment. However, a fair critique is that Bulman sometimes overlooks how these films can still inspire students or educators in meaningful ways.
Elena Here: One thing I think Bulman got right is how dramatized Hollywood depicts high school. Often over exaggerating student life. Don't get me started on the crazy stereotypes. Often these exaggerated depictions have a life lesson or some sort of feel good aspect as it's major take away.
Bulman is right that movies like Mean Girls and Clueless reinforce stereotypes about popularity, cliques, and individual success instead of showing the real concerns of school life. However, he fails to see that people mostly grasp the exaggeration and watch these movies as satire, not as reality. However, his comment on how these movies affect the understanding of teens about status and identity in school does make sense. - Presley
Yasmin: I think Bulman was right by saying how movies and TV shows influence the way we think about high school. Every child remembers high school as a fantasy before experiencing it themselves, and when we actually made it to high school, it was the total opposite of what we had in mind.
Bulman got it right about how Hollywood exaggerates the idea of individualism in high school movies, like when one student or teacher completely changes everything. It’s not realistic because real school experiences are shaped by other factors.
I agree with Bulman's point that high school is often dramatized in its depictions. I also feel like the way individualism presents itself is vastly different depending on social class. I do think that high school movies can feel like a fairy-tale depiction of what it was like to grow up in the era in which it was made. The points that are exaggerated usually center around things that are somewhat relatable or teach a lesson. - Autumn
I think that Bulman was right about how dramatized certain things are in film when depicting high schoolers. This often leads to the reinforcement of stereotypes and can take away from the life lesson that is meant to be taught.
Nadia- in the article, Bulman mentions that the reoccurring theme in most Hollywood movies about high school is individualism, where the main character who is normally a high schooler develops throughout the film by becoming a "better person". They start to discover themselves, as a lot of high schoolers start to do during that age by finding their friend group and their interests. I agree with this observation because in all of the movies that I have watched, including the ones for class. Each one has a plot that is centered around the main characters journey to finding their best self.
I think Bulman has the right idea about how Hollywood does overall exaggerate the idea of individualism in high school specifically, I say this because there are a lot of people okay with being in a group. I also think he is correct about how Hollywood is exaggerating students life is general. -Kailei
I agree with Bulman that Hollywood portrays individualism very differently depending on a person’s social class and culture. He makes a good point about how movies often show education and success in separate ways for the wealthy and the working class. Still, I think he overlooks other important factors like race, gender, and economic inequality that also play a huge role in shaping people’s experiences.
Victoria - Although I think Bulman acknowledges that Hollywood school films are dramatic and unrealistic, he also contends that we should watch them because they convey a valuable message. Since school is different for everyone, movies intentionally exaggerate it to highlight a single topic that viewers can identify with or comprehend. Bulman acknowledges this and suggests that we understand the aspects related to identity and class.
I agree with a lot of Bulman's takes on Hollywood exaggerating high school life. I also think he's right about how these films often focus on individualism, where wither the student or teacher fixes things and I can understand why people can connect to them. But I wish Bulman would have talked more about how race and gender can affect these portrayals, because most of the time these factors play a big part. - Alana 'Ana'
I agree when Bulman argues that Hollywood high school movies reflect adult fears and nostalgia more than real teenage life. I think he’s right that films like The Breakfast Club and Mean Girls rely on stereotypes to explore social themes rather than showing authentic experiences. However, his view can feel too basic recent films like Lady Bird or Eighth Grade are shows that some filmmakers are offer more realistic and complex portrayals of adolescence.
One thing Bulman got right about Hollywood’s version of high school is how films create an unrealistic version of education that values individual success stories instead of systemic inequality. He points out that many movies have students who can overcome battles using just determination. This version doesn’t address racism and underfunded schools. I agree with his viewpoint because many teacher focused or hero student films tend to dismiss how difficult learning environments can be.
I think Bulman is right that Hollywood high school movies often reflect adult fears and stereotypes more than real teenage life. Films like Mean Girls or Clueless reinforce the same social hierarchies they seem to critique. However, I think he overlooks movies like The Breakfast Club or Lady Bird, which show more nuance and challenge those stereotypes. So while his point fits many films, it doesn’t capture the full range of the genre.
Bulman argued that high schools promote the idea of individualism. However, he shows that individualism is not based on merit, choices or effort. It is based more on class, race and gender. Based on the films I watched (Feris Bueller & Clueless) I agree. Race and or class heavily influenced the expression of individualism. Some other main characters’ actions could have been seen as delinquent or disrespectful if they were of lower class or minority/marginalized group.
After watching Stand and Deliver, Mean Girls, and Half Nelson, I get what Bulman means when he explains how Hollywood’s school stories reveal more about America’s identity than about actual education. These movies aren’t really about how classrooms work (even true stories are dramatized in a way); they’re about how we think they work, and what we believe about success, individuality, and belonging.
In Stand and Deliver, his “teacher-as-hero” example comes to life. Jaime Escalante’s charisma and sacrifice make a powerful story, but it sells the idea that one great teacher can fix inequality through sheer effort. The camera zooms in on his determination while the larger systemic failures fade out. Then there’s Mean Girls, which flips the script from grades to popularity. Bulman calls this expressive individualism, the belief that being “yourself” is the ultimate goal. Cady’s story is about identity more than academics, exploring the dialectics between expression and conformity. Tina Fey turns the conflict of individualism into a makeover plot, which is where I also see hope, especially in Ms. Norbury’s approach to the Burn Book. She models care instead of control, and the Spring Fling scene, where Cady breaks the tiara and shares it, feels like a spark of authentic expressive individualism. Here we see what I believe to be a healthy balance of teacher & student agency, but hopefully we can now reach this point before catastrophe strikes. By the time we reach Half Nelson, the Hollywood myth starts to crumble. Dan Dunne is no savior; he’s falling apart. His 13 y/o student (Drey) catches him doing hard drugs at school after a game and her steady presence, her choice to keep showing up, becomes its own kind of strength. This movie is where I see Bulman’s myths dismantled, where we can decondition ourselves to the tropes of the hero teacher and individualism – that other narratives exist that challenge these concepts. Mr. Dunne is a failed Mr. Escalante, and Drey doesn’t have the luxury of caring about individualism as she navigates a very different reality than Cady.
What Bulman provides are great definitions of what these myths are and where I think he can continue is in exploring how these actually take shape in reality. Now that we know what individualism is - we can take that further into what that might mean for us ( when is it healthy/toxic?). Escalante’s ganas matter, but so would the support of peers, supervisors, and students if the system made room for them. The same pattern echoes in Cady and Dunne’s collapse. Real learning happens when agency is balanced, not divided. Teachers and students both need space to act, to fail, and to be seen. Without teacher agency, there’s no student agency; and without connection, even the most passionate educators run dry. So yes, Bulman names the myths. But maybe the next step is learning how to critically integrate them: to build systems where ambition and rest, resilience and relationship, structure and agency can all coexist.
Something I think Bulman got right is that Hollywood high schools are so exaggerated; the cliques of high school students like jocks and nerds show up in a lot of teen movies and shape how viewers imagine real schools. However, they are interesting to watch even if they’re not exactly how they are. One critique though is he thinks everyone accepts those cliques, which I think is farther from the truth. If you genuinely believe people act like someone like Sharpey Evans from high school music, then you’re below the age of 13. (In the nicest way possible). Also, there's more self-aware films like LadyBird and Perks of Being a wallflower, both amazing movies btw, that reject those clique formulas.
Bulman makes a good point about how Hollywood creates a very unrealistic picture of high school. He says teen movies rely on the same stereotypes the nerd, the popular girl, the jock and act like these types define everyone. He also argues that these movies focus too much on personal change ("just be confident") instead of the real issues students face, like race, class, or inequality. I think he's right about that. But one thing I think Bulman overlooks is that most students know these movies aren't real. People watch them for fun, not as a guide to actual school life. Teenagers can usually tell the difference between entertainment and reality. And even with all the clichés, some viewers still find parts of these movies relatable or comforting. So while Bulman is right that Hollywood oversimplifies high school, it's also true that audiences are smarter and more aware than he sometimes gives them credit for.
I believe that he was right about there is no such thing as individualism. After watching recent movies suggested in class, I’ve seen a common theme in understanding pop culture films surrounding schooling. The “theme” of the movies are always the same “feel good” lesson. The concept of individualism does not exist because we take inspiration from somewhere. - Jayla Alston
ReplyDeleteAmiya- Bulman makes a good point like Hollywood does tend to blow high school drama way out of proportion. But I think he misses how some movies actually connect with students, showing real struggles like bullying or figuring out who you are. That kind of impact matters too.
DeleteI really like this point. The idea that individualism doesn’t fully exist makes a lot of sense, especially when you notice how school movies repeat the same “feel-good” lessons over and over. Like you said, even when films push individuality, that idea is still shaped by shared stories and inspirations, which shows how connected our thinking really is.
DeleteBulman is right about Hollywood school movies being unrealistic and dramatized, but he also argues that these movies convey an important message, which is why we should watch them. Movies do this on purpose because they'll never get school right, as it is different for everyone, so they exaggerate it to focus on one thing that someone can relate to or understand. Bulman recognizes this and says that we should understand the parts about like adolescence, class, or identity.
ReplyDelete-Joaquin S.
DeleteI agree with Bulman on the idea that individualism in Hollywood films is depicted vastly different between the social classes and culture. How they depict education in different ways and separated by social class. However, he doesn't factor in the other barriers like economic inequality, race, or gender, he mainly talks about social class. - Kayla
ReplyDeleteOne thing Bulman got right is how Hollywood often exaggerates or simplifies high school life to fit certain narratives — like the “popular vs. outsider” trope or the idea that one teacher or event completely changes a student’s life. These storylines do reflect some real experiences but are usually dramatized for entertainment. However, a fair critique is that Bulman sometimes overlooks how these films can still inspire students or educators in meaningful ways.
ReplyDeleteElena Here: One thing I think Bulman got right is how dramatized Hollywood depicts high school. Often over exaggerating student life. Don't get me started on the crazy stereotypes. Often these exaggerated depictions have a life lesson or some sort of feel good aspect as it's major take away.
ReplyDeleteBulman is right that movies like Mean Girls and Clueless reinforce stereotypes about popularity, cliques, and individual success instead of showing the real concerns of school life. However, he fails to see that people mostly grasp the exaggeration and watch these movies as satire, not as reality. However, his comment on how these movies affect the understanding of teens about status and identity in school does make sense. - Presley
ReplyDeleteYasmin: I think Bulman was right by saying how movies and TV shows influence the way we think about high school. Every child remembers high school as a fantasy before experiencing it themselves, and when we actually made it to high school, it was the total opposite of what we had in mind.
ReplyDeleteBulman got it right about how Hollywood exaggerates the idea of individualism in high school movies, like when one student or teacher completely changes everything. It’s not realistic because real school experiences are shaped by other factors.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Bulman's point that high school is often dramatized in its depictions. I also feel like the way individualism presents itself is vastly different depending on social class. I do think that high school movies can feel like a fairy-tale depiction of what it was like to grow up in the era in which it was made. The points that are exaggerated usually center around things that are somewhat relatable or teach a lesson. - Autumn
ReplyDeleteI think that Bulman was right about how dramatized certain things are in film when depicting high schoolers. This often leads to the reinforcement of stereotypes and can take away from the life lesson that is meant to be taught.
ReplyDeleteNadia- in the article, Bulman mentions that the reoccurring theme in most Hollywood movies about high school is individualism, where the main character who is normally a high schooler develops throughout the film by becoming a "better person". They start to discover themselves, as a lot of high schoolers start to do during that age by finding their friend group and their interests. I agree with this observation because in all of the movies that I have watched, including the ones for class. Each one has a plot that is centered around the main characters journey to finding their best self.
ReplyDeleteI think Bulman has the right idea about how Hollywood does overall exaggerate the idea of individualism in high school specifically, I say this because there are a lot of people okay with being in a group. I also think he is correct about how Hollywood is exaggerating students life is general. -Kailei
ReplyDeleteI agree with Bulman that Hollywood portrays individualism very differently depending on a person’s social class and culture. He makes a good point about how movies often show education and success in separate ways for the wealthy and the working class. Still, I think he overlooks other important factors like race, gender, and economic inequality that also play a huge role in shaping people’s experiences.
ReplyDeleteVictoria - Although I think Bulman acknowledges that Hollywood school films are dramatic and unrealistic, he also contends that we should watch them because they convey a valuable message. Since school is different for everyone, movies intentionally exaggerate it to highlight a single topic that viewers can identify with or comprehend. Bulman acknowledges this and suggests that we understand the aspects related to identity and class.
ReplyDeleteI agree with a lot of Bulman's takes on Hollywood exaggerating high school life. I also think he's right about how these films often focus on individualism, where wither the student or teacher fixes things and I can understand why people can connect to them. But I wish Bulman would have talked more about how race and gender can affect these portrayals, because most of the time these factors play a big part.
ReplyDelete- Alana 'Ana'
I agree when Bulman argues that Hollywood high school movies reflect adult fears and nostalgia more than real teenage life. I think he’s right that films like The Breakfast Club and Mean Girls rely on stereotypes to explore social themes rather than showing authentic experiences. However, his view can feel too basic recent films like Lady Bird or Eighth Grade are shows that some filmmakers are offer more realistic and complex portrayals of adolescence.
ReplyDeleteOne thing Bulman got right about Hollywood’s version of high school is how films create an unrealistic version of education that values individual success stories instead of systemic inequality. He points out that many movies have students who can overcome battles using just determination. This version doesn’t address racism and underfunded schools. I agree with his viewpoint because many teacher focused or hero student films tend to dismiss how difficult learning environments can be.
ReplyDeleteI think Bulman is right that Hollywood high school movies often reflect adult fears and stereotypes more than real teenage life. Films like Mean Girls or Clueless reinforce the same social hierarchies they seem to critique. However, I think he overlooks movies like The Breakfast Club or Lady Bird, which show more nuance and challenge those stereotypes. So while his point fits many films, it doesn’t capture the full range of the genre.
ReplyDeleteBulman argued that high schools promote the idea of individualism. However, he shows that individualism is not based on merit, choices or effort. It is based more on class, race and gender. Based on the films I watched (Feris Bueller & Clueless) I agree. Race and or class heavily influenced the expression of individualism. Some other main characters’ actions could have been seen as delinquent or disrespectful if they were of lower class or minority/marginalized group.
ReplyDeleteAfter watching Stand and Deliver, Mean Girls, and Half Nelson, I get what Bulman means when he explains how Hollywood’s school stories reveal more about America’s identity than about actual education. These movies aren’t really about how classrooms work (even true stories are dramatized in a way); they’re about how we think they work, and what we believe about success, individuality, and belonging.
ReplyDeleteIn Stand and Deliver, his “teacher-as-hero” example comes to life. Jaime Escalante’s charisma and sacrifice make a powerful story, but it sells the idea that one great teacher can fix inequality through sheer effort. The camera zooms in on his determination while the larger systemic failures fade out. Then there’s Mean Girls, which flips the script from grades to popularity. Bulman calls this expressive individualism, the belief that being “yourself” is the ultimate goal. Cady’s story is about identity more than academics, exploring the dialectics between expression and conformity. Tina Fey turns the conflict of individualism into a makeover plot, which is where I also see hope, especially in Ms. Norbury’s approach to the Burn Book. She models care instead of control, and the Spring Fling scene, where Cady breaks the tiara and shares it, feels like a spark of authentic expressive individualism. Here we see what I believe to be a healthy balance of teacher & student agency, but hopefully we can now reach this point before catastrophe strikes. By the time we reach Half Nelson, the Hollywood myth starts to crumble. Dan Dunne is no savior; he’s falling apart. His 13 y/o student (Drey) catches him doing hard drugs at school after a game and her steady presence, her choice to keep showing up, becomes its own kind of strength. This movie is where I see Bulman’s myths dismantled, where we can decondition ourselves to the tropes of the hero teacher and individualism – that other narratives exist that challenge these concepts. Mr. Dunne is a failed Mr. Escalante, and Drey doesn’t have the luxury of caring about individualism as she navigates a very different reality than Cady.
What Bulman provides are great definitions of what these myths are and where I think he can continue is in exploring how these actually take shape in reality. Now that we know what individualism is - we can take that further into what that might mean for us ( when is it healthy/toxic?). Escalante’s ganas matter, but so would the support of peers, supervisors, and students if the system made room for them. The same pattern echoes in Cady and Dunne’s collapse. Real learning happens when agency is balanced, not divided. Teachers and students both need space to act, to fail, and to be seen. Without teacher agency, there’s no student agency; and without connection, even the most passionate educators run dry. So yes, Bulman names the myths. But maybe the next step is learning how to critically integrate them: to build systems where ambition and rest, resilience and relationship, structure and agency can all coexist.
Something I think Bulman got right is that Hollywood high schools are so exaggerated; the cliques of high school students like jocks and nerds show up in a lot of teen movies and shape how viewers imagine real schools. However, they are interesting to watch even if they’re not exactly how they are. One critique though is he thinks everyone accepts those cliques, which I think is farther from the truth. If you genuinely believe people act like someone like Sharpey Evans from high school music, then you’re below the age of 13. (In the nicest way possible). Also, there's more self-aware films like LadyBird and Perks of Being a wallflower, both amazing movies btw, that reject those clique formulas.
ReplyDeleteBulman makes a good point about how Hollywood creates a very unrealistic picture of high school. He says teen movies rely on the same stereotypes the nerd, the popular girl, the jock and act like these types define everyone. He also argues that these movies focus too much on personal change ("just be confident") instead of the real issues students face, like race, class, or inequality. I think he's right about that.
ReplyDeleteBut one thing I think Bulman overlooks is that most students know these movies aren't real. People watch them for fun, not as a guide to actual school life. Teenagers can usually tell the difference between entertainment and reality. And even with all the clichés, some viewers still find parts of these movies relatable or comforting.
So while Bulman is right that Hollywood oversimplifies high school, it's also true that audiences are smarter and more aware than he sometimes gives them credit for.