Find something (an idea, a claim, an argument, etc.) in Bulman Ch 1 to disagree with. Explain what it is and shy you disagree with it. Note: If you absolutely can’t find something to disagree with, feel free to write about that situation (why you can’t disagree) or simply discuss something that you found interesting in Ch. 1.
Overall, I cannot find something that I directly disagree with. I feel like the text is correct in the sense that movies and films can be described as a "fairytale". They do not accurately depict today's society but they do contain important key details that allows the viewers to understand when the film takes place. Films and movies try to focus more on the entertainment aspect than trying to accurately depict the youth and pop culture as it is today. -Alyson
ReplyDeleteI agree that movies can hold artifacts of culture, however I think that films often exaggerate said culture. Shows that depict high school life often show teenagers engaging in heavy drugs and drama that an average 16 year old wouldn't experience. I think the wrongful portrayment can have a negative effect on real teens who watch everything unfold in the film. It can cause them to watch to reenact or try to outlive the negative ''culture'' the director has painted out for highschoolers. - Jayla
ReplyDeleteFrom Blockbusters to Buffering: Reframing the "Collective Experience" of Film
ReplyDelete“The enjoyment of popular culture such as movies is a collective experience… This collective process helps to bond members of a society together and to reinforce our collective understanding of the social world we share.”
— Robert C. Bulman, Hollywood Goes to High School, Ch. 1
But Is It Still Collective?
This statement might’ve held true in 1999, or even 2015. But in 2025, we find ourselves questioning it. Streaming has changed everything. What used to be a handful of widely shared cultural moments (Harry Potter, Star Wars, The Matrix) has been replaced by hyper-personalized viewing experiences. Now, our watchlists barely overlap. Yeah, we’re still watching movies, but I’m not necessarily watching what you are watching. Our feeds are shaped by algorithms. Everyone’s getting different suggestions, and there’s so much content to keep up with that it feels impossible to connect over a single story. With hundreds of new titles dropping every month, and dozens of streaming platforms, not everyone even has access to the same content anymore. Going to the movie theater used to feel like a collective ritual; now it’s more like watching alone in our own digital bubble. Algorithms shape what we watch and what we believe about the world. That personalization can be powerful but also isolating. Films today aren’t just cultural reflections; they’re predictive reinforcers, tailored to individual tastes and biases.
Where Do We Go From Here?
Do films still have the power to create collective meaning? Occasionally, yes. There are still cultural touchstones, like Barbie or Everything Everywhere All At Once. But even those moments feel fleeting, scattered across fandoms rather than centered in society. So maybe it’s time to redefine what “collective” means. Maybe it’s not about everyone watching the same movie anymore. Maybe it’s about recognizing the moments when film sparks conversation, memory, or change—however small the circle. Maybe the new “collective” isn’t mass-based, but meaning-based. While movies play a strong role in mirroring society, I believe now that how we watch movies is just as instrumental towards shaping our culture.
I would argue that "High School Movies," especially those which were released in the 1980s (Fast Times, Ferris Bueller, and Breakfast Club) were not attempting to show high school as it was. They were caricatures of the high school experience, where every detail was turned up to 11. In the 90s and 2000s, movies like Dazed and Confused, and, notably, Superbad attempted to paint a picture of what a typical high school experience actually entailed. This course correction displays the desire to show an accurate experience on screen, to show a more average character that past and present high schoolers could relate to. Jonah Hill's persona in Superbad is much more relatable than the unassailably cool Ferris Bueller.
ReplyDelete-Thomas
After reading the first chapter, there really isn't anything that I disagree with. I agree with what Bulman has to say about how movies depict pop culture and how movies allow us to bond with other members of our society. One thing that I found interesting is how genre films work to reflect the culture of not only the people who produce them but also the people who consume them, like us. They use their film to express the people behind the film, the people who fund the film, and lastly, the audience or people who watch the film. By doing this, it allows not only the society to connect with one another but also the creators.
ReplyDelete-Ireland
DeleteBulman talks about how films can represent youth culture, but I don't necessarily agree with that. More often than not, films glamorize or stereotype being a teenager instead of showing what it's really like. High school movies especially show everything to be so much more dramatic like every day is just huge conflict or absurd cliques. While those are some entertaining anecdotes, they don't really relate to most people's everyday experiences in high school. For that reason, I think that films more closely portray what adults think it's like to be a teenager than what it's actually like.
ReplyDelete- Presley
DeleteI disagree with the notion that most “High School Films” have a prominent theme of individualism. While I think many do, as many also serve as “coming-of-age” stories that inherently require a degree of coming into one’s own self, I think that it’s impossible to ignore the concept of the “teacher-hero” that’s brought up early on in the reading. When the narrative follows a teacher seeking to enlighten or bring up a student or group of students, it’s hard to have the story of the teacher, (i.e, “what’s the best way I can help these students? I had to move to this lower income area and now I can change these kids’ lives, and so forth) and still have the student(s) stories remain just as prominent. The story can still have themes of individualism, but by the nature of its story, it becomes about the dynamic between an instructor figure and those learning.
ReplyDeleteFor example, when reading this article and how it discussed the idea between “the middle-class suburban high school film” and “urban high school film”, my mind immediately thought of the movie McFarland, USA. That movie centers around Jim White after he is fired from his old job as a high school football coach, forced to move to a more rural area and find work as a coach there. While each student on his team does get moments to shine, the interplay between the coach and his team is the most important dynamic. He’ll show up to their houses and have dinner with them, or he’ll help work on their fields to convince a few of them to come back to the team. And while progression is important, the movie doesn’t necessarily end with their path forward totally clear. In the post-movie blurbs detailing the real events that inspired this movie, we’re given insight into where they went in life, but the movie itself ends with them winning the state championships. Which I guess *is* fairly standard for these types of movies…
The themes discussed around individualism do get tackled, such as the concept of “transcending the limitations of their communities… the ineffectiveness of their schools”, but it’s inherently a group effort, *including* the teacher, which I think is the important distinction. My point in all of this being that a movie like this cannot have a core theme of individualism when the main character is meant to be the guiding figure for others. But, it’s undoubtedly a “high school movie”, as it does center itself around the same themes and ideals that fuel other movies of the genre. There’s something to be said as well about the concept of the “white savior” and how that can be applied specifically to “urban high school movies”, and how THAT can tie into even more separation from this idea of individualism. None of this is to shame McFarland, or the person/people it represents, but it’s all about the way everything is framed.
-Jake C
I disagree with the idea that high school movies often resonate with the audience. They don't accurately depict what shapes society and doesn't reflect real life. High school movies often show really dramatic confrontations and social cliques that are very exaggerated for some elements, like how fierce high school drama really is or the unrealistic hierarchies. "Superbad" and "Mean Girls" show a dreamt-up interpretation of high school life, while real life has many diverse friend groups and dynamics. Also, academics are simplified and aren't seen as hard challenges like they are for actual students. It's more entertainment than the full reflection of the complexities and reality in real life. - Kayla
ReplyDeleteI agree with the chapter completely. I feel that movies can serve as a capsule for the time it was made, representing the dominant but not always authentic culture of the time. I think that comparing the way movies depict youth culture to fairytales was a very good way to describe it. Movies often glamorize and exaggerate the high school experience for entertainment purposes. I don't think the exaggerated elements should be a reason to discredit movies as a representation of their times. I feel that most people are aware that movies greatly dramatize certain aspects for entertainment purposes.
ReplyDelete- Autumn
DeleteElena here:
ReplyDeleteI think that I pretty much agree with this chapter in its entirety. Movies are often a reflection of the real world but they also sometimes shape how we perceive it. Like before attending college I had an idea what it would be like from movies, TV shows, and social media. But some of those ideas are not accurate to how I saw it portrayed in media. I agree with the idea that hollywood glamourizes and exaggerates things to make it comical and entertaining to consumers as well. Like personally my high school was divided into super stereotypical cliques as they showcase in movies from the 80s a lot.
I disagree with Bulman's claim that hollywood films generally portray emotions and sentiments of the people in America, especially high school. I feel like this point probably rung true 20 or more years ago, but with nowadays I believe the best portrayal of modern sentiment is though social media. It has gotten to the point where feelings and events pass so quickly through society that by the time movies are produced pertaining to the topic, it has been months to even years since it was relevant. I think this is also partly due to social media and the fact that nowadays people around the world can learn about almost anything within 5 minutes or less of it happening. Otherwise, I agree with almost every other point in this chapter and I believe that Bulman is correct that hollywood summarizes general sentiments and feelings of the majority population in America.
ReplyDeleteOne thing I disagree with in Bulman's chapter 1 was him stating that movies aren't realistic and they make the "magic" into things. He states that movies tend to take the real and turn it into something else. I have to disagree with that because although some movies are a bit dramatic, there are some movies out there that portray real raw emotions and events that happens. Not every movie is made for the viewers to see the "fairytale" version of life.
ReplyDelete-Yasmin
DeleteI didn't necessarily find anything to disagree with but one comment he made really had me thinking about the way we see movies in different particular lights. He said that due to clustering films into their specific genres, it helps shed light on the importance of the reality in those themes/cultures. I do think that his perception on how movies can simply never truly be real is not extremely accurate because even though it may be "simplified" it has to get the basis of what it is going off of or the knowledge of the topic to be somewhat realistically correct. I do however think that because of movies certain lights and importances are shown unto real life things that wouldn't have been seen otherwise. The way movies are a gateway into representation even if it's just the first step for that culture, it's still making a impact. And movies are not just an escapeway for people but are an outlet to show others there not alone as well, it says so much more than the basis of what is argument/topic is one.
ReplyDeleteI honestly did not find much I disagreed with in the article. However, I would say as we gain immediate access to other forms of media, the quality and creativity has decreased in films. I do not think high school films accurately portray American high schools anymore. Pop culture is constantly changing and it is hard to keep up. I think rather than try to keep up, old plots, ideas and themes get recycled. I assume that this is an attempt to stay "authentic" with "coming of age" and theme of individualism we always see. - Jade
ReplyDeleteI don't disagree most of the things that are talked about in the article; I actually agree with Hollywood mostly referring to their false version of reality because Hollywood movies have always been just a way to make money and get everyones appeal. With Films, they can be more artistic as some can be independent films or experimental projects. I see films as passionate works of art that use storytelling, imagination, and creativity to try to connect with audiences, instead of using popular actors to try to grab out attention. I think I'm just repeating myself here, but you get the point I'm trying to make. I miss emotional impacts on movies.
ReplyDeleteLexi
DeleteI disagree with high school being both a reflection of culture and a way to shape it. These movies often show us what American values are like. But they don’t explain the who we really are as much as they show what we’re like. They think movies sometimes make high school seem more dramatic or stereotypical than it actually is. Not everyone’s high school experience fits the typical cliques and conflicts seen in movies.
ReplyDeleteWhile these films do influence how we think about ourselves and others, the writer is concerned that they can also give false ideas or promote wrong expectations about what high school or life should be like. Instead of just mirroring reality, movies can sometimes distort it, leading people to believe things that aren’t true.
I do not fully agree with this articles description of how *all* movies are subject to appease large audiences and corporations. I do agree, especially in recent years, that many large corporations like Disney have had many remakes of films or ones that feel pandered to appeasing the broadest possible audience, thus watering down the impact of their story. However, to make that blanket statement is to completely disregard indie film studios who are making their unique voice heard, and it feels as though the author is condemning any writer that does not make strictly analytical non-fiction pieces as simply being frivolous products of their environment. Yes, I completely agree that the culture around a director will influence the films they make, but the same can be said for literally anyone in any field. The author states that they study Sociology but not Film, but I honestly think that there shouldn't be a harsh divide between the two, as it feels like a return to "High Art vs Low Art". Films are not reality and are exaggerated, but that in itself is the display of the culture it illustrates a story about. What was exaggerated in High School Film in the 50s may overlap, but is not synonymous with current High School Films, and that can show us what different people found important/interesting in that genre at different times.
ReplyDelete- Akiko M
I agreed with several points within the reading and can't find anything I find myself strongly disagreeing with. I enjoyed the connection that was drawn between films/popculture and the building of communities through shared and enjoyed media. I also liked how the reading acknowledged how many depictions within film are exaggerated for entertainment purposes, but also explained how the films are still influential in shaping our society culturally. I will say, that while films have always been dramatized or exaggerated versions of reality, they recently have begun to do this even more so. An example of this can be seen in the depiction of high schoolers in recent films and television shows, and how teenagers are seen using popular vocabulary/language that is used primarily online in social media. Many teenagers often feel inaccurately depicted in the shows and movies they watch, making the media less relatable, which in turn often causes the films to not be received well by younger audiences.
ReplyDeleteBulman states," While I do not disagree with those who argue that Hollywood also privileges the perspectives of whites, I find in my analysis of the high school films that a social-class lens better explains the data than a lens of race." He is implying that even though race is important, he believes that class divisions were more prominent and revealing. Completely disagree. I think especially in more recent films race is just as prevalent in these movies as class is, if not more. In my opinion race and class are not mutually exclusive lenses, they intersect. To claim that class "better explains the data" may ignore how racial identity is represented in media. The 2018 movie adaptation of "The Hate You Give" is a great representation of class and race themes in a high school film.
ReplyDelete-Laney Fontanilla
DeleteI do agree that films depict social culture and have a great influence over how "society makes sense of social life". From my own personal experience in high school the obvious cliques that Timothy Shary was even able to recognize were very prevalent. While they were probably not as dramatized as they are in films, you could definitely see the obvious divisions in real time.
ReplyDeleteAmiya: Bulman argues that school films typically reinforce dominant ideologies instead of challenging them. However, I contend that films are also powerful tools for subversion. Over time, a film once seen as upholding societal norms can be reinterpreted as problematic or even progressive, depending on the evolving cultural context. This shows that films have the capacity not only to reflect but also to challenge and reshape beliefs, making their impact both meaningful and persuasive.
ReplyDeleteBulman's writing is very interesting, especially given his extensive film viewing, but I disagree with his repeated use of genre to mirror culture. Nowadays, movies and films recycle themes like high school, where freshmen are portrayed as puny and seniors are depicted as being drugged out, throwing parties that go down in the hall of fame. These narratives are so old and outdated; times have changed.
ReplyDeleteI disagreed with Bulman's sentiment of "a social-class lens better explains the data than a lens of race". I genuinely do not believe that one can have serious research about high school films and essentially disregard race in the "data". Both race and class intersect, and implying that the "data" wouldn't change when disregarding race in research is absurd. -Dakota C
ReplyDeleteThere wasn't anything I could find that I disagreed with but what I did find interesting was Bulman saying that films often act like modern day folktales. I liked how her compared high school Hollywood movies to stories of culture. This really stood out to me because I never really thought about in that perspective. Usually, when I watch films I think of them as entertainment with some underlying messages, but Bulman shows that it reflects cultural values, individualism, or middle-class normality's. It made me realize that even lighthearted movies can reveal something about the society that produced it. - Alana "Ana" W
ReplyDelete