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.
After reading Bulman’s Chapter, I couldn’t find anything to disagree with. He starts off the chapter talking about how even though movies may represent a false reality, they still give insight into society as a whole. Films can show their effect on culture through the writers, producers and consumers. Writers are able to express themselves through their writing/directing, producers can choose what films they feel represent their image well, and consumers choose what films they enjoy watching based on their own interests or feelings.
ReplyDeleteTalking about the genre of High School Films, the patterns Bulman talks about are intriguing yet true. He talks about the three sub genres of high school films and how the way teachers and students are portrayed varies among each sub genre. He explains how middle class students are paired more with bad teachers and lower class students are paired with good hero-like teachers.
I think this is interesting because looking back at films I’ve watched this is an accurate representation. For example, Freedom Writers took place in a lower income divided school and was focused on the new teacher who aimed to help the children overcome their obstacles in life.
I just finished reading the first chapter and there was nothing that I disagreed with. The amount of research that he conducted and his opinions made on each particular matter, showed to me why I couldn't argue with anything he said.
ReplyDeleteWhen I look back on the high school films that I have watched, I think of the points that he has made in this reading. Explaining to the audience that certain patterns do most like occur (ex. low class students and their relationship with the super teacher") or the point he made talking about usually these films are a reflection of high schools in general. Talking about social norms, school politics.
Renee Bland:
ReplyDeleteAfter reading, I couldn’t really find that much to disagree with. I agree that films and shows often reinforce social norms and stereotypes. But, in some cases, despite over-exaggerating, they also reflect the real struggles of teens like identity issues and peer pressure. Like the movie ‘The Breakfast Club’ reflects the intense emotions of teenage life, addressing universal themes of self-discovery and acceptance. Even thinking back and comparing high school for me and some films, they loosely align. So even though I agree that Bulman's critique of stereotypes in high school films is valid, these films can also provide an emotional connection, empowerment, and opportunities for meaningful conversations, boosting a positive impact.
n Chapter 1, Bulman talks about how looking at movies from both artistic and social points of view can help us understand them better. He says that while we usually look at things like camera work, story, and style, we should also consider the time and place of the movies and how people reacted to them. Bulman thinks that movies can show us a lot about the world they were made in and the world they were watched in. By looking at art and social stuff, we can see how movies are part of the world and what the world is like. This way of thinking shows us that movies are both creative and essential for understanding people's thoughts.
ReplyDeletein ^^^
DeleteBulman uses Chapter 1 of his book to explain how he wants to focus his research on how socioeconomic status affects the portrayal of high school in films. He spends a lot of time explaining how in more urban and poorer settings the teacher is often times seen as the hero of the film while in suburban public school and private school settings, the student is seen as trying to pursue their individualism while the educator is portrayed in a negative light. What he fails to explore, however, is the role of race in these portrayals. He acknowledges that Hollywood wants to keep up this ideal of white and middle class, but he does not delve in to how in the poorer, more urban movies a lot of the time the students are black/of color and are seen as in need of guidance until someone comes in and "tames" them.
ReplyDeleteFilms like that make it seem as though because of a students lack of economic status, they have a lack of self-control or they do not know how to conduct themselves in a respectful manner. This shows how society views the lower class, society sees them as rebellious and in need of molding to fit society's ideal. This is a very important point that Bulman chooses not to mention.
Kylan Lockett
DeleteAfter reading the Bulman chapter, I didn't find anything that I disagreed with, but I did find something interesting. Bulman mentioned that it is hard for films to interpret cultures since they are complex. This statement is true because depending on who created and produced the film depends on the perspective and the message that they want to go for. I will say that everyone will not respect the perspective that is given and may not represent it correctly.
ReplyDeleteThere were a lot of good points made that I do agree with. Some of these being the fact that the companies, directors, and audiences of a film contribute to cultural significance of a film. I also agree with his point he made about films influencing how we see the world and how we make sense of things in the world.
ReplyDeleteOne of the things that I don't completely agree with is viewing highschool films through a lens of class rather than race. To elaborate on this, more recent depictions of high school in entertainment try to steer away from the stereotypical white family in the upper-middle to high class and the black family in the lower classes, but race can't help but to peek through. I would like to argue that some directors feel there would be no story if a black family who is in the upper class does not have struggle, or if they don't over exaggerate their lack of struggle. Bulma says looking at data and analyzing high school films through a lens of social class rather than race would be a better interpretation, but I feel race in most cases is the underlying lens. Sure their can be white families in the lower class but if there is a black family in the middle or upper class, they will almost always still face adversity that a white family in the upper class would not. I feel like there's no ignoring this fact and personally I think it's done for a reason so as not to erase the struggle, but for this reason I think high school films should be analyzed through multiple lenses. (Not trying to make everything about race)
"Part of the pleasure of popular culture is that it's popular- that others are experiencing the same cultural product that we are experiencing. This collective process helps to bond members of a society together and to reinforce our collective understanding of the social world we share."
ReplyDeleteI agreed with the first part of this statement, that popular culture is popular and it is a shared experience, but I would not say it is ALL the same product. There are numerous different kinds of pop culture, like fashion trends, music, television, social media etc, and they all differ based on peoples preferences and what their into. So this part I did not really understand/agree with. I also partially agreed with the second sentence, because I believe it does help society bond because people can practice the same types of pop culture, but I don't think it necessarily reinforces EVERYONES understanding of the social world we all share because it is extremely different for everyone, it's not the same.
I realized that I chose something that didn't have to do much with the main argument of this reading. Heres a take 2.
Delete"Films teach us who we are as much as they reflect who we are. When we go to the movies, we absorb messages about the social world in which we live in." page 3
I have to disagree with this because personally I do not think this is true and this doesn't apply to some people, especially me. For some, yes maybe the things happening in the film they can relate to, but most movies/films (especially ones in the movie theatre) are fiction and made up by the author/producer/story maker. Also, most films in todays day and age do not have "messages" about our social world. Unless I am not watching the right films at the theatre, I believe this quote from the reading is controversial and partially incorrect for some people. (just my opinion though)
Bulman approached the topic very well, and I could not find anything to disagree with. Although there were some points I had to read again because they were a bit questionable, I had a hard time finding supportive points for any disagreements. Instead, what I found interesting was the presentation "to package reality and to represent it as fiction" to make the complex social world easier to swallow. I never thought about reality like that even though I can think back on many times when I packaged reality as fiction. For example, when I feel strong emotions for a certain topic or situation, I construct it as a piece of literary fiction so I can be able to digest it and have a better understanding of cloudy emotions. I would have never compared films to myths and folklore, and I am intrigued by how Bulman realized the comparison.
ReplyDeleteAlthough I may agree with the point made, I do not necessarily agree with this "repackaging." I think it is quite harmful to take reality and always represent it as fiction just so audience members have an easier time comprehending the topic. In fact, I do not think it is necessary to always translate complexity to simplicity. It takes away the value of reality and our growth as humans who have to experience life to learn from it, instead of learning the diluted version and approaching life with a filtered mind.
Bulman's first chapter concentrates around the idea that, while films may not exactly depict real-life events, they do provide valuable insights into the culture that creates and consumes them. This viewpoint is consistent with the belief that films, despite their fictional nature, serve as artifacts that represent societal values, fears, and norms. While I agree with this concept to some extent, I do not believe that movies fully shape or represent our culture. For example, movies frequently focus on specific narratives, topics, or character traits, which may fail to reflect the complete range of cultural experiences. Films may also reinforce stereotypes rather than provide realistic portrayals of different social groups. Another reason why I do not fully agree with Bulman's main idea is because a lot of movies are created for financial success which might lead to a preference for entertaining content over realistic or critical cultural representations.
ReplyDeleteBulman's indication on films is that we need to view films from a different lense such as how they move peoples feelings/emotions. I agree with his acknowledgement that they do provide an insight into the pop-culture that we all nourish on the every day basis. Something that stood out to me from the chapter was the quote by Bell hooks "Movies make magic. They change things. They take the real and make it into something else right before your very eyes... They give the reimagined, reinvented version of the real etc...." I really love this quote since it truly explains the notion of movies and how they can be a different universe from the world of the real.
ReplyDeleteIn Chapter 1, Bulman discusses how analyzing films from both an artistic and social perspective enhances our understanding of them. While we often focus on aspects like cinematography, narrative, and style, it's equally important to consider the historical context and how audiences responded. Bulman argues that films offer valuable insights into the era they were created and watched in. By exploring both the creative and social dimensions, we can see how movies not only reflect the world but also help us understand people's perspectives and experiences.
ReplyDeleteBulman states that Hollywood movies about high school often show sterotypes and do not challenge the way things actually. In Bulman's argument, he argues that these films keep people thinking the same way about social issues such as class, race and gender. I disagree as I think some movies about high school do more thatn repeat sterotypes like in "The Breakfast Club" and "Mean Girls" show different problems people face in real life. They make people think about these issues and could lead for people wanting to change. I think these movies make people more aware and encourage them to think differently.
ReplyDeleteI didn't disagree with anything in the chapter. After class, I found how Bulman talked about the different classes and how he didn't bring up race interesting. I agree that he shouldn't have stepped over that part. I also agree that the words urban and suburban can have deeper meanings than their dictionary definition. I can relate to the part where he talked about how in films the characters in a school would act a certain way and the viewers can think that's how they act in real life. Being a first generation college student I came into college blind on how it would actually be. The only view I had on college was watching films. I expected college to be how I viewed it on tv.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading Bulman Chapter 1, I disagree with his statements about how films represent and shape our lives and cultures. We can be influenced individually by a character in a movie. I don't agree with this because movies are based on our lives and cultures. Sometimes, in films, the writers base the concept of the film on their experiences or lives. Movies based on one's culture usually exaggerate and almost over-do one's culture. Some stereotypes in a film or TV show can be portrayed to a level of overdoing it.
ReplyDeleteOne statement I found in Bulman Ch 1 that I personally disagree with is that "elite private school films focus on academics". While there definitely are films I have watched that are set in private schools that do have a big focus on academics, Dead Poets Society being a prime example, most of the private school films I've seen before had a main focus on the student dynamics and hierarchies within the school rather than how oppressive academic achievement can be. From the films I have seen I believe there are two main types of films set in private schools, ones that focus on an outsider joining the school (Wild Child, She's The Man, Step Up) and ones that focus on the coming of age of a single student (Lady Bird, The Holdovers). Films based around an outsider joining a private school are often comedic and light hearted while films depicting the coming of age of a private school student tend to delve into more serious topics such as parental issues and involve an important life shaping event for the student.
ReplyDeleteI could not disagree with anything, but I like how it was talking about films. I feel like for future films sociologists should study them for accuracy in human interaction so it's more realistic. Often times the way high school is portrayed is not how it usually is at least from my experience. Like in the episode we watched last class I'm sure there would be consequences for not teaching and they wouldn't just throw a teacher into a class randomly without them knowing prior. It's just not very accurate. Films are also a good way to bring people together and things being entertaining is a good way for doing that. Sometimes things that are too realistic are not as appealing. This is most likely why sociologist don't study films since they are made to entertain and not always for realism.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading Bulman chapter 1, I could not find anything that I disagree with. I think he makes really good points about how films become popular because they resonate with the people watching. He also says that although movies are not based in reality, they can represent the era and culture in which they were made through their dipictions of fears, societal values, and norms. Although movies about high school are often over-dramaticized and romanticized for viewing pleasure, they do contain themes that many people can probably relate to.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading Bulman chapter 1, I also didn't have anything that I really disagreed with him on. Bulman made good points on how films effect people's perception of themselves. I think that when watching films people try and find things about themselves within the different characters, which isn't a bad thing. I just think that one should always remember that films are not real life and won't a hundred precent emulate what goes on in daily life due to the fact that multiple different factors like race, religion, homelife, class, etc. effect how people move through the world.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading the Bulman chapter, I found nothing to disagree with, but I did find something intriguing. Bulman stated that films struggle to accurately represent cultures due to their complexity. The claim is valid as the creator and producer of the film influence the perspective and intended message. Moreover, interpretations would likely vary based on individual perspectives influenced by cultural context.
ReplyDeleteIn Chapter 1 of Robert Bulman’s work on representations of social class in popular films, he argues that Hollywood consistently portrays the working class in a narrow and stereotypical way, often focusing on narratives of individual success against systemic odds, while neglecting broader structural issues like inequality or class struggle. Bulman suggests that this depiction reinforces a meritocratic view, where individual effort and moral character are seen as the primary determinants of success.
ReplyDeleteWhile I find Bulman’s analysis insightful, I disagree with his implication that these films primarily serve to uphold the status quo or a meritocratic ideology. While it is true that many Hollywood films focus on individual narratives, I think it overlooks how these stories can also inspire hope and motivate people by highlighting personal resilience and agency.
While Bulman raises valid concerns about Hollywood’s tendency to oversimplify complex social realities, I think his view underestimates the potential for these films to raise awareness, challenge viewers’ perspectives, or even inspire collective action. In this sense, I believe films can both reflect and critique the society in which they are created, serving multiple purposes beyond merely reinforcing dominant ideologies.
Aliyah Ibrahim: Bulman expressed in this chapter how the reasoning for low or high education between wealthy and poor communities, is only the money aspect. I could disagree with this statement even though majority of the time it is the money and area a school is residenced in, but it could be argued that some schools that aren't as wealthy or has less funding might have the strongest community involvement or unique and great performances of teaching methods.
ReplyDelete