Educational Media Reviews Online

Bulletproof is, in brief, a documentary about how schools have responded to school shootings. The film is presented primarily through a lens of observation; it contains only a few scenes in which an individual speaks directly to the filmmakers. Despite the sparse narration, Bulletproof manages to convey a clear narrative throughout the film. Furthermore, the filmmakers also provide context early in each scene so that viewers understand what's happening at that point in time. Overall, the film is well-structured and superbly edited.

The film shows two broad categories of responses to school shootings. Some schools have adopted strategies and tools focused on stopping a shooter from harming others, while others have adopted strategies and tools focused on supporting the mental health of all students. Although it's not explicitly stated, it is implied that the second set of strategies would help a student find healthier ways to express his or her emotions instead of resorting to violence.

Logically, these strategies should not be mutually exclusive, but the filmmakers seem to suggest that the first set of strategies is favored by school boards and government agencies. At the beginning of the film, viewers are shown a number of technological measures used at one particular school, such as a badge monitoring system, cameras, body (and possibly facial) recognition systems, and a threat tracking system - most of which were funded by the state. Partway through this scene, an unnamed school administrator begins to describe some of these tools. Toward the end of the scene, the administrator confesses, "What keeps me up at night, is that the wolf is in the henhouse. I don't like using the reference in regards to our students, but the fact of the matter is that's the truth. The threat always comes from inside." This statement beautifully illustrates one of the tensions in the film. The strategies focused on stopping a shooter don't focus on preventing a student from becoming a shooter; they focus on protecting the other students. The administrator's discomfort in describing his students this way suggests he's aware that shooters aren't born, but made.

The scene shifts to a trade show focused on school security, with several vendors trying to sell their products. Some of the products shown in this scene are a flash bomb designed to distract the shooter but not harm other students, bulletproof dry erase boards, and first aid equipment. The viewer gets the impression that these products are both expensive to produce and expensive to purchase. This idea is emphasized in the next scene, which shows a woman running a small business, making hoodies lined with Kevlar. She was motivated to create her product because her next-door neighbor was shot, and she wanted to create protection that would be more accessible to poor people living in bad areas. Unfortunately, we learn in a later scene, her hoodies are still quite expensive to manufacture. The small business owner has sold many of her products to gun manufacturers and other large companies, which allows her to donate many of her hoodies to those who can't afford them.

In addition to the creation of technologies and physical measures meant to reduce harm, the film also examines teacher training as a method to stop shooters. In this next scene, a firearms trainer attempts to motivate a group of teachers by stating, "What's the opposite of fear? Love is the opposite of fear. You can just look back at your kids, and you love the kids that are getting shot outside. That's a huge, huge motivation." It's a jarring moment in the film; shortly after that statement, the scene shifts to the same trainer and teachers at a shooting range.

Perhaps recognizing the heavy emotional load of that scene, the filmmakers shift to our second set of tools and strategies - those focused on the mental health of all students. There are several scenes showing students of various ages engaging in mindfulness meditation. After completing a meditation exercise, the teachers and students discuss when and how they can use mindfulness in their daily lives. At one point, we're shown an old clip from Mr. Rogers, in which he says, "Everyone longs to be loved and longs to know that he or she is loveable. And consequently, the greatest thing we can do is to help somebody know they're loved and capable of loving." This is a poignant juxtaposition to the firearms training scene.

Unfortunately, the next scene gives us a clue as to why mental health isn't given more attention in schools: because people don't understand it. The filmmakers show us a school board meeting; a board member confidently - and incorrectly - declares that SSRIs (a commonly-prescribed class of antidepressants) are at the root of all school shootings. The viewer learns that the meeting is a debate on whether or not school security officers should be armed. Both a student and another school board member opine that having armed security guards will change the dynamic between students and security: we should make students feel loved and respected, and guns imply the opposite, especially to students from underrepresented minority groups.

This scene, and a later one, drive home the message that schools' responses to school shootings in general can have, and are having, an effect on students' mental health. One scene shows a math classroom going through a lockdown drill. The students and teachers are quiet and appear uncomfortable during the drill. Discussing the drill after it's completed, one student states, "I feel as if, um, having to do constant lockdown drills, is almost as traumatizing as having an actual situation like that."

The rest of the film circles back to earlier scenes as a means to complete those individual stories. The school administrator at the beginning of the film notes that the type of strategies and tools they employ were dictated by the provisions of the state grant they received; he would have preferred to spend money on mental health, social emotional learning, and similar strategies. Then we see the teachers demonstrate their newly earned proficiency with firearms.

This film is highly recommended for college and adult audiences. For college audiences, this film would be especially relevant to teacher education and school counseling departments. One aspect of the film that has not been mentioned yet is that it draws from footage taken in a variety of settings throughout the United States. The teachers learning to shoot live in an isolated rural area, not close to law enforcement. The students in the math classroom are in NYC. Some of the other locales in the film include Chicago, Pittsburgh, the San Francisco Bay area, and Texas City. As such, this film might also be useful for sociology classes focusing on differences between rural, suburban, and urban settings.

Awards:
Winner, International Emerging Filmmaker Award, 2020 Hotdocs; Official Selection, 2020 SXSW Film Festival; Official Selection, 2020 IDFA; Official Selection, 2020 Doclisboa International Film Festival; Official Selection, 2020 Camden International Film Festival; Official Selection, 2020 Dok Leipzig; Official Selection, 2020 Ji.hlava IDFF; Official Selection, 2020, Doku Fest; Official Selection, 2020 Festival dei Popoli; Official Selection, 2020 DMZ Docs; Official Selection, 2020 Maryland Film Festival; Official Selection, 2020 Tacoma Film Festival; Official Selection, 2020 Tempo; Official Selection, 2020 Rooftop Films Summer Series; Official Selection, 2020 Molodist; Official Selection, 2020 Melbourne International Film Festival; Official Selection, 2020 Docville; Official Selection, 2020 Sedona; Official Selection, 2020 Dokumentarci 23; Official Selection, 2020 AIFVF; Official Selection, 2020 Philadelphia Film Festival; Official Selection, 2020 Docpoint Tallinn; Official Selection, 2020 Gimli Film Festival

Published and licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 license. Anyone can use these reviews, so long as they comply with the terms of the license.