Well, I’ve watched about four of the Active Shooter episodes thus far. I think their style of approach is classy – very tasteful and respectful. The formula for the series appears to be told by either law enforcement, surviving victims or victim family members or friends which gives us a chance to get to know these people and feel for them from their vantage point of being victimized or discovering their loved one had been shot and killed. As they relay what has happened to their loved one, it kind of builds on to the story of events until we are told what actually takes place during the shooting and how exactly it occurred in detail. Midway through, the shooter is discussed. A brief background on their life is given. What they did and how they end up: either apprehended or found having committed suicide. The show spends just enough time on the shooter but it never lingers or spends a gratuitous amount of time on them because the arc of the story always resides through the various storylines being told through each of the victims’ family/friends eyes. I think that is a very classy way to address this documentary. If the shooter was the sole focal point there would probably be a lot of complaints especially given how often we have shootings in the US. I’m sure Showtime wanted to handle the show in a manner that would not inspire other shooters to get their own celebrity weekly showcasing on ‘Active Shooter’. After having watched a few of these now, I almost tend to think Cullen will not be used as the usual influencing ‘expert’ brought in as he has been on other documentaries. *crosses fingers* And that is because the formula of this show appears to utilize the victims to tell their collective stories leading up to the shooting and the fallout from the tragedy. So, if we can count on that – my hope is that only the Columbine victim families and classmates, who were there and experienced the massacre first hand, will be used as the ‘experts’ rather than bringing in Cullen to color everything with his confabulation.
Of course, for those of us who are into the case, it would be great to have a really insightful documentary examination of the boys. But I tend to think there is always that concern that we are spending too much time and emphasis on ‘the shooters’ which appears gratuitous as though we are tipping the scales and giving them far too much attention which then disrespects the victims, making them seem incidental, if the program gives 95% of the time to the perpetrators. There is one documentary specifically on the boys that I can think of that came out in 2002 called Columbine: Understanding Why ( pre-Cullen) that involves a bunch of psych experts discussing the boys’ potential motives. It was so-so interesting but didn’t delve too deep. Most of the conclusions they came to were pretty obvious from the start for anyone that really studies the case. If they ever made one of these again, I think unfortunately, the doc would enlist the bias of Dave Cullen by default and Peter Langman. In which case, it’s probably for the best it didn’t happen.
Somehow I tend to think only amateurs that know the case well and understand the boys as they do themselves could make the kind of insightful documentary we’d really want to see. This type of honest documentary would seek to include former classmates and friends in interviews that knew the boys personally. It’d be a production that could truly pitch a constructive, preventative light to the public by delving into the bullying, depression, rage and mental illness which initially victimized those boys and made them hell-bent on the destruction of others and themselves. The show could explore all the reason for the ‘Columbine Effect’ and why there have been so many others that have followed in their footsteps with school/mass shootings. It would really give the public real insightful food for thought rather than just regurgitating everything we already ‘officially’ know as told by the so-called ‘experts’.