Bubble

I had been meaning to see Bubble for a really long time. The DVD always popped up on my "recommended films" list on NetFlix and the cover looked really compelling. When I finally saw it I have to admit I was totally surprised. Steven Soderbergh has such a range, from high budget, high profile films that feature every star in Hollywood to something like Bubble, which was shot in a small town in Ohio using non-actors from the area and a mostly improvised script. All of his films are interesting and all of them, in my opinion, are good.

Bubble is a slice of life film which goes very dark very quickly with very little explanation. The non-actors that make up this perfectly awkward ensemble cast do a spectacular job integrating their own personalities and experiences with the plot of the film. The performances in this film are wonderful and could not have been achieved with big name actors.

Bubble was also shot on DV which doesn't show at all. I have always said, if a filmmaker has truly mastered DV then the audience will never know it's not film. Granted some shots in Bubble couldn't pass for 35 mm but it's pretty damn close.

Bubble is complex in it's simplicity. This is the fist of Soderbergh's 6 low budget picture deal with HD Net. The other 5 will follow the same formula: choose a subject, choose a town, choose local actors. If you feel like seeing something way outside the mainstream but oddly close to home Bubble is a good choice. Just don't watch it expecting any of the characteristics of modern Hollywood.

Bubble (2005)

I think any movie by Steven Soderbergh was at least worth looking at if only because he takes what you might call safe chances. But they are chances. Some are brilliant or at least very successful, such as "Erin Brockovich" or "Traffic," and others are well done and worthy side trips like "Che" or even the recent "Contagion." But then there are clunkers like the well-intentioned "The Good German" shot using vintage equipment and trying hard to be the real deal 50 years late.

So "Bubble" looks like something straight from the Indie world--a small unknown cast, a simple kind of location shooting, modest production values, and full of decent sincere acting. And a decent idea, at least enough to draw you in: a group of people work in a struggling doll factory in an Ohio town and a new employee gets murdered. In a very believable almost documentary way the local detective looks for answers. And the murderer is found.

Well folks, that's it. There's a very long build up to the crime, setting up in fifty minutes what a good noir would do in five. We get to know the small cast of very ordinary folk. They are mostly likable, but all a bit quirky. (They live in West Virginia, actually, across the river from the factor.) There is no real suspense or curiosity required during this time, just patience.

Then there is the murder (not shown, just told). And the detective makes his rounds interviewing each of these people we now know as viewers. And we know kind of who might have done it or why. And then the crime is solved (and the perp is no surprise, and is intentionally not meant to be). And then the movie ends.

I don't know if there's some kind of surreal intention here, or if it really is about how mundane life is in Middle America even when a killing is involved. But it's not enough. The movie is short (75 minutes) so it's not the end of the world (as "Tree of Life" was for a lot of people, or "Barry Lyndon" depending on your taste). So try it out. The doll factory scenes are briefly interesting. The side characters are subdued and fine. The cop is wonderful and a bit drab.

You might decide this is a film about relationships since that ends up being the core of the movie, or about personality types (since these get dissected by the cop interviews) but if so, there are a million ways to make this more moving or interesting or odd or anything.

Focused mediocrity?

The lives of small-town workers, as insular as the title suggests, and the way they interact with one another unaware of these ties, real or imagined or wished for, is dissected in Steven Soderbergh's de-glamorized little experiment of a movie. It probably won't cause a big splash -- it's not meant to -- but to anyone aware of its existence, it should be seen, even when the experience may not be the most satisfactory.

Martha and Kyle work dead-end jobs in a doll factory. Nothing important happens to them, at least, not as envisioned by us, who may -- whether we're aware of it or not -- have better lives than they do. Martha dreams of going to Aruba for a vacation one day, Kyle wants to save money for a car. The exchange of small talk is a big part of these people's lives, a way of them to have someone who is there, who will listen, even when they may not respond back, or even care.

While I know it's been done before, I was surprised at how authentic the ad hoc dialog was: I felt myself thinking, I've had these exchanges of thoughts, dreams, experiences, even over coffee and fast food. I may not live in a small town like the nameless place in Ohio but I'm not that different from these people, and after all, aren't we all looking for something better? Context doesn't change things, it just places them in a different locale.

Martha and Kyle may not know it, but they have a lot more shared history together but because it's so mundane it looks irrelevant. How many times have we gone to lunch with co-workers every day on the clock at 1:00 PM, spoken the same small words while ordering the same food and beverages, and one day, when this doesn't happen, we feel lost? It's what happens to Martha at the arrival of the monkey-wrench that Rose represents.

Rose has a murky past that gets hinted at throughout her brief participation, and her sole presence is enough to cause the subtlest of shifts within Martha who continually watches her, maybe even without knowing it. I know people like Martha. They don't know you and they don't want to get to know you since you are the implied enemy, and they hint at only a veiled animosity while going through these practiced motions of social politeness and a willingness to "help". Rose, too, knows she is not liked by Martha and is also concealing it all under a Mona Lisa smile.

After all, Rose is the new girl, the one who is different, the one who -- in Martha's words -- scares her. But why? Because Rose will, in Martha's world, become a distraction to her perfectly organized world of small actions and repetitive complacency. Rose is restless, and that kind of people attract others who may have been sleepwalking through life and give them a possibility of change. Kyle is attracted to change and drops hints here and there. Now, whether they involve Rose or not is for his character to disclose to us, and even then, it doesn't matter if he does that or not: the story of BUBBLE isn't dependent on a fixed outcome because it's a story about real people, and their stories are less drama-heavy, less swooning, and entirely dependent on personal choice.

Had this been a Hollywood version, Martha would not have been the moon-faced woman we see here (which we've seen in any Walgreen's) but Kathy Bates. Kyle's and Rose's date would have had more interaction, sensual flirtation, the inevitable exchange of a romanticized kiss instead of this bland, awkward chit-chat in a sad bar. And even when it would have ended in non-chemistry as it does, there would have been more glitz and glamor. Here, it's again, just two people who have little in common past the initial spark, again sharing their hopes and dreams with some alcohol.

I know this type of movie has been done before, but BUBBLE impressed me and is still growing on me. These are relationships that are closer than the characters involved would like to admit to, and the actions or presence of one will dictate how the other will react. Martha is at the center of this triangle and is probably the most aware of the three: she's not quite there, but maybe a little too there at the same time. And that makes her story, and that of BUBBLE, so resonant.

I was lucky enough to see this movie followed by a Q&A with the screen writer. I thought this was one of the most amazing movies i have ever seen. They used all non-actors who actually lived in the town. The acting was so true, Rose's daughter was her real daughter and the reactions that they got from the child were so genuine that they could only come from true relationship. They kept the "actors" in the dark about how the story would unfold and shot in sequence. this could not be more clear when you watch the film. The reactions were true in a way only the best actors could pull off. They were not acting, they were being themselves in these contrived situations. They used the actors real houses, clothes and life experiences. I thought it was one of the most brilliant and unconventional films of our time.

Bubble was a pleasant experience with a solid script, great performances and sharp direction. With echoes from Aki Kaurismäki's work, Soderbergh gives us a intimate movie which borderlines between a tragicomedy and a mystery tale.

I expected the low budget to show, but this movie was absolutely beautifully shot and I still don't believe that the equipment fit in one van... The actors were very good, and it's hard to believe they weren't professionals.

All in all, a very good film which I plan to view several times. I am left eagerly awaiting the next movie in Steven Soderbergh's series of low-budget movies shot in America.