Bubble
After slumming in a slightly entertaining way with the 2004 cash cow “Ocean’s Twelve,” please join me in welcoming Steven Soderbergh back to the realm of real filmmaking. And though it may not look like much on the outside, in reality “Bubble’s” as bold a return- in conception, if not story- that you could ask for from an Oscar winner (for 2000’s “Traffic”). The story- written by his “Full Frontal” writer Coleman Hough with perceptive feeling and fascination- revolves around three workers at a doll factory in Ohio- Martha (Debbie Doebereiner, a non-actor- like all of the cast- who brings authenticity and quiet gravity to a tragic role), a middleaged worker caring for her father; Kyle (Dustin Ashley, note-perfect as a good kid whose grown up too soon), a young man who gets rides to work from Martha and lives with his mother; and Rose (Misty Wilkins, smart and down-to-earth in a pivotal role), who has a two-year old daughter and a boyfriend artist who accuses her of stealing his money- and a week that changes their lives forever.
“Bubble” is Soderbergh’s return to his indie roots, which have branched out in exciting and experimental ways in projects as diverse in both story and size, be it his 1989 debut “sex, lies and videotape,” his underrated oddball thriller “Kafka,” his underappreciated 1993 Depression drama “King of the Hill” (one of his best), his duel 2000 Oscar-winners “Erin Brockovich” and “Traffic,” or his misunderstood 2002 science-fiction drama “Solaris” (which only got better with a second look). But his unforced and unflinching intelligence isn’t the only thing that distinguishes the $1.7 million dollar “Bubble”- which would probably be just a generic indie con job in lesser hands; the way with which it came to audiences is meant to shake us up as well. The film was released in theatres by Mark Cuban and Todd Wagner, who through their Magnolia Pictures put it on the screens of their Landmark Theatres in a limited run in late January…with a twist. In the span of four days from its’ January 27 debut in theatres, “Bubble”- the first of reportedly six low-budget films Soderbergh is collaborating on with Cuban and Wagner (I’ll watch every single one; Soderbergh has few peers among American filmmakers)- also became available to viewers via pay-per-view and, on January 31, DVD. The release was intended to be the start of major shakeup in film distribution, which saw a major blow in the steadily-declining profits of theatrical box-office and not just a rise in DVD sales and rentals but also a speeding-up of the timetable, and proof that you could release a film in different formats and still hook audiences into theatres while cutting down on marketing, and allow them to buy the DVD not long after. A bold idea that- according to Magnolia’s accounting on opening weekend- paid off; though not a smash, “Bubble” reportedly tripled its’ budget in profits between the three options, proving their point (even if the film didn’t exactly burn up the box-office).
Did it really? It’s a good start, but until we see the big studios gambling their mega-projects on multi-format simultaneous releases (“Mission: Impossible III” in theatres Friday…buy it on DVD next Tuesday!!)- and convincing the major theatre chains to go along for the ride- we won’t know for sure if the strategy really works. Still, with one of Hollywood’s smartest and boldest filmmakers leading the way, and making films that give hope to up-and-comers who have limited means to tell stories we feel strongly about (“Bubble” is an early front-runner for my Top 10 of ’06), it’s hard not to feel inspired by what Soderbergh, with Cuban and Wagner, is trying to do.
