Bubble
Dir: Steven Soderbergh
2006
*
Steven Soderbergh has quite a large group of devout followers by who he can do no wrong but I really can't see what makes him so special. By 2006 'A Steven Soderbergh Experience' was becoming more of a warning than a selling point. I understand why you'd want to make a social piece with non-actors, film it on a Mini DV and just release it without fanfare, sure, if you've got the money then I'm all for the 'Point and shoot' philosophy. It's just that you have to have a firm message, good angle or open discussion to make it interesting. Life is hard in middle America, I get it, and? There is nothing knew or particularly interesting going on here. The budget was $1,600,000 and it made $145,382. It's not all about the money (except it is), but Bubble is a film with a flawed message that failed to make a fraction of what it cost to make. Revolutionary film making it is not. On a personal note, and no one is to take offense at this, but there is nothing worse than American films trying to be European, other than perhaps European films trying to be American. By 2006 Steven Soderbergh had made 2 really good films, 4 extremely over-hyped films and 1 of the two worst films he's ever made (interestingly, his 2 worst films come straight before and straight after Bubble, making Bubble a filler in the worst film sandwich of all time). He also made 3 of my favorite films of resent years after Bubble, so I like him more these days but I still don't get the cult following by 2006 but once again I seem to be the minority.