Kam
01-30-2006, 07:33 AM
Bubble - Soderburghs latest movie/experiment is about a group of three people working in a doll factory. its a strange movie thats a little awkward to watch, i think because of how straightforward it is. kind of like talking to someone who is a little TOO honest and open for a first conversation. its another of those slice-of-life type movies, at least for the first half, before slipping into a murder investigation. cast with local people from the area, including the local police chief playing a local police chief, the daughter of one of the characters is the daughter of the woman playing the part, etc. supposedly it wasnt fully scripted, but each scene was given its outline, etc. and the actors simply improv'd their way through the scene. it gives it all a very quiet, subdued feel. its nothing like Me, You, and Everyone We Know, which i think is a better movie, but its still interesting.
the first hook doesnt come until about 15 mins in, and i have to say, i was about to stop watching at that point, so it came just in time. it's a touch TOO slow and if it wasnt soderburgh, i'd prolly be less forgiving and have stopped watching sooner, but once the third character is introduced, it does pick up, and when the murder happens, it has a strange fascination to it as we see a small town investigation of a murder done by an actual cop playing a cop. no theatrics, i dont even remember any police yellow tape markers anywhere that indicate 'crime scene' or those kinds of devices. so overall, i'd say its worth checking out for the sheer experimental value of it to watch something not in the ordinary and at least attempts a little something different.
It was shot on hidef and the format has come a loooooooooooong way even since rodriguez in Once Upon a Time and even collateral with mann. the camera doesnt move very often, and when it does combined with screen movement is the only time when it starts to have that video-feel. other than that, it looks phenomenal and is beginning to have a few (very few) advantages over film. i still think its a stretch before reaching the zenith of 35, but hd is looking better than ever.
now to the rant section: bubble is being released simultaneously on cable, dvd, and in the theaters. albeit most people will not be able to see it in the theaters, because theater owners dont want to exhibit a movie that's available on dvd at the same time. presumably (and this is mark cuban and my opinions) because theaters dont stand a chance competing against people's homes as far as entertainment goes. that a theater owner, when looking at his customer base, believes they do not offer a product worthy enough to pull people out of their homes. we've had some discussions running on the board for a while now about how poor the movie-going experience and here is a prime example of it.
one reason, perhaps the only reason, people go to the theaters now is a timing issue. the only place they can watch xyz movie if they want to watch it is at the theaters. otherwise they'll have to wait until the dvd comes out. if the choice is given to watch a movie at a theater or at home, which would you take? i guess in most cases, it would be the home, because of how crappy going to the movies is with all our aforementioned gripes of commercials, growing prices, crowds, attitudes, dirt, etc. so i liked mark cuban's challenge to the theater owners out there and agree with it. why should we go to the theaters if we can stay at home to watch the same thing? for the experience of going to the theaters. right now, that experience is pretty crappy with a few exceptions, most notably which arent available to most of the movie going public (ala the arclight, the landmark sunshine (owned by mark cuban) imax theaters, etc). there was a deal struck that a percentage of dvd sales would get bounced back to the theaters. as the case is now, it happens to favor cuban since (i think) over half of the 32 or so theaters showing it are from his landmark chain. but that's only because the other theater owners are boycotting it and putting in movies you can't watch on dvd right now, like Annapolis and Big Momma's House 2, and other such scintillating fare. and... who's to argue, BMH2 made 28mil in the 3,261 theaters its showing over the weekend and bubble only made $72,000 in the 32. so i guess the theater owners and hollywood know what they're doing.
the first hook doesnt come until about 15 mins in, and i have to say, i was about to stop watching at that point, so it came just in time. it's a touch TOO slow and if it wasnt soderburgh, i'd prolly be less forgiving and have stopped watching sooner, but once the third character is introduced, it does pick up, and when the murder happens, it has a strange fascination to it as we see a small town investigation of a murder done by an actual cop playing a cop. no theatrics, i dont even remember any police yellow tape markers anywhere that indicate 'crime scene' or those kinds of devices. so overall, i'd say its worth checking out for the sheer experimental value of it to watch something not in the ordinary and at least attempts a little something different.
It was shot on hidef and the format has come a loooooooooooong way even since rodriguez in Once Upon a Time and even collateral with mann. the camera doesnt move very often, and when it does combined with screen movement is the only time when it starts to have that video-feel. other than that, it looks phenomenal and is beginning to have a few (very few) advantages over film. i still think its a stretch before reaching the zenith of 35, but hd is looking better than ever.
now to the rant section: bubble is being released simultaneously on cable, dvd, and in the theaters. albeit most people will not be able to see it in the theaters, because theater owners dont want to exhibit a movie that's available on dvd at the same time. presumably (and this is mark cuban and my opinions) because theaters dont stand a chance competing against people's homes as far as entertainment goes. that a theater owner, when looking at his customer base, believes they do not offer a product worthy enough to pull people out of their homes. we've had some discussions running on the board for a while now about how poor the movie-going experience and here is a prime example of it.
one reason, perhaps the only reason, people go to the theaters now is a timing issue. the only place they can watch xyz movie if they want to watch it is at the theaters. otherwise they'll have to wait until the dvd comes out. if the choice is given to watch a movie at a theater or at home, which would you take? i guess in most cases, it would be the home, because of how crappy going to the movies is with all our aforementioned gripes of commercials, growing prices, crowds, attitudes, dirt, etc. so i liked mark cuban's challenge to the theater owners out there and agree with it. why should we go to the theaters if we can stay at home to watch the same thing? for the experience of going to the theaters. right now, that experience is pretty crappy with a few exceptions, most notably which arent available to most of the movie going public (ala the arclight, the landmark sunshine (owned by mark cuban) imax theaters, etc). there was a deal struck that a percentage of dvd sales would get bounced back to the theaters. as the case is now, it happens to favor cuban since (i think) over half of the 32 or so theaters showing it are from his landmark chain. but that's only because the other theater owners are boycotting it and putting in movies you can't watch on dvd right now, like Annapolis and Big Momma's House 2, and other such scintillating fare. and... who's to argue, BMH2 made 28mil in the 3,261 theaters its showing over the weekend and bubble only made $72,000 in the 32. so i guess the theater owners and hollywood know what they're doing.