Bubble's Recent Activity

list Bubble's Recent Activity - Spout http://www.spout.com/ Recent community activity around Bubble on Spout Copyright 2005-9 Spout, LLC Spout RSS http://www.spout.com/images/SpoutLogoRSS.jpg Bubble's Recent Activity - Spout http://www.spout.com/ 136 30 Film:Bubble http://www.spout.com/films/Bubble/267774/default.aspx

Title: Bubble
Year: 2006
Director: Steven Soderbergh
Plot: Steven Soderbergh followed up his slick, star-studded sequel, Ocean's Twelve, with Bubble, a small-town drama about workers in a doll factory, played by a cast of unknowns. Martha (Debbie Doebereiner) seems to have acclimated herself to a very simple life. She works at the factory, where she eats lunch with a younger co-worker, Kyle (Dustin Ashley), and goes home to take care of her elderly father. Her routine is disrupted when an attractive young woman, Rose (Misty Wilkins), is hired at the factory to help them with the holiday rush. Rose soon tells the others that she's eager to leave their town, where there is "nothing to do." She immediately attracts Kyle's attention. One night, Rose asks Martha to baby-sit for her two-year-old daughter while she goes out on a date. Martha is startled to learn that her date is with Kyle. When Rose returns home that night, she's greeted by her angry ex-boyfriend, Jake (K. Smith), who accuses her of stealing from him. Martha looks on while Rose and Jake have a heated confrontation. The next morning, one of the characters is found murdered, and a detective (played by Decker Moody) begins to investigate. Bubble was written by Coleman Hough, who also scripted Soderbergh's Full Frontal. It was shown at the 2005 New York Film Festival, presented by the Film Society of Lincoln Center. ~ Josh Ralske, All Movie Guide
Times Tagged: 21
Number of Lists: 14
Number of blog posts: 3
SpoutRating: 3
]]>Fri, 27 Feb 2009 23:02:31 GMTBubble2006Steven Soderbergh<a href="/players/P___112040/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Steven Soderbergh</a> followed up his slick, star-studded sequel, <a href=/films/229402/default.aspx style='text-decoration:underline'>Ocean's Twelve</a>, with Bubble, a small-town drama about workers in a doll factory, played by a cast of unknowns. Martha (Debbie Doebereiner) seems to have acclimated herself to a very simple life. She works at the factory, where she eats lunch with a younger co-worker, Kyle (Dustin Ashley), and goes home to take care of her elderly father. Her routine is disrupted when an attractive young woman, Rose (Misty Wilkins), is hired at the factory to help them with the holiday rush. Rose soon tells the others that she's eager to leave their town, where there is "nothing to do." She immediately attracts Kyle's attention. One night, Rose asks Martha to baby-sit for her two-year-old daughter while she goes out on a date. Martha is startled to learn that her date is with Kyle. When Rose returns home that night, she's greeted by her angry ex-boyfriend, Jake (K. Smith), who accuses her of stealing from him. Martha looks on while Rose and Jake have a heated confrontation. The next morning, one of the characters is found murdered, and a detective (played by Decker Moody) begins to investigate. Bubble was written by Coleman Hough, who also scripted Soderbergh's <a href=/films/205209/default.aspx style='text-decoration:underline'>Full Frontal</a>. It was shown at the 2005 New York Film Festival, presented by the Film Society of Lincoln Center. ~ Josh Ralske, All Movie Guide21Tag Target (>10)1433http://www.spout.com/ProductImages/u49874etw94.jpghttp://www.spout.com/films/Bubble/267774/default.aspxFilm Spout Post: Noah Baumbach + Greta Gerwig = The Future http://www.spout.com/blogs/karina/archive/2009/2/27/40728.aspx

Post By: Karina
Post To: Karina on SpoutBlog
Post Date: 2/27/2009 6:02:31 PM
Body: The news that Greta Gerwig will star opposite Ben Stiller in Noah Baumbach’s upcoming Focus Features-financed Greenberg would seem to represent just the latest landmark in an evolution. As polemicists rush to reject mumblecore as an ill-defined concept and Joe Swanberg as an auteur, Noah Baumbach is borrowing both the Nights and Weekends director as a cameraman and Swanberg’s frequent ingenue as a star. Even Steven Soderbergh is adopting the production methods with which Swanberg has become associated –– shooting fast and cheap on digital, using acquaintances of the production in lieu of actors and asking them to improvise based on an outline, etc. Swanberg invented none of it, but neither did Soderbergh, and when you consider Bubble as a kind of experiment in exotica, the latter has never gone as far in a quest for contemporary naturalism as he does in The Girlfriend Experience. There’s something, at the very least, undeniably interesting about the fact that both filmmakers will release films in 2009 made roughly the same way. As a result, the m-word might cease to exist as a stand-alone concept –– and I think no one would be happier about that than some of the filmmakers who bristle at being lumped into a movement just because they made a movie about 25 year-olds shot on video –– but its stars and spirit are being assimilated into mainstream indie film. Are boundaries finally breakind down between Indiewood and, uh, DIYwood? Was this inevitable, or are we surprised? Originally posted on:SpoutBlog » Karina Longworth
]]>Fri, 27 Feb 2009 23:02:31 GMTKarinaKarina on SpoutBlog2/27/2009 6:02:31 PMThe news that Greta Gerwig will star opposite Ben Stiller in Noah Baumbach’s upcoming Focus Features-financed Greenberg would seem to represent just the latest landmark in an evolution. As polemicists rush to reject mumblecore as an ill-defined concept and Joe Swanberg as an auteur, Noah Baumbach is borrowing both the Nights and Weekends director as a cameraman and Swanberg’s frequent ingenue as a star. Even Steven Soderbergh is adopting the production methods with which Swanberg has become associated –– shooting fast and cheap on digital, using acquaintances of the production in lieu of actors and asking them to improvise based on an outline, etc. Swanberg invented none of it, but neither did Soderbergh, and when you consider Bubble as a kind of experiment in exotica, the latter has never gone as far in a quest for contemporary naturalism as he does in The Girlfriend Experience. There’s something, at the very least, undeniably interesting about the fact that both filmmakers will release films in 2009 made roughly the same way. As a result, the m-word might cease to exist as a stand-alone concept –– and I think no one would be happier about that than some of the filmmakers who bristle at being lumped into a movement just because they made a movie about 25 year-olds shot on video –– but its stars and spirit are being assimilated into mainstream indie film. Are boundaries finally breakind down between Indiewood and, uh, DIYwood? Was this inevitable, or are we surprised? Originally posted on:SpoutBlog » Karina Longworth Spout Post: Bubble - Underworld: Evolution http://www.spout.com/blogs/moviebabe/archive/2007/7/18/15230.aspx

Post By: MovieBabe
Post To: MovieBabe Blog
Post Date: 7/18/2007 5:27:00 PM
Body: By Tricia Olszewski Thank you, Steven Soderbergh: I finally get to review a movie that’s going straight to video. And cable. And, actually, first-run theaters. Bubble, as you might have heard, is “Another Steven Soderbergh Experience,” which actually has little to do with the film itself. Instead, it refers to the director’s decision to release his latest more or less simultaneously in three different formats. “For the first time,” Soderbergh’s Web site trumpets, “consumers will truly have their choice of how they want to watch a new film.” Of course, the accuracy of that statement depends on what you mean by “first.” And “truly.” And, actually, “choice.” Bubble’s backer, 2929 Productions, distributes its own DVDs; Bubble, listed at $30, is priced above the norm. 2929 also owns both HDNet Movies, the cable channel broadcasting Bubble, and Landmark Theatres, which is offering an exclusive engagement. Reportedly, other chains backed out of the Experience...of surely losing money. Even 2929, which has committed to producing five more so-called “day-and-date” releases with Soderbergh, limited its gamble, allotting Bubble a budget of only $1.6 million. The movie itself makes even that modest price tag seem bloated. Bubble is as spare as its 73-minute running time in telling the story of a murder in a depressed, lower-middle-class Ohio town. Every dawn, middle-aged Martha (Debbie Doebereiner) wakes and feeds her infirm father before leaving to pick up Kyle (Dustin James Ashley), a kid she works with at a doll factory. They get doughnuts in the morning and eat their lunches together. Though their conversations never seem to go beyond awkward small talk, Martha tells Kyle that he’s her best friend. So when an attractive young woman named Rose (Misty Dawn Wilkins) is hired to airbrush faces onto the dolls’ creepy plastic heads and begins joining the pair for lunch, Kyle gets interested and Martha gets perturbed. For a film by a notoriously flashy director, Bubble is remarkably low-key—sometimes self-consciously so. (When Martha drives Rose to her second job as a housecleaner and takes a tour of the large but bland suburban home, she reacts as if she’s in a palace, a scene that needlessly underscores the movie’s ordinary-folk milieu.) No one talks much, only a handful of scenes are accompanied by Robert Pollard’s acoustic-guitar score, and what little dialogue there is in Full Frontal writer Coleman Hough’s script is typically delivered in a monotone by the actors, all of whom are nonprofessionals from southern Ohio. Soderbergh fills the time between major plot points—which, after Rose’s hiring, include a date, an accusation of theft, a murder, and an arrest—with silent shots of either rows of freaky doll parts or what day-to-day life is like in this town: Empty streets. Trailer homes. A church full of blank-faced worshippers. There’s nothing about Bubble that would make its viewing on a big screen seem necessary by anyone but the most dedicated—or business-obsessed—of cinéastes. Someone staring at a TV is a recurring image here, and the tube might be the best medium for this relentlessly modest exercise in mood-conjuring. Soderbergh’s bare-bones approach, though, is absorbing enough to be occasionally hypnotic, the actors are working-class-dejected through and through, and Hough’s script even throws in a tiny red herring or two to make you second-guess the film’s apparent predictability. Bubble’s only significant flaw is its abrupt and simplistic conclusion, which is likely to leave viewers unsatisfied no matter which way they’ve chosen to watch it. Day-and-date would have been a great way to release Underworld: Evolution—minus the first-run-theaters part. Improbably more tedious than its predecessor, 2003’s Underworld, Evolution continues the story about a centuries-old war between Death Dealers and Lycans (vampires and werewolves, for anyone who’s been blissfully unexposed to the franchise). The scariest thing about this sequel isn’t the bloody, goopy, never-ending fights between the man-beasts, but the poorly written voice-over at the end: “An unknown chapter is still ahead....All I know is, darkness is still ahead.” It sure is, if we’re to be subjected to Installment No. 3. Evolution’s narrator and main character is again Selene (Kate Beckinsale), a “vampire warrior” who has to wear latex cat suits, keep her hair stringy, and unload a gangster’s worth of bullets to settle some kind of ancient score. (You’d have to go to the film’s writers—returning director Len Wiseman and Danny McBride, with some character contribution from Kevin Grevioux—to get a plot summary less murky.) The movie begins with an explanatory scroll about the offense committed some 800 years ago that makes poor Selene battle Lycans to this day. Helping her, mainly by gazing into her eyes, is Michael (Scott Speedman), a half–Death Dealer, half-Lycan hybrid. Like the first Underworld, Evolution is all gray-blue darkness and chill. Also like the first Underworld, Evolution is long on looks and short on everything else except portentous, ridiculously costumed characters who speak of “serums” and “bloodlines.” Though some of the undead’s methods remain mystical—a bite of another’s wrist, for instance, gives the nibbler a fast-mo replay of the victim’s memories—these ghouls are not averse to technology: Computers and surveillance equipment play a big part in the hunt, and battles are won not only by old-fashioned flesh-ripping and body-hurling but also by a cache of automatic weaponry large enough to give 50 Cent flashbacks. It all seemed like a promising, badass twist on the vampire genre back in ’03, especially when centered on the saucy Beckinsale (who, not willing to let a lack of talent get in the way of love, eventually married Wiseman). But the black-haired Brit, who was given, if nothing else, the action heroine’s requisite number of impressive stunts and one-liners in the first installment, is here reduced to a killing machine dull enough to make fans of Tomb Raider yawn. With its overly complicated story, zero-personality characters, and increasingly uninspired action, this Underworld is one that gets very tiresome very quickly, making its 105 minutes feel like a bloodsucker’s lifetime.
]]>Wed, 18 Jul 2007 21:27:00 GMTMovieBabeMovieBabe Blog7/18/2007 5:27:00 PM By Tricia Olszewski Thank you, Steven Soderbergh: I finally get to review a movie that’s going straight to video. And cable. And, actually, first-run theaters. Bubble, as you might have heard, is “Another Steven Soderbergh Experience,” which actually has little to do with the film itself. Instead, it refers to the director’s decision to release his latest more or less simultaneously in three different formats. “For the first time,” Soderbergh’s Web site trumpets, “consumers will truly have their choice of how they want to watch a new film.” Of course, the accuracy of that statement depends on what you mean by “first.” And “truly.” And, actually, “choice.” Bubble’s backer, 2929 Productions, distributes its own DVDs; Bubble, listed at $30, is priced above the norm. 2929 also owns both HDNet Movies, the cable channel broadcasting Bubble, and Landmark Theatres, which is offering an exclusive engagement. Reportedly, other chains backed out of the Experience...of surely losing money. Even 2929, which has committed to producing five more so-called “day-and-date” releases with Soderbergh, limited its gamble, allotting Bubble a budget of only $1.6 million. The movie itself makes even that modest price tag seem bloated. Bubble is as spare as its 73-minute running time in telling the story of a murder in a depressed, lower-middle-class Ohio town. Every dawn, middle-aged Martha (Debbie Doebereiner) wakes and feeds her infirm father before leaving to pick up Kyle (Dustin James Ashley), a kid she works with at a doll factory. They get doughnuts in the morning and eat their lunches together. Though their conversations never seem to go beyond awkward small talk, Martha tells Kyle that he’s her best friend. So when an attractive young woman named Rose (Misty Dawn Wilkins) is hired to airbrush faces onto the dolls’ creepy plastic heads and begins joining the pair for lunch, Kyle gets interested and Martha gets perturbed. For a film by a notoriously flashy director, Bubble is remarkably low-key—sometimes self-consciously so. (When Martha drives Rose to her second job as a housecleaner and takes a tour of the large but bland suburban home, she reacts as if she’s in a palace, a scene that needlessly underscores the movie’s ordinary-folk milieu.) No one talks much, only a handful of scenes are accompanied by Robert Pollard’s acoustic-guitar score, and what little dialogue there is in Full Frontal writer Coleman Hough’s script is typically delivered in a monotone by the actors, all of whom are nonprofessionals from southern Ohio. Soderbergh fills the time between major plot points—which, after Rose’s hiring, include a date, an accusation of theft, a murder, and an arrest—with silent shots of either rows of freaky doll parts or what day-to-day life is like in this town: Empty streets. Trailer homes. A church full of blank-faced worshippers. There’s nothing about Bubble that would make its viewing on a big screen seem necessary by anyone but the most dedicated—or business-obsessed—of cinéastes. Someone staring at a TV is a recurring image here, and the tube might be the best medium for this relentlessly modest exercise in mood-conjuring. Soderbergh’s bare-bones approach, though, is absorbing enough to be occasionally hypnotic, the actors are working-class-dejected through and through, and Hough’s script even throws in a tiny red herring or two to make you second-guess the film’s apparent predictability. Bubble’s only significant flaw is its abrupt and simplistic conclusion, which is likely to leave viewers unsatisfied no matter which way they’ve chosen to watch it. Day-and-date would have been a great way to release Underworld: Evolution—minus the first-run-theaters part. Improbably more tedious than its predecessor, 2003’s Underworld, Evolution continues the story about a centuries-old war between Death Dealers and Lycans (vampires and werewolves, for anyone who’s been blissfully unexposed to the franchise). The scariest thing about this sequel isn’t the bloody, goopy, never-ending fights between the man-beasts, but the poorly written voice-over at the end: “An unknown chapter is still ahead....All I know is, darkness is still ahead.” It sure is, if we’re to be subjected to Installment No. 3. Evolution’s narrator and main character is again Selene (Kate Beckinsale), a “vampire warrior” who has to wear latex cat suits, keep her hair stringy, and unload a gangster’s worth of bullets to settle some kind of ancient score. (You’d have to go to the film’s writers—returning director Len Wiseman and Danny McBride, with some character contribution from Kevin Grevioux—to get a plot summary less murky.) The movie begins with an explanatory scroll about the offense committed some 800 years ago that makes poor Selene battle Lycans to this day. Helping her, mainly by gazing into her eyes, is Michael (Scott Speedman), a half–Death Dealer, half-Lycan hybrid. Like the first Underworld, Evolution is all gray-blue darkness and chill. Also like the first Underworld, Evolution is long on looks and short on everything else except portentous, ridiculously costumed characters who speak of “serums” and “bloodlines.” Though some of the undead’s methods remain mystical—a bite of another’s wrist, for instance, gives the nibbler a fast-mo replay of the victim’s memories—these ghouls are not averse to technology: Computers and surveillance equipment play a big part in the hunt, and battles are won not only by old-fashioned flesh-ripping and body-hurling but also by a cache of automatic weaponry large enough to give 50 Cent flashbacks. It all seemed like a promising, badass twist on the vampire genre back in ’03, especially when centered on the saucy Beckinsale (who, not willing to let a lack of talent get in the way of love, eventually married Wiseman). But the black-haired Brit, who was given, if nothing else, the action heroine’s requisite number of impressive stunts and one-liners in the first installment, is here reduced to a killing machine dull enough to make fans of Tomb Raider yawn. With its overly complicated story, zero-personality characters, and increasingly uninspired action, this Underworld is one that gets very tiresome very quickly, making its 105 minutes feel like a bloodsucker’s lifetime. Spout Post: What do I think? http://www.spout.com/blogs/ingrid/archive/2006/3/21/532.aspx

Post By: ingrid
Post To: ingrid Blog
Post Date: 3/21/2006 5:37:00 PM
Body: Saw the movie last night. It's haunted me all day. If you need your movies highly polished and following established plotlines, don't see this. This is a whole different game. See it if you love raw, felt films in unmitigated settings. Cast with people who live in the West Virginia town where the film was shot, people who have not acted before, people who came up with their own dialogue, for the most part, it's a film that comes off as suffocating and binding as life can feel in these places, if you're afraid of losing your way in them. I couldn't stop watching and couldn't stop looking away. Both. The three lead actors are luminous. Amazing. The DVD offers their casting interviews, which are wonderful extras. It stuns me how some people just glow on film. These interviews reinforce that. My favorite character in the movie might be the doll factory where many scenes are shot. I have to think of it as a character. What a place! Could have been a heavy club of a metaphor, especially the scenes at the end, but somehow it never is. It's murky and scary and dark and innocent all at the same time. Great little dumbshow/painting/illustration going on there. Amazing. We never see a fully assembled doll, do we? (Unless that's one of them in a ground-up heap in the daughter's mess of toys?) Ah. I loved it.
]]>Tue, 21 Mar 2006 21:37:00 GMTingridingrid Blog3/21/2006 5:37:00 PMSaw the movie last night. It's haunted me all day. If you need your movies highly polished and following established plotlines, don't see this. This is a whole different game. See it if you love raw, felt films in unmitigated settings. Cast with people who live in the West Virginia town where the film was shot, people who have not acted before, people who came up with their own dialogue, for the most part, it's a film that comes off as suffocating and binding as life can feel in these places, if you're afraid of losing your way in them. I couldn't stop watching and couldn't stop looking away. Both. The three lead actors are luminous. Amazing. The DVD offers their casting interviews, which are wonderful extras. It stuns me how some people just glow on film. These interviews reinforce that. My favorite character in the movie might be the doll factory where many scenes are shot. I have to think of it as a character. What a place! Could have been a heavy club of a metaphor, especially the scenes at the end, but somehow it never is. It's murky and scary and dark and innocent all at the same time. Great little dumbshow/painting/illustration going on there. Amazing. We never see a fully assembled doll, do we? (Unless that's one of them in a ground-up heap in the daughter's mess of toys?) Ah. I loved it. Spout Tag:murder http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/murder/MemberTagFilms.aspxmurder
Number of films tagged: 8748

Number of people who tagged: 157

Number of times used: 830

]]>Fri, 04 Dec 2009 02:57:25 GMT8748157830Tag Spout Tag:betrayal http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/betrayal/MemberTagFilms.aspxbetrayal
Number of films tagged: 1035

Number of people who tagged: 62

Number of times used: 154

]]>Mon, 27 Jul 2009 04:28:04 GMT103562154Tag Spout Tag:detective http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/detective/MemberTagFilms.aspxdetective
Number of films tagged: 2345

Number of people who tagged: 43

Number of times used: 105

]]>Wed, 12 Aug 2009 13:02:59 GMT234543105Tag Spout Tag:lovetriangle http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/lovetriangle/MemberTagFilms.aspxlovetriangle
Number of films tagged: 2902

Number of people who tagged: 38

Number of times used: 75

]]>Tue, 16 Jun 2009 13:12:01 GMT29023875Tag Spout Tag:struggle http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/struggle/MemberTagFilms.aspxstruggle
Number of films tagged: 886

Number of people who tagged: 19

Number of times used: 35

]]>Fri, 28 Aug 2009 19:22:40 GMT8861935Tag Spout Tag:low-budget http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/low-budget/MemberTagFilms.aspxlow-budget
Number of films tagged: 42

Number of people who tagged: 18

Number of times used: 46

]]>Thu, 19 Nov 2009 00:30:35 GMT421846Tag Spout Tag:factory http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/factory/MemberTagFilms.aspxfactory
Number of films tagged: 300

Number of people who tagged: 16

Number of times used: 20

]]>Mon, 26 Oct 2009 03:24:45 GMT3001620Tag Spout Tag:poor http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/poor/MemberTagFilms.aspxpoor
Number of films tagged: 19

Number of people who tagged: 15

Number of times used: 19

]]>Tue, 08 Sep 2009 19:51:11 GMT191519Tag Spout Tag:simple http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/simple/MemberTagFilms.aspxsimple
Number of films tagged: 14

Number of people who tagged: 14

Number of times used: 15

]]>Sat, 10 Jan 2009 12:35:56 GMT141415Tag Spout Tag:doll http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/doll/MemberTagFilms.aspxdoll
Number of films tagged: 116

Number of people who tagged: 10

Number of times used: 12

]]>Wed, 12 Aug 2009 13:02:59 GMT1161012Tag Spout Tag:dolls http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/dolls/MemberTagFilms.aspxdolls
Number of films tagged: 7

Number of people who tagged: 10

Number of times used: 10

]]>Fri, 30 Jan 2009 20:51:48 GMT71010Tag Spout Tag:visions http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/visions/MemberTagFilms.aspxvisions
Number of films tagged: 7

Number of people who tagged: 5

Number of times used: 8

]]>Mon, 01 Jun 2009 00:42:49 GMT758Tag Spout Tag:digital http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/digital/MemberTagFilms.aspxdigital
Number of films tagged: 5

Number of people who tagged: 4

Number of times used: 5

]]>Thu, 12 Jun 2008 19:50:55 GMT545Tag Spout Tag:natural http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/natural/MemberTagFilms.aspxnatural
Number of films tagged: 32

Number of people who tagged: 4

Number of times used: 4

]]>Sat, 25 Jul 2009 15:07:58 GMT3244Tag Spout Tag:mundane http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/mundane/MemberTagFilms.aspxmundane
Number of films tagged: 2

Number of people who tagged: 2

Number of times used: 2

]]>Fri, 25 May 2007 09:23:09 GMT222Tag