i, like a lot of people, am not exactly excited about seeing ben stiller in another movie (maybe EVER), but i am excited to see greta finally get a sink-or-swim chance at hanging with more seasoned, professional (if you will) talent.

and yes, john m. is right i think. swanberg is much more a lesson in networking than anything else. like a lot of folks making the festival rounds, i’ve never cared for his films, never found them that interesting and have always found them hard to sit through — mainly for the almost complete absence of cinematography and production design. there are other “mumblers” that make much better films; bujalski is a genuinely talented filmmaker, which was apparent for anyone who saw FUNNY HA HA without knowing a thing about him or the yet to be named movement.

when it comes down to it, all members of the so called “mumblecore” movement should be hella thankful that critics and festival audiences are paying enough attention to give them a name in the first place. it means people are watching your movies, which is something to embrace, not shun.

i don’t think we’ll see great directors with heart following suit. like, i don’t expect terrence malick to jump on board.

I’ve never been on a Swanberg set—and at this point, it’s not likely I’ll ever be invited to one—but as cast member of “Girlfriend Experience” I daresay that Soderbergh’s methods of working with his performers and setting up scenes is quite different, and it’s likely I’ll discuss those at length once Soderbergh’s picture comes out. (At which point I’ll have actually SEEN it, I hope.) And I do believe that I am the only participant in “Girlfriend Experience” whose consciousness has been sullied by the more-or-less complete Swanberg oeuvre. Which awareness, honest to God, I never brought to the set of “GFE.”

Karina really does set up a weird causal relationship, in which Steven Soderbergh is somehow emulating Joe Swanberg. (She’s cleared this up in the comments, kinda by refuting her own words.) The differences between, say, BUBBLE, and the mumblecore movies are many–a very strict and calculated formalism, a 3-act script, and the use of tightly controlled “non-actors.” Most of the mumblecore films are assemblages of “friends and acquaintances” who improvise a great deal, and in the case of Swanberg, virtually everything–narrative shape, beats, etc–is created in the edit. (Truly, he would be lost without digital editing.)

BUBBLE’s coming from a completely different place. Fast and cheap, yes, but concerned with personal truths, em, I’m not so sure.

In any case, sounds like THE GIRLFRIEND EXPERIENCE is getting closer to the world of improvisation.

All well and good. But then Karina, in the comments, says she’s not concerned with whether or not a director uses a tripod, and this just seems strange: are you saying you’re not concerned with a director’s formal approach to his/her art? That’s a little limited, no? Formally, something like the first half of CHE and BUBBLE are miles and miles from mumblecore–this doesn’t interest you? FULL FRONTAL and the second half of CHE might be closer…this is one of the ways we talk about cinema, right?

What really puzzles me has nothing to do with Karina’s take, but rather Noah Baumbach’s take: he’s using Joe Swanberg as a camera person?!? In my opinion, nothing in Swanberg’s films suggests an exceptional, or even unique, eye. He’s, what, gonna be operating for Harris Savides or something? I’m assuming this is on video? Has Swanberg ever even worked with, like, lens choice?

Too much weirdness. Swanberg is a cunning little networker, though, I gotta hand it to him–somehow, he’s framed himself as a pioneer, and it’s sticking.

Ah well. Everything seems to be working according to his plans…mwahahaha.

And Mr. Millich, I agree with the mass consciousness sentiment, but I don’t think anyone was really pushing for improvised, DIY, film-school sensibilities which is what the ‘mumblecore’ movement seemed to indicate.

Yes Dogme was cinematically rough-and-ready, but improvisation and naturalism it wasn’t always. Mumblecore as the title suggests also seems very tied to the communication of a certain generational age-group.

Also I think Bujalski is more of the forerunner of ‘mumblecore’ and his output started in 2002 with Funny Ha Ha.

So Soderbergh was pursuing this strategy before anybody knew who Swanberg was. Or mumblecore. Or that whole style of filmmaking.

Like I said, it’s just a mass consciousness thing.

So… I don’t know about influence. I think there’s just a general mass consciousness going on. You know? Because most of my work has been improvised (or at least blocked as it’s been shot), and I know he’s familiar with my work as well. I think there’s just a general vibe out there.

Just to note, regarding Baumbach, Scott Rudin is producing his movie, and it was Rudin who hired Bujalski to write a while back. So you can see some connecting threads there.

Is there any difference between mumblecore and say, Dogme ‘95?…

I don’t see much of an influence from mumblecore on Soderbergh. He was shooting DV way back with Full Frontal — he even appeared in magazine ads for the XL-1. Furthermore, Soderbergh’s two recent “digital experiments” (he shoots EVERYTHING digital now with his Red, EVERYTHING: Girlfriend, The Informant, Cleo, etc.) were both locked off on tripods — not handheld like mumblecore.

As far as Baumbach is concerned, both Squid and Margot were handheld slices of life, so it’s not unrealistic for him to see an aesthetic relation to his own work in mumblecore.

Baumbach isn’t much of a filmmaker either, though, so I guess it is fitting that he is moving in with the Swanberg clan.