Did you know that a profile of Andrew Bujalski appeared in ESQUIRE a couple of months ago? And did you know that that profile was written by Chuck Klosterman? I certainly didn’t, not until I saw this link at Fimoculous today, with a dig at the NY Times for being late to the party (if they’re late to the very concept of Mumblecore, then I should get extra super double credit for being early … right?) Anyway, the article came out while I was still locked in the dark embrace of corporate America, so I’m giving myself a pass.

What’s most interesting to me is how much has changed since this story appeared in May (or, actually, since Klosterman wrote it, which was probably in April, as Bujalski apparently leaves their meeting to go file his taxes). For one thing, in a footnote (!), Klosterman tells us that Bujalski is considering shooting his third film over the summer in either Austin or Boston. Boston, it would seem, at that point had the upper hand, as Klosterman writes: “One of the complications with shooting in Austin is the heat: During filming, all air conditioners need to be turned off, lest they interfere with the audio. This is a problem I had never even considered.” That film wrapped two weeks ago. In Austin.

And then there’s this semantic debate waiting to happen: “For a time, Bujalski sardonically embraced the term ‘mumblecore’ to describe his filmmaking style, but it did not catch on.” Oh, to relive those innocent days of May 2007, before ‘mumblecore‘ caught on!

I’m just being catty now, aren’t I? Okay, I’ll stop.

When is it time to demarcate a filmmaking “movement”? What if the filmmakers in this movement don’t want to be grouped into any kind of movement at all? And what if the films in this movement revolve around the crisis of self-definition? Could it get any worse for one of its members than to have to talk about feeling self-conscious about being in a movement?

An article in the Spring 2007 issue of Filmmaker Magazine begins by asking these very smart questions, which immediately intrigued me. The article, “What I Meant to Say,” looks quite thoroughly at the independent film movement known by many as “mumblecore.” There are several posts waiting to emerge from this article, so I hope Paul and some of the other guys will share their thoughts in the coming days. For now, just check out the article and take note of the collaboration aspect of this movement.

The article generalizes these mumblecore films as “severely naturalistic portraits of the life and loves of artistic twentysomethings.” Names like Joe Swanberg (LOL), Mark Duplass (The Puffy Chair) and Andrew Bujalski (Funny Ha Ha) are all names that bubble to the top of this “scene,” if you can call it that. (I’ll never forget stumbling across Funny Ha Ha with some friends. It was definitely unlike anything we had ever seen.) Here’s another description from the article:

The first aesthetic indicators–and, it must be stressed, not all friends of mumblecore make films like this–are improvised dialogue and naturalistic performances, often by non-actors. The films employ handheld, verite-style digital camerawork and long takes. Budgets are tiny. The plots hinge on everyday events. The stories are often obvious reflections of the filmmakers’ lives. Most characters are white and educated and pursue creative endeavors when not pursuing one another. They are sensitive. They are sincere.

So that’s mumblecore, and it’s been slowly emerging for a while now. But apparently something interesting started taking shape this year at SXSW, causing people to sit up and pay attention. The festival’s promotional shorts were co-created by eight so-called mumblecore filmmakers, most of whom also had feature-length films at the festival (most of which were made with, written with, or acted by some of the other filmmakers).

It may be hard to follow all that, but you get the idea–this is a tight group. Read the article and you’ll see all the names and how they’re intertwined. It’s quite remarkable. And it made me think that something exciting is happening, whether or not I love this style of film (and I’m not convinced, yet, that I do–I’ll get back to you after I see more). The exciting thing that’s happening, from my perspective, revolves around a shared filmmaking experience that organically draws in ideas and talents from anyone who has some to offer. It’s not about competition–rushing to finish your film first, get it to festivals, attract the most attention. It’s about the love of making movies like this, of finding a format for expression that works, and sharing with others through that format.

In the end, these films, as the Filmmaker articles says, are ultimately about “trying to communicate.” While all films are trying to communicate something, it’s often something that’s inside one person (the writer or director). What’s interesting (and rather poetic) about mumblecore, is that people are interacting and trying to communicate on the screen as well as through the creation process. That seems to be filmmaking collaboration at its best.