No Actors for Soderbergh's Bubble

I can't help but applaud Steven Soderbergh for his production and distribution decisions on Bubble. I think the film speaks volumes about what can be done outside of the studio system. But did he go too far by casting non-actors? Notice I didn't write "unknown actors," but "non-actors."

Soderbergh's goal, as I see it, was to show us that we don't necessarily need the huge studio budgets or name actors behind a film for it to be good. To this I say, Bravo! Or Here Here! Or even F'ing Aye! But I can't but feel that he has betrayed the acting community a bit by casting no-name actors.

Indie films are about getting it done together - without the "machine" forging your way. I am a fan of indie movies (well most), and I see them as a group of unknown or unproven "specialist" coming together for a common goal: the film. Screenwriter working with director, working with cinematographer, working with actors... and so on. Often, we're all nobodies that believe in a story enough to bust our asses to get it done. For what? Recognition. More work. A career.

Soderbergh didn't hand the camera over to a non-cinematographer; he didn't use a script by someone who had never written a screenplay... so why use actors who have never acted?

Indie films are for dreamers - dreamers who are working hard and searching for their break. Soderbergh is a talented, accomplished director that can offer such a break. I love that he wants to bring in unknowns to these projects, but I feel it is his duty, or should be, to do just that. Yes, bring in unknown actors, but, with projects this precious, the goal should not be to use non-actors.

If you're interested, here's my review of Bubble.