Steven Soderbergh's "Bubble"

I watched it. Not bad. Obviously shot on digital video with non-actors and improvised dialog. Takes place in a small Ohio town. They used the actors' homes and apartments as sets.

I looked it up on-line. I was shocked to see that the thing cost $1,600,000. I hope that means that they paid the actors really well. I can't figure out where the money went otherwise. It only grossed about $260,000 and I don't know what it made from other sources. But for God's sake!

Am I this out of touch? Am I this oblivious to the cost of making a movie, even one that looked like it was shot on a camcorder? Maybe if you're a big shot like Soderbergh you just HAVE to spend the money. You can't very well show up in a town with a few thousand dollars and camcorder and announce that you're making a movie.