Dan Harmon, the erstwhile creative force behind the widely-beloved, but very-unwidely-watched NBC meta-sitcom Community, and Charlie Kaufman, the creator of a bunch of beloved meta-films like Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, and Being John Malkovich, are teaming up to work on a film project, which they hope to pay for through the crowdfunding site Kickstarter. Oh man, if internet nerds are 1/3 as good as they are paying for content as they are at not paying for content, I predict this thing is going to be a huge success. Wait, does making gifs count as currency yet?
But should it be a success?
As we've seen with recent Kickstarter success stories, like the astronomically popular Amanda Palmer project, which we wrote about here, one of the sticking points for me about crowdfunding sites is that they tend to work very well for people who already have a broad and well-established fan base, and not so much for the normal, every day artistic dreamer they were designed to give a leg up to, like the guys behind the Mmmmaven project I wrote about in the Globe a few weeks ago, who are trying to get an electronic music school of the ground to give one example. (Donate here if you like the idea.)
I'm still not sure if the scales being weighted toward the already successful is an inherent problem or not, or just a corrective function of the entertainment economy, because realistically, lots of people shouldn't be encouraged to follow their dumb dreams. But it's not hard to imagine droves of people taking justifiable umbrage about two famous and presumably rich filmmakers, like Kaufman and Harmon, who are asking fans to bear the financial burden of their pet projects. It's a lot easier for me to do that myself in this instance considering it's for a fucking stop motion film, 100% of which are brutal vortexes of woe and the absolute antithesis of joy.
On the other hand, I've long this thought idea of crowdsourcing a TV or film project that gets canceled, or can't find funding is a long overdue economic model. How many Firefly fans, for example, wouldn't have ponied up $100 for another season? Multiply that times a few million, or even less, and you've got more than enough to make it a reality. A nerd friend and I used to say the same thing about the woefully underrated Sarah Connor Chronicles right after it got canceled. I would pay $100 today to fund another season I said. My friend agreed. I suspect that wasn't an uncommon opinion at the time among fans. Same thing for Arrested Development or whatever other cult show you want to mention.
What do you think? Does this type of thing seem like the way forward, or is it offensive to you? What are some shows or films you would pay to see revived? How fucking awful is stopmotion?
brought to you by
9 comments:
I think it's great and don't see why people so often categorize it as "begging" or "charity"... the very structure of Kickstarter requires that funders receive things in return. It's closer to a pre-order than charity.
The gap between the bigs and the littles in entertainment is always marketing. Until something bridges that gap, well known folks are always going to get the most funding. People just have to work to build an audience of support. As you say, most people's dreams deserve to be brutally crushed anyway.
That's ba good point about getting something in return, but most of the things your average person will get are trinkets and tokens right?
Depends on the project, I suppose... my band did it to press vinyl and anyone who donated over $10 got one + a T. I'm sure some projects are shady and/or give you garbage.
Like you said, a lot of folks would be happy to pay $100 for a Firefly trinket + more episodes actually existing.
I think the distinction is if it's something that could have otherwise been made through other channels. If it could be, and you're trolling for money, then eff you.
It's both. I think it's kind of douchebaggy for successful people to ask for funding when they don't need to get it from their fans. Harmon and Kaufman? Come on, they can have any project they want funded in no time; Amanda Palmer probably didn't need to do a Kickstarter,etc. On the other hand, though, how can you blame them? No one is forcing anyone to contibute.
I can't wait until the next level butthurt nerd rage starts to set in. Like, I'd pay $100 for a new season of Firefly. I love that shit. What happens when donors start to feel more of a sense of ownership after funding something, though? "I didn't pay $500 so that you could kill off my favorite character or turn him homo!"
Fourthing or whatever the sentiment that if you can already afford to do it yourself you're kind of a DB trying to get other people to fund it. On the other hand, the music industry is a pyramid built upon a base of the actual talent, where few artists will ever see the money that the "upper levels" will see, so more f'ing power to you if you want to offer special things for fans to help you take it to the next level. Top tier promo companies cost thousands per month.
Nightmare Before Christmas?
The shit they gave to the backers of that Bret Easton Ellis, Paul Schrader, Lindsay Lohan, flick seemed pretty tight.
Roll in the sack with Lilo?
Post a Comment