In case you haven’t already heard the news: a Kickstarter campaign for a Veronica Mars movie exceeded its $2 million goal in 24 hours. This is what the figure looked like as of 10:30am GMT today:
It will almost certainly go much higher.
It’s kind of insane, the goodies backers will receive. At the $50 level, supporters get a digital version of the film soon after its release as well as a physical DVD that will contain bonus material, plus a limited-edition T-shirt, plus a PDF of the shooting script, plus other fannish goodies (like ongoing updates on the production). Just on a solely dollar-value basis, the film itself is pure gravy for a fan. I mean, it’s really easy to spend $50 for a DVD package and T-shirt from one’s favorite geeky thing even if that dough isn’t going to help get a movie made.
If this works, how can it not be replicated? More Firefly, anyone?
Is fan funding the wave of the geek-movie and -TV future?
(If you have a suggestion for a QOTD, feel free to email me. Responses to this QOTD sent by email will be ignored; please post your responses here.)
Ha! I put the “Firefly” comment on your facebook page, when you first listed the link to the kickstarter.
It totally could be the wave of the future. Or the wave of now. I’ve contributed to two campaigns, one for Eat Your Kimchi’ studio and the other for a Sherlock fan art thing. I think it’s fantastic and could be just the thing so many people who love their shows and books are looking for.
What about you? Is it something you would ever consider?
The problem I foresee here is licensing. Making the movie itself might not be too expensive if the actors work for scale (Kristen Bell is a fairly big star these days), but the companies who created it in the first place may still hold the rights and demand a cut. For instance, the Gargoyles comic sank not because it was too expensive to make, but because they couldn’t afford to keep paying Disney’s licensing fee. So that’s the one obstacle I see to this idea, though it will differ depending on the status of specific products.
If enough of these are successful, perhaps artists, including shows, could be much more independent from the get-go, resulting in less licensing issues later.
I want to believe this, but I suspect that this Kickstarter wouldn’t have been nearly as successful nearly as quickly if it had been simply “An Untitled Original Rob Thomas Project With Kristen Bell”. It’s the fandom for the pre-existing product that drove this fundraising, not the creatives themselves.
What if it were the license holders who set up Kickstarters to gauge fan interest?
I love that crowdsourcing has become a viable alternative to capitalism. :)
(By which I mean investment of money expecting increased money in return, rather than investment of money expecting the product in return)
All these kickstarter things baffle me. I’m not one for extras, so perhaps that’s the problem. I also don’t like the idea of giving my money to something that we have no idea how it’s going to turn out. The movie/show/game that you fund could turn out to be horrible. I’m not a fan of the “something is better than nothing” way of thinking.
I will buy your product after it comes out and ONLY if it’s good. If this prevents the product from ever being made, then so be it. Obviously lots of folks think differently.
It also has got me thinking about the disposable cash people have. The economy is in the tank, and yet there are millions of people happy to donate money to projects with unknowable futures. Not so much the ones throwing down a few bucks, but those giving 25, 50, 100, or more. Bizarre.
Just playing devil’s advocate here:
What if a movie from Your Favorite Franchise came out and got only middling or even bad reviews from critics? Would you see it anyway? Would you wait for other fans to see it and let you know if it’s any good or not? Or would you be there on opening weekend anyway and hope for the best?
Well, I don’t really HAVE a favorite franchise, so there’s that.
But to answer the question: No doubt, I would not see it in the theater. I only see 5 or 6 films a year in the theater, so they have to be worth it. A film with mediocre reviews across the board would not be one of them. I might be interested enough to put it in my queue, though. Or pay the 1.25 for a redbox rental. No real harm in that.
Any yet the lottery is a trillion dollar business, weird.
Most of the world economy is based around forking over money today for the expectation of return later down the line. It’s not that strange.
It is for ME. I’m far too picky and skeptical to be dropping cash on pretty much anything risky. I don’t gamble, play the lottery, or have enough expendable cash to play the market. I wouldn’t do it even if I did.
Warner Bros are supporting some what with marketing and what not so we still need our corporate overlords
I’m not familiar with “Veronica Mars”, but I’m just waiting for the hurricane of whining, disappointment and “it’s not what it used to be…” complaining that will almost inevitably ensue from many of the same people who eagerly threw their money at this project.
Sometimes the past belongs in the past.
Yeah, Whedon is already addressing this: http://www.buzzfeed.com/adambvary/joss-whedon-on-kickstarter-and-firefly
How many people do you think would have donated money to see Brett Ratner’s Veronica Mars?
Probably less, granted, but this doesn’t actually address my point (which admittedly could have probably been phrased better). No, people probably wouldn’t contribute greatly to a Brett Ratner-helmed “Veronica Mars”, but then, “Veronica Mars” by Rob Thomas with Kristen Bell is a known and established property with a devoted fan-base; Brett Ratner’s “Veronica Mars” isn’t. And a wholly original project by Rob Thomas isn’t either. Yes, Rob Thomas himself has a fan-base, but is it really that likely that he would have raised $2.5 million in a single day for a wholly original project? Would “Veronica Mars” fans really be throwing money at him to quite this degree if they weren’t expecting to get new “Veronica Mars” at the end of it?
I’d love it if Kickstarter really was a serious alternative to the studio system, but I’m skeptical that that’s anything but a long way off. And even if it isn’t, this particular example isn’t a good example of that by any means; this, like many successful Kickstarter projects, is a known name and a known property drawing upon an established fan-base who have a pretty good idea of what they’re getting from the start. Show me Kickstarter rallying around an unknown offering something original to such a degree, then I’ll sit up and take notice.
But look at someone like Amanda Palmer, who left the studio system and then raised a huge amount of money on Kickstarter to fund an independent album. You can argue, of course, that she developed her following while she was recording for a studio label, but I think we’re going to see artists who bypass the corporations entirely. Long before Kickstarter, Ani DiFranco was making money on her own record label.
In the meantime, Kickstarter is a viable alternative for people like Danielle Ate the Sandwich, who promotes her music on YouTube and funded her last album on Kickstarter. Most people have never heard of her, but she surpassed her Kickstarter goal by a fair amount of money. And the album is terrific. Even if Kickstarter never produces an international superstar or a blockbuster movie without studio help, it’s allowing smaller artists to keep making art, and I think that’s a worthy goal on its own.
There’s probably have to be alternative marketing for fan-based projects. Look at the successful Youtube channels, started from unknowns: samples of their work are well-liked, then gets paired up with Youtube. Likewise, other works might offer 3-5 minute shorts and then fully develop the project if the interest is there.
Speaking of “Firefly”, for what it’s worth Joss Whedon’s already addressed this, and apparently if ever it does happen, it’s a few years off at least:
http://www.buzzfeed.com/adambvary/joss-whedon-on-kickstarter-and-firefly
ETA: D’oh! Anne-Kari, you beat me by four hours! *shakes fist*
This seems to me like a slightly abusive approach to the kickstarter system. The film’s budget is going to be, what, a minimum of around five mil even if they shoot it like a TV episode? The point of the kickstarter was to “gauge fan interest” and get the studio to put up the real money for the project – but that means that the kickstarter itself can offer, as you point out, ridiculously good value deals because it doesn’t really need to do more than cover its costs.
Which is fine, but… what about the effect on other kickstarter projects, where the initiator has tried to do an honest profit and loss calculation, and ends up offering something that looks like much worse value than this because he’s trying to raise actual money?
“Even if Kickstarter never produces an international superstar or a blockbuster movie without studio help, it’s allowing smaller artists to keep making art, and I think that’s a worthy goal on its own.”
Absolutely true, but again I don’t think I ever said otherwise — I’m just skeptical that it’s ever really going to be more than that (not that that, like you say, isn’t worthy in itself) in that I don’t think it’ll ever really challenge the studio system in any serious way. In fact, this scenario suggests to me that the studio system, far from being threatened, will in fact increasingly find ways of co-opting it, possibly even at the continued expense of smaller artists who may benefit from it more.
To be honest, other than Amanda Palmer I’ve never really heard of the other artists you mention (which, not to sound dismissive of them — particularly since Ani DiFranco, according to Wikipedia, certainly has much to be proud of by the sounds of things — perhaps suggests that my point isn’t entirely invalid), and like you say she already had a pretty solid fan-base to begin with when she did so. Again, not to diminish what she accomplished, but I don’t think it entirely invalidates my point either.
I agree / concede we are and will see more artists bypass the corporations to go directly to the people, but the established properties that do so — and the established system — will, I’d still argue, always maintain the edge.
You’ve never heard of Ani DiFranco? I’m either older or more fringe than I thought. ;-)
In order to spare you any unnecessary angst (age related or otherwise), I should confess that my knowledge of indie folk rock is woeful. :-)
As for age … well, given the age on my birthday cake today I think I can go round for round with you on that score.
FRINGE!!!
http://www.tvbomb.co.uk/wp/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/The-Fringe1.jpg
[Edited: This is weird…the wrong picture is showing up in the preview. Not what comes up if you click on the link.]
Happy Birthday!
Thank you! :-)
The Onion, with some opinion on this:
http://www.theonion.com/articles/veronica-mars-film-sets-kickstarter-fundraising-re,31672/?utm_source=Facebook&utm_medium=SocialMarketing&utm_campaign=standard-post:headline:default
Both cool pics, though!
Glad you like both, but it bothers me that the bubble pic got stuck.
At first I thought it was just me…so I cleared the cache (I had opened a link that was that picture) but it didn’t seem to help.
Anyhow, you ARE fringe. So am I. Revel in it.