Another TV show on the big screen: Veronica Mars!

[Doctor Jones]

Not that this keeps me up at night, but celebrities and Hollywood and people of wealth using kickstarter are pretty much abusing its original purpose. Kickstarter, at its core is really meant for independent filmmakers who aren't in the position and don't have the resources (i.e. the wealth) in getting a film made. Of course Hollywood would take advantage of this because it's free money. Bell and these people are millionaires and THEY can't fund this themselves?

Fincher and Whoopi Goldberg did the same thing.... why do they need to? So they can't get funding for a film. Boo hoo. Try and go through the flaming hoops like everyvody else does. Of course kickstarter doesn't care, because they get 5% from this. And they'll continue to because it seems like Hollywood has found a way in getting free money. I mean it's genius: getting the people to pay for a film instead of them who are in a much better position to do it anyway. So we just give it to them.... Worst of all, if this movie ia a huge success, you won't see a dime. It would only just add money to the studios who are getting this free money.

This is also a SAG issue. You pay and get a speaking role? So instead of the SAG actor who's been working their ass off to get auditions are going to lose out to a rich douche who easily pays 10,000 dollars like it's nothing to talk in a movie?

This is poor character on Bell's part. How she can just look into a camera and ask us for money for them. I'm coming from the perspective of being a part of a kickstarter campaign myself. My major is adapting a Stephen King short story and compared to them... shouldn't that money be going to people like us? In three days they are already over two million. And worse, they tell you to not stop donating. It's going up as I write this. And we have **** compared to them. So who are the donors going to be more inclined to donate to? Rich established celebrities where you can get to talk in a film or for an college educational program like us? Tell me how that's fair.

I think we, the people who aren't even making this film for a profit, should be getting at least a couple thousand of this money, since that is our goal. But unfortunatly, we aren't famous celebrities who are known and can take money like this and gain tens of thousands every thirty seconds. Nope, just people trying harder in getting money, because we need it more. I hope this doesn't become a rising trend.Because this could be terrible for independent filmmakers if this continues.

[ThePowerCosmic]

Why can't this ever happen with shows I like? S**t.

[Dangerman]

Originally Posted by Thought Crime

I do not think there is any type of movie that I would donate an amount to help make happen, and then have the possibility of being unhappy with the final product. But, I guess the same thing can be said for practically anything else. Unless can be refunded for said possible crap product.

Well to be fair we all donate to movies be it buying tickets, things related to the movie, or even the DVD's. We all donate to it one way or the other its just a matter of doing it knowingly or unknowingly.

[mr. peasant]

Originally Posted by The Question

This article seems kind of full of crap to me.

It's argument seems to boil down to "Veronica Mars shouldn't on kickstarter because the IP is owned by a major studio and that means it lacks indie cred to be on kickstarter." And that just sounds like whiny ******** to me.

All that stuff about "double charging fans" seems like nonsense to me. If a fandom wants something to happen and donating money and buying extra stuff is how you make it happen, I don't see how that's exploitation. They're getting what they want and they're giving what they need to in order to make it happen.

So yeah, this article is full of crap.

I second this; especially since there's a double standard being applied. Everyone who fund their project using Kickstarter is essentially "walk[ing] away from the risk" while "still reap[ing] the reward". That's the entire concept of Kickstarter, for crying out loud!

Person X is unable and unwilling to take the financial risk needed to create Project Y. Consequently, said person then proceeds to crowd-source the project from others to a point where s/he is comfortable with the financial risk being incurred upon him/herself.

[Thought Crime]

***

[Lencho01]

Though I'd post the FSR article the Collider one talked about...

http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/opi...en-studios.php

There’s Room For Everyone At Kickstarter (Even Studios)

Features By Scott Beggs on March 14, 2013 | Be the First To Comment



Rob Thomas and Kristen Bell raised $2m through Kickstarter yesterday, and they did it in under 10 hours. As of this morning, their effort to score a budget for a Veronica Mars movie has secured their goal with about $500,000 and 29 days to spare. One guy, entrepreneur Steve Dengler, even gave $10,000 to the production to get a small speaking role in the film (and because he’s a big, big supporter of crowdfunding).

What they did took a certain kind of courage. Maybe not greater courage than the more-standardized model of getting money from fans when they hand it over at the box office, but absolutely a different type of courage. After all, it’s one nerve-wracking thing to convince studio executives that your idea has an audience, but it’s another to prove it out on the limb without the amount of fan support you thought you had. Simply put, it’s likely we’d all be writing different pieces if Thomas and Bell’s Kickstarter campaign were still languishing at $6,000.

Fortunately, fans have proven their overwhelming dedication to seeing Ms. Mars again by breaking records and ensuring that Thomas may actually get to include a big choreographed fight scene amid all the broody talking. With 29 more days to raise funds, who knows how high they might go.

Now, all of this comes with a catch: Warners (because they’ve held onto the copyright) will be distributing and making money off a movie that fans are funding. Depending on the deal they have with Thomas, the studio was just handed a free movie to do with what they please, and that’s caused a lot of concern among the people that get concerned about this kind of thing.

But you know what? It’s going to be okay.

Frankly, all the cultural hand-wringing is a bit bizarre. I get all the hypothetical arguments about what this will do to the state of filmmaking and about the generic boogeyman of corporate co-opting, but they all sound like the bellowing that happens when a remake of a classic film gets announced. Granted, I lived in that mindset a few years ago when the ramp up really started on that latter front, but the core truth — that a remake won’t erase every copy of the original — sunk in, and I got over it. That same core truth applies here alongside a few other reasons this revolutionary moment isn’t really such a big deal.

1. Veronica Mars is an ultra rare phenomenon. It’s a cult television show whose passionate fans persisted despite low ratings. They’ve called out for its return for years, and its creator has had countless phone calls and meetings trying to make something happen again. With Arrested Development taken care of by Netflix, you can count on one hand the properties that match Mars on these fronts, and even though studios are taking notice this morning, it’s highly unlikely that there’ll be a massive flood of studio projects hitting Kickstarter tomorrow.
2. Even if there are, even if we reach a point where studios are collectively putting up dozens of big movies on Kickstarter, the market will absolutely take care of itself. There will be a bigger backlash against the practice if it gets out of hand, and if there isn’t, who is any single person to tell fans what they should give their money to? If someone has waited a decade for a new Firefly series, isn’t $35 for a t-shirt and digital download a steal at twice the price?
3. It’s also pretty ridiculous to think that Veronica Mars‘ success is taking away anything demonstrable from any of the indie projects on the site. No one was on the cusp of donating $10 to a promising video artist’s stop-motion project when their Twitter feed lit up with the news.
4. And, if anything, there’s a higher probability that the high profile and larger buzz brought more attention to what Kickstarter is doing, which is a win for everyone.
5. Speaking of which, it’s a good time to remember that Kickstarter is a rising tide that lifts all boats. It’s not like the service has been fundamentally altered simply because a giant company discovered a use for it. They’re not making it exclusive to studio use or anything.
6. Oh, and if you’re still concerned about how the fabric of indie filmmaking has been altered here, you certainly don’t have to donate anything.

Ultimately, the concern all feels like whatever the opposite of schadenfreude is. Like when the star quarterback joined the chess club and turned out to be a natural. Or like when someone incredibly attractive wins the American Crossword Puzzle Tournament before winning the lottery.

Was it easier for Veronica Mars than the average, aspiring unknown? Of course. Of course. But even with its massive leg up, it’s still a creator selling the public on a vision and appealing to whether they think it’s worthwhile or not. Thomas is going to have a lot easier time with distribution, but the grounding factor is that this is a story that fans clearly want that would not have gotten made without them. Yes, Warners could have made it, but they didn’t, and they weren’t going to, and them’s the breaks. Now, Veronica Mars is going to be in theaters in 2014.

Finally, I want to toss out a hypothesis of my own: that studios finding ways to occasionally leverage Kickstarter is a good thing. I spoke with Vimeo’s VP of Creative Development Blake Whitman yesterday (the conversation will be part of this Friday’s Broken Projector Podcast), and when asked about whether they’d be comfortable with studios using their new Vimeo On Demand service, he said that all were welcome. Vimeo’s new product is also ostensibly for the indie creator out there trying to make a few bucks from his or her efforts, but it also seems reasonably within Vimeo’s best interest to court larger producers in order to offer their fans big movies and snag 10% of the ticket price at the same time.

Vimeo and Kickstarter are different programs, but big names and big money can also bring big attention. And more big money; Kickstarter and Amazon will net at least $180,000 now that Mars has passed $2m. That’s going to help keep their doors open so they can help indie filmmakers with their bootstraps, so with a few records broken and a model proven even more correct, it’s likely that there’s a Mars-themed party being planned at the Kickstarter offices right now to celebrate the rising tide.

Ultimately, all of this boils down to something unbelievably simple. If you feel that Kickstarter and other sites like it should be reserved solely for independent projects without celebrity faces instead of opening its virtual doors to studios, you have to ask yourself: Why can’t it be for both?

And this one...

http://scottalanmendelson.blogspot.c...ying-love.html

Thursday, March 14, 2013

How I learned to stop worrying & love the Veronica Mars film.

30,000 people donated an average of $64 during a several hour period yesterday, and thus we will be getting a Veronica Mars movie sometime next summer. Creator Rob Thomas and star Kristen Bell used Kickstarter to basically prove to Warner Bros. that there is indeed an interest in a continuation of the cult detective drama that ran for three low-rated seasons on the CW back in 2004-2007. The deal was basically to raise $2 million in a month and Warner Bros. would agree to distribute and market the film, giving it a limited theatrical release and the various home-viewing options. They hit their target at 5:55 pm this evening. I made a *****y joke earlier in the day about raising money to find domestic 'food insecurity' among American children by calling such an initiative 'Save Firefly!' or something to that effect. My first instincts were ones of priorities and what this said about our 'entitlement culture'. Upon reflection (I purposely didn't write anything immediately), I'm still not sure how I feel about this. This is indeed very interesting, it may even be *news*. But is it good news overall?

Obviously if you're among those who really really wanted a Veronica Mars movie or were involved in the Veronica Mars television series, then it's pretty good news. I don't know whether this will be a game-changer of any kind. I don't know if this will change how indies are funded or whether this is merely a variation on the 'get independent funding, then find a distributor' model of so many indie films. The idea of fans putting their money where their mouth is does have a certain worth. But I do know that thousands of people donated their money not to a charity or even to a proverbial starving artist, but to a multinational for-profit corporation with no promise of any kind of return on their investment. Thousands of people willingly donated their money to an incredibly wealthy corporation so that said corporation could make a movie which they would then theoretically pay $10 a piece (be it a theater ticket or a VOD price-point) to view in a year's time. They were basically paying Warner Bros. to do what Warner Bros. is supposed to do with the money they have already accumulated.

The Kickstarter page notes that a number of donors past the $10 range will receive various perks for their contribution (digital copies of the film, PDFs of the script, etc.). UPDATE: This fascinating article highlights the good news (most people who donated got something for their contribution) and the bad news (the rewards will be incredibly costly and time-consuming to produce) of the fundraising process. The donors receive no ownership stake in the final product, and the cost/reward is indeed something more akin to spending money to win tickets to buy a stuffed animal at a fair. It's not a complete wash, but it's along the lines of winning a stuffed bear worth $5 after spending $20 to accumulate the tickets. No one got ripped off since everyone knew that they were or were not getting for their contribution. For most, of course, the booty is merely beside the point, with the primary goal being merely the satisfaction of having donated in order to bring about a mainstream big-studio release based on a long-cancelled TV show. And that's the other part that really bugs me.
Veronica Mars was one of the best shows on television when it ran back in the mid-2000's. But it's been off the air for nearly six years. We live in an entertainment culture of presumed entitlement. We *deserve* more seasons of Arrested Development because uh... it ran for three solid seasons and only got cancelled when its ratings got so bad that they started dragging down the shows around them on Fox's schedule. John Carter absolutely deserves a sequel because the vast majority of critics and ticket-buyers just didn't get it and Disney really ought to sink another $250 million into a second chapter just because! In 1996, Mars Attacks! tanked at the box office. Burton fans such as myself licked our wounds and moved on. Today David Duchovny wants fans of The X-Files to start a letter-writing campaign because, bomb office catastrophe be damned, the fans obviously deserve a continuation of the nearly 20-year old television show. The idea that certain properties have a natural life cycle has given way to an entitled presumption that no franchise should die or end, ever.

I do worry about the various ways this can go horribly wrong. I do worry that studios will eventually start seeing this as a business model when dealing with geek properties. "Pay us $5 million and we won't cancel Revolution!". I worry that studios will demand some kind of Kickstarter upstart money before embarking on a film like (random example) Kick Ass. I worry that the allure of upfront investment from the very people who will buy tickets will make studios more likely to fund known properties as opposed to original pictures that won't necessarily drum up fanatical fan interest. I worry that geek-centric properties that are partially subsidized by fans will be even more dependent on giving the hardcores what they theoretically want and we'll end up with more 'Venom in Spider-Man 3' scenarios. On a societal level I worry that Kickstarter start-ups will get crowded out by rabid fans giving their money in order to buy an advance on an additional season of Jericho. And yes it does bother me that thousands of people basically made a charitable donation to a corporation. But there is indeed potential here.

If the announcement involved someone like George Lucas offering to help fund Guillermo del Toro's In the Mountains of Madness provided a certain financial goal-post was hit, after which Lucas donated the money to one of his charities, I'd admittedly feel better about it. If it were an announcement from Michael Moore offering to help fund a bunch of social issue-documentaries out of his own pocket provided there was financial interest, I might feel a little better about this. My misgivings are at least as much about what's being funded (Really? A Veronica Mars movie? They haven't moved on yet?) and who the money went to (again, basically it's a $2 million+ gift to Warner Bros.) than the concept at work. The idea of Kickstarter being used as a tool for raising capitol for well, anything at all, is of course the whole point of the program. That I really really don't think the world needs a Veronica Mars movie shouldn't preclude me from being happy for those who indeed voted with their wallet and made a pipe dream into a reality. I may have misgivings about what it all represents, but that doesn't mean I have to piss on everybody else's parade.

So in the meantime, mazel tov on the new Veronica Mars movie. I hope it's good, and I'll probably watch it when the time comes. But for now I'm hoping I'm wrong. I'm hoping that this indeed broadens the opportunities for aspiring filmmakers rather than leading to a bunch of Kickstarter projects intended to continue long-dead franchises. I hope studios don't look at this and see a way to offset at least a portion of their budget even for films they were going to make anyway ("We want to shoot Justice League entirely in IMAX, and $5 million can make it happen!"). And as for the other qualms, in terms of societal priorities and whether or not we just got somewhat grifted by a movie studio, it is what it is (it's not like I haven't severely cut back on charitable contributions since having kids). This is indeed something new and different that happened yesterday. Despite my misgivings and discomfort, I can at least take solace in the fact that A) something new and different happened yesterday and B) a lot of fans of a specific franchise are very very happy today. That's gotta count for something.

Scott Mendelson

[Sawyer]

Cry me a river.

[ThePowerCosmic]

Hope you have a canoe!

[Sawyer]

[-JKR-]

Originally Posted by Doctor Jones

Not that this keeps me up at night, but celebrities and Hollywood and people of wealth using kickstarter are pretty much abusing its original purpose. Kickstarter, at its core is really meant for independent filmmakers who aren't in the position and don't have the resources (i.e. the wealth) in getting a film made. Of course Hollywood would take advantage of this because it's free money. Bell and these people are millionaires and THEY can't fund this themselves?

Fincher and Whoopi Goldberg did the same thing.... why do they need to? So they can't get funding for a film. Boo hoo. Try and go through the flaming hoops like everyvody else does. Of course kickstarter doesn't care, because they get 5% from this. And they'll continue to because it seems like Hollywood has found a way in getting free money. I mean it's genius: getting the people to pay for a film instead of them who are in a much better position to do it anyway. So we just give it to them.... Worst of all, if this movie ia a huge success, you won't see a dime. It would only just add money to the studios who are getting this free money.

This is also a SAG issue. You pay and get a speaking role? So instead of the SAG actor who's been working their ass off to get auditions are going to lose out to a rich douche who easily pays 10,000 dollars like it's nothing to talk in a movie?

This is poor character on Bell's part. How she can just look into a camera and ask us for money for them. I'm coming from the perspective of being a part of a kickstarter campaign myself. My major is adapting a Stephen King short story and compared to them... shouldn't that money be going to people like us? In three days they are already over two million. And worse, they tell you to not stop donating. It's going up as I write this. And we have **** compared to them. So who are the donors going to be more inclined to donate to? Rich established celebrities where you can get to talk in a film or for an college educational program like us? Tell me how that's fair.

I think we, the people who aren't even making this film for a profit, should be getting at least a couple thousand of this money, since that is our goal. But unfortunatly, we aren't famous celebrities who are known and can take money like this and gain tens of thousands every thirty seconds. Nope, just people trying harder in getting money, because we need it more. I hope this doesn't become a rising trend.Because this could be terrible for independent filmmakers if this continues.

^ This

[I SEE SPIDEY]

Originally Posted by flickchick85

Yeah, no amount of cynicism over "what this means in the industry" is gonna rain on my parade here. We're getting a Veronica Mars movie. If it offends your delicate principles, then by all means don't support it. To sum up,

Agreed. I want a proper ending and I'm happy us VM fans are going to get one. I'd be even happier if we got a 13 episode series wrap up 4th season on Netflix but a movie will do.

[Sawyer]

Originally Posted by flickchick85

Yeah, no amount of cynicism over "what this means in the industry" is gonna rain on my parade here. We're getting a Veronica Mars movie. If it offends your delicate principles, then by all means don't support it. To sum up,

I'm really surprised by how many people I see being butthurt about this.

They've corralled the show's fans into showing the support and will be able to give the fans what they want in return. I don't think they're abusing the system at all...

[I SEE SPIDEY]

People on the intertubes cry about every single thing. Believe me I've done my share of *****ing about certain things but I don't even compare to these know it all web masters.

[rashad]

I just started watching this series. I heard great things about it in the past but I never got around to watching it while it was still airing. Simply put, I love it. I'm glad the kickstarter was a success and look forward to the film.

[flickchick85]

Originally Posted by rashad

I just started watching this series. I heard great things about it in the past but I never got around to watching it while it was still airing. Simply put, I love it. I'm glad the kickstarter was a success and look forward to the film.

Oooh, how far along are you? Sorry, I love living vicariously through viewers experiencing it all for the first time again, haha.

[rashad]

Originally Posted by flickchick85

Oooh, how far along are you? Sorry, I love living vicariously through viewers experiencing it all for the first time again, haha.

Just finished Episode 10 of Season 1. It's pretty addictive. lol

[flickchick85]

Originally Posted by rashad

Just finished Episode 10 of Season 1. It's pretty addictive. lol

Yeah, that episode was the point where I was seriously, officially, hopelessly hooked. Episode 12 just cemented that love. That's the episode I tell the uninitiated to watch up to, and if they're not hooked by then, they never will be and should drop it. Unsurprisingly, everyone I've told that to became devoted converts.

[jmc]

Take note of season one and the use of muted green hues throughout, gives it a real noir feeling which I love. Season 1 and 2 are near perfect detective stories.

[rashad]

Originally Posted by flickchick85

Yeah, that episode was the point where I was seriously, officially, hopelessly hooked. Episode 12 just cemented that love. That's the episode I tell the uninitiated to watch up to, and if they're not hooked by then, they never will be and should drop it. Unsurprisingly, everyone I've told that to became devoted converts.

Yeah the over-arching mystery/conspiracy along with the mysteries Veronica solves with her friends are a real treat to watch. Love the father-daughter relationship as well. The characters have some depth to them as well.

This show was ahead of it's time.

[flickchick85]

Originally Posted by jmc

Take note of season one and the use of muted green hues throughout, gives it a real noir feeling which I love. Season 1 and 2 are near perfect detective stories.

Yeah, it's funny, because I'm pretty sure a lot of the colored windows and filters they used were in an effort to compensate for their utter lack of budget (and make the show look "glossier"), but in the process, I feel like they created the perfect noir look for color television. I once heard it described as "technicolor noir," which I thought was perfect. The loss of that aesthetic was one of the major changes I hated in S3.

Originally Posted by rashad

Yeah the over-arching mystery/conspiracy along with the mysteries Veronica solves with her friends are a real treat to watch. Love the father-daughter relationship as well. The characters have some depth to them as well.

This show was ahead of it's time.

Indeed.

Hope you'll keep updating as you progress throughout the series! I love hearing reactions and thoughts of new viewers.

[jmc]

Originally Posted by Doctor Jones

Not that this keeps me up at night, but celebrities and Hollywood and people of wealth using kickstarter are pretty much abusing its original purpose. Kickstarter, at its core is really meant for independent filmmakers who aren't in the position and don't have the resources (i.e. the wealth) in getting a film made. Of course Hollywood would take advantage of this because it's free money. Bell and these people are millionaires and THEY can't fund this themselves?

Fincher and Whoopi Goldberg did the same thing.... why do they need to? So they can't get funding for a film. Boo hoo. Try and go through the flaming hoops like everyvody else does. Of course kickstarter doesn't care, because they get 5% from this. And they'll continue to because it seems like Hollywood has found a way in getting free money. I mean it's genius: getting the people to pay for a film instead of them who are in a much better position to do it anyway. So we just give it to them.... Worst of all, if this movie ia a huge success, you won't see a dime. It would only just add money to the studios who are getting this free money.

This is also a SAG issue. You pay and get a speaking role? So instead of the SAG actor who's been working their ass off to get auditions are going to lose out to a rich douche who easily pays 10,000 dollars like it's nothing to talk in a movie?

This is poor character on Bell's part. How she can just look into a camera and ask us for money for them. I'm coming from the perspective of being a part of a kickstarter campaign myself. My major is adapting a Stephen King short story and compared to them... shouldn't that money be going to people like us? In three days they are already over two million. And worse, they tell you to not stop donating. It's going up as I write this. And we have **** compared to them. So who are the donors going to be more inclined to donate to? Rich established celebrities where you can get to talk in a film or for an college educational program like us? Tell me how that's fair.

I think we, the people who aren't even making this film for a profit, should be getting at least a couple thousand of this money, since that is our goal. But unfortunatly, we aren't famous celebrities who are known and can take money like this and gain tens of thousands every thirty seconds. Nope, just people trying harder in getting money, because we need it more. I hope this doesn't become a rising trend.Because this could be terrible for independent filmmakers if this continues.

Let me defend this particular situation. The entire VM team of actors and creator have been wanting to give the show a proper send off for years, and there's a big fan base that wants it too, the stumbling block has been WB. Could the actors/production team fund it themselves? Perhaps, but you could also make the argument that music acts like U2 could fund their own concerts and yet they still charge their fans to be entertained. For all we know Kristen Bell is helping to fund it, but lets not make out like she's this multimillion dollar superstar, I think it's grossly unfair to say she should have to cover the costs of the production. Ultimately fans are paying for something they want to see, it's no different from attending a sporting event featuring your favourite team or a rock concert featuring your favourite band, I don't see it as any different to paying for other kinds of entertainment, at the very least the odds are they'll enjoy it and won't feel the ripped off. Here's the thing, with fans money on the line quality is now going to be of the up most importance, the fans are now more than ever deserving of their money's worth. That's only a good thing because the film will benefit knowing a lot of good faith has been placed in the creators hands. Your issue seems to be more about fairness, yes it's unfair that you and other Kickstarters don't have celebs in your corner helping you out, but that's just the way it is and I'm sorry you and others feel like the system has been cheated. I've worked on a kickstarter campaign and it's not easy to get noticed.

[Octoberist]

I can see both arguments. This can hurt indy projects, and may get neglect as more and more 'bigger' projects jump into the Kickstarter trend. For example, a cool project like Paisley, which is a short film that pays homage to Gremlins by using puppets for its creature effects (see here: http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/...-creature-film) may not hit its target.

BUT, on the other side of the coin, this is the ultimate supply and demand. People are speaking up and are willing to pay up for content for cancelled shows like 'Mars'. It shows that corporate 'Big Data' could be an outdated concept in Hollywood and this is the ultimate pro-consumer push.

I don't know. It's a double edged sword.

[terry78]

Basically paying money for something shows you're willing as opposed to just talking about it or signing a petition. Aside from physical sacrifice, money is the second biggest sacrifice.

[flickchick85]

So I started a re-watch myself this weekend, and I forgot just how many awesome people were in this before they were famous. I'm on Disc 3 and have already come across Amanda Seyfried (of course, that one I didn't forget), Melissa Leo, Jessica Chastain, Max Greenfield, Jane Lynch and Aaron Paul.

[Sawyer]

I remember when I first read about the role Max Greenfield would be playing on New Girl and going "lol wut?!" because Schmidt is so different from Leo on VM. Now, I can't imagine him being anything other than Schmidt. I haven't even watched any of his episodes of VM since New Girl started. I imagine that will be quite a trip.