Kickstarter and Celebrities: Yay or Nay

[teewee1432]

I personality can't understand why big celebs like Sly Stallone who has a net worth of over 250 million dollars or Spike Lee who has a net worth of 40 million just to name a few of them needs to ask fans for there hard earned money to fund movies for them when they can do it themselves. I believe these celebs are abusing kickstarter for the young up and comers that really need it. What are you guys opinions on it?

 

[KevanG]

They are just abusing it. If they want money for things they could easily find backers and put their own money in as well.

 

[Yurka]

It's a valuable tool for indie filmmakers, but it seems big-name directors are just using their personal brand to gather funds for projects, and I don't agree with that. "I gave money to make a Spike Lee movie, therefore I helped produce a Spike Lee movie!"

 

[teewee1432]

They are just abusing it. If they want money for things they could easily find backers and put their own money in as well.

I agree.

 

[StrainedEyes]

Getting the funding through Kickstarter allows for greater creative control of the product. It's also been proven that when bigger projects with bigger names introduce people to Kickstarter, they are more likely to go on to fund other, smaller projects. This was all discussed when Zach Braff had his going on.

 

[Soapy]

I don't think it's a big deal. I don't think it's necessarily fair to expect celebrities to put up their own money. I'm not sure why people assume that they don't contribute to their own projects. If the rewards are equal to whatever money you're giving, then I don't see a problem.

 

[Teelie]

I think there is potential to abuse it and that it needs to be looked at on a case by case basis.

 

[amazingfantasy15]

They are just abusing it. If they want money for things they could easily find backers and put their own money in as well.

I agree. Kevin Smith's been talking about it a lot lately as he's going to start shooting Clerks 3. He's knows that he could get all the money he would need instantly on Kickstarter, but feels it wouldn't be right because he'll be taking away money from a new indie film maker. Instead, if the Weinstein's don't back it (they have first crack at it due to the Clerks 2 contract) he'll put up the money himself, going so far to put his house up as collateral since he believes that much in the project. The budget doesn't need to be big and he can recoup it easily, as he did with Red State. Although if it was the first Clerks he'd definitely use Kickstarter to help fund it.

 

[Teelie]

That's very similar to what Vin Diesel did for Riddick: put his house up as collateral to get the movie done rather than use Kickstarter to get more funding.

 

[Xeno]

People with the sort of money and connections that these big-name directors and stars have should not be begging fans to finance their projects. There are ponzi schemes that are more honest than some of those Kickstarter campaigns. None of these people are destitute so they should stop acting like charity cases looking to people less well-off than them for a handout. It would be better if they treated their donors as financial backers, offering a return on their investments, rather than asking for money and giving nothing (or a cheap T-shirt) in return.


Not only are wealthy directors and stars taking to Kickstarter, but major studios have gotten in on the feeding frenzy as well. The most notorious instance was WB using Kickstarter to raise money for their Veronica Mars project. I can understand fans kicking in to fund a favorite show, but for a studio with the vast resources WB has to ask people to pay for a movie is beyond despicable. When the fan who paid for the movie buy tickets, they'll be paying twice for it, while any profits will be kept by the massive media conglomerate that put up none of its own funds to make it. WB's execs must be laughing their asses off at that.

 

[GENERAL RAAM582]

Don't you get stuff for Kickstarters?

 

[terry78]

Basically if people want to give you money on their own, I say let them. It's a scam to me personally as even the stupidest **** I've seen has gotten funding, but whatever.

 

[Lencho01]

A major part of film making includes using money that isn't yours, so I see no problems with it.

 

[Warhammer]

You are a dumb motherf***er if you are donating your hard earned money to Warner Bros. They are fully capable by themselves.

 

[chaseter]

Nay

 

[TheDreamMaster]

Nay. Use that million you made off one of your roles instead of buying another sports car.

 

[BATZARRO WWD]

Look, as much as we'd like Kickstarter to be the place where quirky little ideas get funded, the practicality of it is stuff that projects that get people behind them before they show up in the site are the ones that get funded. And why would new sites talk about quirky little idea #574483992 when Spike Lee has a vague fart of an idea about a movie? HE'S FAMOUS. Famous is clicks. Clicks is views. More views mean more money for ambiguous vampire movie.

So, does Zach Braff(or whatever) has a responsibility not to use this great oportunity for funding where he's advantaged over common people? I can't say he has. In the end, Zach Braff isn't taking the funding from anyone, because Zach Braff's not attracting a "casual" audience that surf the site, looking for random projects to fund. He's attracting Garden State and Scrubs fans.

That said, it does get my goat a little when people do a KS for something they could get otherwise funded. Like the Rob Liefeld Brigade comic giveaway. Because I could get a project being to ambitious or risky for a millionaire to fund. But it's JUST another RL superhero comic, and doesn't Rob own a comic company or something? He's a s well connected as it gets.

If he said:" Ohs, I wanna make a Youngblood movie but no studio wanna touch it, elp!" I could see it. But...the only way in which Brigade needs funding it's in that it'd be the third time nobody likes it.

But again, if people fund it, why would I be angry at him?
If anything I should be angry at people
for not considering this factors.

 

[dark_b]

two simple questions.

should we be angry at kickstarter for allowing famous rich people of using it ? or should we be angry at famous rich people? to me its simple. everyone has the right to ask for money. i am angry at rich artists and stupid fans who will give them money.

and yes if you give a rich person money for a small budget movie when he f... has a car and house more expensive than the movie than you are naive and stupid.

for hollywood to get away with this its important that fans all over the world think that only blockbuster movie stars are rich. no. you are in a sitcom for 3 seasons and you are rich. you are in a simple franchise that makes enough money to get to 3 movies you are rich. you are not CEO 5 houses and a private plane rich. but you are rich.