A good blog starts with something controversial.
I thought I’d start by attacking one of the most widely-held criticisms of crowdfunding: that celebrities (people with perceived wealth, connections and fanbases) shouldn’t be using sites like Kickstarter to raise money for new projects.
Amanda Palmer, Zach Braff, and Spike Lee are just three of these creators who have copped flack for bringing their creativity to Kickstarter. All three were accused of sitting on large bank balances while simultaneously holding out their cap to the public to back their latest project.
All three have responded to these criticisms. (You can read Amanda Palmer’s here, and Zach Braff’s here, and Spike Lee’s here.)
The tl;dr version of all three is: these projects cost money. The traditional methods used by artists to get this money is through studios and labels, who also demand a level of control. They don’t want to give up that control, so they are looking for alternate “start-up capital”.
I, personally, am a huge fan of “superstar creators”.
Platforms tell us it’s good for other projects because it brings more traffic to the sites (from experience, this is true), and more money to other projects (also true for me), but I see it slightly differently.
So many backers are willing to give money to a perfect stranger. A stranger whom, we are essentially taking a risk on. To think it’s a bad thing when we want to back someone who is proven, and whose work we love, support and buy anyway seems strange to me. It’s not these people’s bank balances backers care about, it’s their proven talent. Why are famous people expected to open their accounts for the news media when the ordinary man is not?
Famous creators are famous for a reason
I didn’t even consider the idea that Zach Braff should be asked to finance 100% of his own film. I know that most movies – indie or not – have a big financial backer behind them. Movies are expensive. No, I backed Wish I Was Here because it was personal to me.
I was always a huge fan of Garden State. It spoke to me on a level very few other films ever have at a point in my life where I needed to hear its message. I loved the creative cinematography and quirky feel. I overplayed the soundtrack all Summer. I have watched that movie at least 100 times, and I even listened to the commentary on my (imported because I was impatient) copy of the DVD.
I was always going to become a backer because I was a fan
I have been waiting many years for Braff’s follow-up film. Giving him $30 to help was a no-brainer. Between the cinema ticket and DVD, I’d be paying that anyway. I don’t expect this movie to speak to me in the same way, but I know he’s capable of having a profound impact on people’s lives through his films. If it helps someone else feel some hope, then that’s awesome.
Also, I know that he’s capable of making a really good film independently on a low budget. I know I want him to have creative control because that, I think, is what made Garden State so, so good. What would life be if Natalie Portman had never done this:
Would that have made the Hollywood Cut?
So on a deeply personal level, I felt that this project was worth my money. How much money Zach personally had never entered my head for a second. As a backer, if I see something cool – and I believe the creator has the ability to do it – AND I haven’t already broken my crowdfunding budget, I’ll back it.
Maybe the media think they’re helping us in attacking artists for trying something new, but I think fans and backers are smart people, who happen to believe in things enough to take a little risk on them.
