Who Pays For It?

JohnFalstaff

Following on from a discussion on the TV forum as regards the recent Veronica Mars Kickstarter campaign, I thought a discussion on film financing in the 21st century might be worth a thread.

To repeat my post from the TV forum:

There's more to the Veronica Mars initiative than just a marketing stunt. WB might have allowed the Veronica Mars creatives apparent control of the process, but I think there are a great many high level Hollywood executives watching things very closely.

This is a gamechanger in how Television Drama is going to be financed.

I don't think anyone could have anticipated the level of support that the Veronica Mars kickstarter has generated in such a short period of time. In the world of Sky plus, box-sets and file-sharing, old-school ratings are no longer the ultimate barometer of a show's appeal.

WB execs would have been well aware of similar campaigns launched by web-series such as Husbands (which Joss Whedon has guest starred in) but this is a watershed moment for television in the internet age. For the last few years execs across the board of major TV & Film companies have watched the growth of the internet and wondered what the future might hold. I recently watched an industry doc in which some of the most powerful people in Hollywood admitted that they have no idea what the future might hold as regards scripted television. They were genuinely worried at the fact that very few people under 30 watched scripted television on a regular basis.

What the Veronica Mars Kickstarter has shown is that smart, scripted TV can independently finance itself if the support base is broad enough. In this case the campaign was dependent on a brand that had established itself through the avenues of traditional network broadcasting, but there are multiple web-series out there that are breaking down this paradigm. Comedians in Cars Getting Coffee was the best comedy show I watched last year on TV or internet.

Once one of these independent web series raises a substantial budget from an internet funding program and delivers a quality product, the sky's the limit.

TV is at a crossroads. The question is whether the major corporations will adapt or stand by like the dinosaurs watching the meteorite in the sky...


_____

The Veronica Mars movie is possibly going to be the first crowd sourced feature to get exhibited at a level that could see positive box-office results. But is this prognosis (and the entire kickstarter campaign) dependent on a brand that has been created through traditional network methods?

Is there a possibility that we are approaching a time when independently financed projects can compete at the multiplexes?

Who else's initial reaction was "Firefly Series 2"?

Cavehill Red

And the Terminator TV series. In fact, there's a whole raft of prematurely concluded SF telly series could potentially get resurrected in this manner.
SF TV is ideally suited to this, because it may lack broad audience appeal, but has sufficient hardcore fans to fund this sort of venture.

JohnFalstaff

Cavehill Red wrote: »

And the Terminator TV series. In fact, there's a whole raft of prematurely concluded SF telly series could potentially get resurrected in this manner.
SF TV is ideally suited to this, because it may lack broad audience appeal, but has sufficient hardcore fans to fund this sort of venture.

I was hoping to focus more on film production in this discussion than on TV.

Cianos

YouTube are in the process of integrating paid for channels. This itself could indicate a big stepping stone for more fringe programming to become financially viable. With TV networks not having to play it safe when it comes to programmes being given air time, revenue models like this should allow for more experimentation. So Internet content should get more specialised and intelligent and mainstream tv can be as broadly appealing and dull as it likes.

Cavehill Red

Then why say

JohnFalstaff wrote: »

This is a gamechanger in how Television Drama is going to be financed.

JohnFalstaff

Cavehill Red wrote: »

Then why say

Please read my post. I indicated that I was reiterating a point that I had made in the TV forum but wanted to explore how it applied to film financing and production.

Seeing as the topic straddles both fields I think it merits discussion in both the TV and film forums.

Antar Bolaeisk

JohnFalstaff wrote: »

The Veronica Mars movie is possibly going to be the first crowd sourced feature to get exhibited at a level that could see positive box-office results. But is this prognosis (and the entire kickstarter campaign) dependent on a brand that has been created through traditional network methods?

Is there a possibility that we are approaching a time when independently financed projects can compete at the multiplexes?

I don't think so, the movie industry and the gaming industry are similar enough that broad comparisons can be made and Kickstarter is an area where the games industry has already made significant inroads so I think it'd be safe enough to make predictions on the future of Kickstarter funded movies based on how successful, or unsuccessful, games have been.

For a start you need a known quantity, for best results this should be a driving force within the company which can be directly related to past accomplishments.

You need an already established fan base. I don't know if Kickstarter sets limits on the timeframe but most of the projects I've seen tend to be thirty days. This means that from the very start you need people to be funding and spreading the word about the kickstarter or the project just won't pick up the required momentum until near the end and by then it'll most likely be too late. This also kinda ties in to the first point as the known quantity will probably have a following.

Finally you need to tap into a certain amount of nostalgia, in gaming this has been represented by a return to genres which are no longer seen as profitable and hence go unfunded by the publishers. In TV and Film this will most likely take the form of cancelled shows (see above for reference to Firefly).

If you look at the games that have been funded on Kickstarter they tend to all follow the above, the point and click adventure games, the return to strategic, isometric RPGs and the large scale RTSs and all of course come with at least one big name, a hero of yore, attached and all purporting to make the games we grew up with. Any games wanting to do something new or novel tend to be slow burners at best, just creeping past the funding line (and generally only when they're looking for a small amount) and more often fail, even when backed by a well know industry presence.

Kickstarter is a great enabler for the right projects but I think it's long term impact on the movie and TV industry will be much less than the likes of Netflix.

johnny_ultimate

I'd agree with most of the above. Kickstarter is a great tool in the right hands, but its uses are limited. Almost every major gaming or film success story has been from a well established personality appealing directly to a nostalgic fanbase. There's nothing wrong with this - Veronica Mars is the latest one I'm happy to see return - but it isn't a tool for encouraging creativity in the form of bold new ideas. It needs to be used as a potential financing method alongside more traditional funding methods that aren't so determined by the wallets of a passionate existing fanbase.

Also, while 3.5 million and counting is a healthy amount (never forgetting the real value can be distorted when expensive physical rewards need to be manufactured and distributed - Amanda Palmer did a good breakdown of where the money went in relation to her album), it is illustrative of how crowd sourcing will inevitably be limited to relatively small scale projects. Veronica Mars is in a favourable position as it doesn't require anything other than fairly straightforward production values. Tied in with the above argument that less established independents with original ideas are likely excluded, Kickstarter funding will likely only benefit a select amount of mid-tier titles - the return of modestly budgeted cult franchises, for example. There's definitely a few existing IPs that will attempt to emulate the Mars success story, but TBH the ones that could be that successful are quite a limited category.

S.M.B.

Alan Sepinwalls recent article is spot on when he suggests that it takes a certain set of circumstances to align for something like this to be a goer in the first place. Veronica Mars is the perfect guinea pig and even if it is successful, the model could only be utilised by a small set of established properties.

So the 'Veronica Mars' Kickstarter succeeded. Now what?

His interview with Rob Thomas is also very informative as to the process they had to go through to even get it to this stage.

Exclusive: 'Veronica Mars' creator Rob Thomas on the wildly successful Kickstarter movie campaign

Mickeroo

I think its a great idea. Can't see it working for something that would need a much bigger budget though, like another Firefly movie for example.

JohnFalstaff

S.M.B. wrote: »

Alan Sepinwalls recent article is spot on when he suggests that it takes a certain set of circumstances to align for something like this to be a goer in the first place. Veronica Mars is the perfect guinea pig and even if it is successful, the model could only be utilised by a small set of established properties.

So the 'Veronica Mars' Kickstarter succeeded. Now what?

His interview with Rob Thomas is also very informative as to the process they had to go through to even get it to this stage.

Exclusive: 'Veronica Mars' creator Rob Thomas on the wildly successful Kickstarter movie campaign

That's a good article, thanks for sharing.

And I learned that Charlie Kaufman has financed an upcoming stop motion film called Anomalisa through Kickstarter - that's much more exciting than the Veronica Mars story!