Kickstarter Success: Game Changer for Big Studios?

Yesterday morning, Rob Thomas started a KickStarter campaign for a feature film version of "Veronica Mars", the cult, detective-noir TV show he created. After a few hours, fans raised an astounding $2 million dollars.

For many of us who launch similar campaigns on KickStarter or IndieGoGo for our own projects, we may view this as a positive thing as far as what can be achieved with these fund-raising campaigns. However, an article on First Showing makes note of what this can mean for big-time studios. Considering Veronica Mars is not your typical small, independent project (Mars is under Warner Brothers), there is concern that big-time studios might see this as an opportunity to let fans finance projects rather than shell out the money themselves. Although it might be too early to tell whether this will become a trend, studios will definitely be paying close attention.

What do you think about this? Do you think projects backed up by big studios and/or famous people should be allowed to use the same platform as smaller independent projects like Kickstarter? Or do you think this is a win-win situation for all?

Discussion : 2D, 3D or 4D?

Just when you thought 2D wasn't enough. . .

Hollywood began experimenting with the 3D format in the mid 1950's with the famous red and blue glasses. The gimmick was used exactly how it is used today, a tactic by theaters to continuously bring an audience out to the movies. This was in response to the dawn of television. Theaters were afraid that audience participation would dwindle since people no longer had to go out to see movies. Other gimmicks during this time are as follows - CinemaScope, Smell O Vision, Tingler, Illusion O - Theses processes would site the movie going experience be far superior if experienced in a theater.  

Now, South Korea is pushing the next gimmick to bring audiences back to movie theaters. 4D! 4D is simply a combination of Smell O Vision, Tingler, and 3D. This is not a new phenomenon considering the technology is fifty years old and Universal Studios, Disney Parks have had theaters like this since the 1980s. The only significant difference is that where this technology was exclusive to theme parks, it may now be available in a theater near you. 


Critics for this process are divided into two camps - movie lovers and casual viewers. Blog critics and self proclaimed cinephiles flock to theaters, not with gimmicks, but with strict cinema rules - no texting, talking, or general disruption. Generally, all other casual viewers look at the theater experience as an expense not worth their money, considering they can get the same experience with cable television. When a gimmick is introduced, casual viewers are interested in experiencing the next best thing. Multi million dollar budget films rely on this population to make their production budget back.  


I'm curious to see what you guys think. Below is an article from the LA Times that reviews the efforts made in South Korea. Is it worth the price of admission? Leave a comment. 

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/envelope/cotown/la-et-ct-4d-cinema-20120707,0,642655.story

Studio or Scam? - the Amazon Debate

As an educator and working filmmaker, I tend to look at film contests with a double edge sword; both as a potential opportunity for advancement or scandal. Too often, these contests have clauses that state if the sponsor comes out with a similar idea to your submission then you have to sign away your right to sue. Artist's source of income stem from the creation of ideas and executing those ideas for a specific purpose. The consequence of some contests are cutting the artist out of their rights to intellectual property. In essence, stealing ideas.
There are two sides to this debate. Supporters of such contests believe that this approach benefits artists by giving them goals and access to publicity, funds, and support that would otherwise be difficult at best to maintain on their own.
Any artist can agree that maintaining a career as a artist is an exercise in persistence and humility. Yes, we need all the help we can get to get a functioning career kickstarted. However, the question I post to you: Are your ideas are worth giving away in order to get access to an opportunity? This is not an easy question.
This line of thought was sparked by a link posted on the "Studio of the Future" post from two weeks ago. This link is an article posted by the National Film Festival for Talented Youth. The director, Jessie Harris, spelled out his thoughts of caution. His opinion is this:

Basically the goal of Amazon studios is to take original ideas from inexperienced filmmakers and pay them very little or nothing for their work, all while creating an interesting social experiment for their users and a fake PR stunt that Amazon is revolutionizing Hollywood and supporting the next generation of filmmakers.

He goes into the details of the Amazon contract to support this opinion. Click HERE to read the full article.
Here are a few links that are posted by artists against this method of soliciting materials:
Motionographer Response to Sesame Street Contest
VFX Soldier Post on Unpaid Internships
Personally, I believe an opinion stems from the purpose of the contest. There are many non-profit, union based organizations (WGA, DGA, WFNYC) that support filmmakers by supplying financial support for creating and distributing films. These organizations do not profit from ideas. Their goal is to judge work based on their reputations as pillars of their artistic communities.
The fine print is what defines the deal as good or bad. Best advice: read all terms of contract before submitting to anything! Including film festivals Make sure you know your rights as an artist/creator.  
The ultimate question to all of you: Do you support or disagree with the idea of contests? Let me know what you think. - Eve.