maranfilms
Veteran
Looks Like you have it all figured out there Eric, your the man!
Spike Lee launches a Kickstarter for his next movie to raise $1.25 million
- Thread starter commercialguy
- Start date
You don't owe sales tax on items sold unless you sell them from a State where you have a brick and mortar location. Because a State doesn't collect sales tax on kickstarter items does not mean they could not. You DO owe income tax on kickstarter proceeds and that is in the kickstarter fine print.
"Art" is a commodity like any other. A movie is no different than an Iphone case. It has a value based on supply and demand and it can be readily sold at market price.
The only differences are between real property and Intellectual property, but IP is not necessarily art, for example a computer program for accounting is not "art" but it's IP. And a painting for example, is a piece of real property just like an Iphone case, or a diamond or a pair of tennis shoes.
When it comes to taxing, buying, and selling it makes no difference if a product is "art" or not.
Everyone that buys a movie ticket at the local multiplex is a "patron of the arts". What difference does it make if they buy the DVD BEFORE you make the film, or after?
I never claimed all films made wiht kickstarter funding were sh--tty.
Where you get the funds and how you get the funds are irrelevant. It's either a good film or a bad film, whether you got the money to make it from friends, bankers, kickstarter, or robbed a bank and shot all the bank guards during the robbery.
Eitehr way the film is still the same film. It's still the same film if the film maker is gay, straight, a billionaire, poor, white, African American, tall, short, blonde, brown eyes or blue.
Eric Boellner
Well-known member
Apparently, I've made this personal, which isn't something I intended to do. I was trying to argue facts, and I apologize if I've irritated or insulted you guys. Condescension wasn't what I was going for, but I can see how that probably came across in my posts.
That's the whole point. With Pre-sales you know up front if there is a demand for the film that justifies making it.
There is no risk that you made a film people don't want to pay to see. They've already paid. How would you know that there isn't enough demand to pay for the film without pre-sales? It would only be a guess, which is what Hollywood generally does. They guess and sometimes they get it right and sometimes they get it wrong.
With Pre-sales you get it right every time. You get enough pre-sales, you make the movie. You don't get enough pre-sales, you do a different project.
I for one have not taken anything in this thread personally.
I think that it's an issue of fairness. There is a perception that it's just not fair for a rich film maker that can go to Hollywood producers for funding to go directly to the fans for money. I get that it strikes people that way on an emotional level.
But for something to be "unfair" someone has to be getting a bad deal. Like you wait in line an hour for tickets, and I cut in line in front of you and don't wait at all. It's "unfair" because you had to wait an hour and I didn't. I got something I didn't deserve and it makes you feel bad.
But in this case, who is being hurt? The fans donating the money? They are getting exactly what they want and are willing to pay for it. The other indie film makers? If I"m a HUGE Spike Lee fan (and they do exist) I"m going to back Spikes movie. I am NOT going to back just any old movie, and I am NOT going to give you Joe Unknown Filmmaker money to make a movie if Spike does not make a movie.
So who is being hurt? Who is it "unfair" to for someone like Spike to use Kickstarter? Who is standing in line for an hour while Spike Lee cuts in line?
I would say it is unfair to the Hollywood bankers and producers maybe, because they are cut out of the profits, but I don't think anyone is really upset about that.
Eric Boellner
Well-known member
You're right, and in some part I agree with you. But I wasn't arguing this whole time that Spike Lee appealing to fans of Spike Lee is unfair to said fans, nor really even that it's unfair to other filmmakers who use Kickstarter, even for what I consider more appropriate purposes (such as the classic "struggling artist trying to make a deeply personal film that he can't get financed by the studios because he can't get meetings with the studios because no-one knows who the hell he is" scenario <grin>).
This argument originated with my comment that I saw James Franco's KS campaign as a more appropriate appeal to mere patrons of the arts (and by patrons of the arts, I don't mean moviegoers, who pay $10 for a specific experience much the same as an amusement park ride, I mean people who actively support artists with money or resources, either a one-time donation or a continuing pledge) than what I called "Spike Lee's vanity project."
I guess I can make sense of Lee's campaign if it's supposedly directed only toward his explicit fans, and not toward fans of movies in general whom he is trying to persuade to support his project simply because, as I said earlier in this topic, he's Spike F--king Lee. But I don't think I really look at Kickstarter as an appeal specifically to JUST an artists fans. And from the outrage and backlash both Spike and Braff have experienced for trying to tap this nearly-billion-dollar pool of support for the arts, I don't think I'm alone.
I think the difference between the campaigns is kind of like that old parable (loosely retold here) about the man who hired one worker for 8 hours of work and paid him $100, and hired another worker for 2 hours of work and paid him $100. On the one hand, Spike's fan are going to get exactly what they pay for, and whether they consider the cost/benefit ratio to be worth it in the end is between them and Spike. And I think that's your point.
Mine is simply that I think for someone who understands how hard it is to make it in this business, and the need that "undiscovered" filmmakers have for a way to prove themselves, a campaign like Spike's seems like an almost insulting vanity project in comparison to one like Franco's, which is helping four Joe Unknown's make their first films, something I think is the very definition of a worthy cause as far as the arts are concerned.
TL;DR... I agree with you that people who contribute to Spike's campaign, as egotistical and arrogant as I myself think it is in its half-assed conception and original presentation, are in no way getting ripped off or scammed out of money. I just think I'd rather support Franco's effort to give undiscovered directors a shot at making it than Spike's effort to make his passion project about bloody, sexy non-vampires.
Hope that made sense, haha. Thanks for sticking it out with me, Gillvane. <grin>
-EMB
This argument originated with my comment that I saw James Franco's KS campaign as a more appropriate appeal to mere patrons of the arts (and by patrons of the arts, I don't mean moviegoers, who pay $10 for a specific experience much the same as an amusement park ride, I mean people who actively support artists with money or resources, either a one-time donation or a continuing pledge) than what I called "Spike Lee's vanity project."
I guess I can make sense of Lee's campaign if it's supposedly directed only toward his explicit fans, and not toward fans of movies in general whom he is trying to persuade to support his project simply because, as I said earlier in this topic, he's Spike F--king Lee. But I don't think I really look at Kickstarter as an appeal specifically to JUST an artists fans. And from the outrage and backlash both Spike and Braff have experienced for trying to tap this nearly-billion-dollar pool of support for the arts, I don't think I'm alone.
I think the difference between the campaigns is kind of like that old parable (loosely retold here) about the man who hired one worker for 8 hours of work and paid him $100, and hired another worker for 2 hours of work and paid him $100. On the one hand, Spike's fan are going to get exactly what they pay for, and whether they consider the cost/benefit ratio to be worth it in the end is between them and Spike. And I think that's your point.
Mine is simply that I think for someone who understands how hard it is to make it in this business, and the need that "undiscovered" filmmakers have for a way to prove themselves, a campaign like Spike's seems like an almost insulting vanity project in comparison to one like Franco's, which is helping four Joe Unknown's make their first films, something I think is the very definition of a worthy cause as far as the arts are concerned.
TL;DR... I agree with you that people who contribute to Spike's campaign, as egotistical and arrogant as I myself think it is in its half-assed conception and original presentation, are in no way getting ripped off or scammed out of money. I just think I'd rather support Franco's effort to give undiscovered directors a shot at making it than Spike's effort to make his passion project about bloody, sexy non-vampires.
Hope that made sense, haha. Thanks for sticking it out with me, Gillvane. <grin>
-EMB
In the end you're saying you want to donate to Franco's project and you don't want to donate to Spikes project. Your'ea fan of Franco and you are not a fan of Spike. Hey, Franco is loveable and Spike is a douchebag. Most people see that.
But Art is art. Spike's project is Art, Franco's project is Art, Transformers is Art. All the people that enjoy them and make it possible to produce them with real dollars are "patrons of the arts". No worse or better than you. If you donate 10 bucks with love in your heart for Artists, and someone else donates 10 bucks because he thinks the movie might get him laid, in the end it's 10 bucks.
maranfilms
Veteran
It's all good eric, no harm no foul, it's easy to get heated when passion kicks in. Apology accepted
refocusedmedia
Veteran
So essentially we agree that it is indeed rich celebrities taking advantage of a platform that wasn't intended for them (definitions vary here), but because it's up to the free choice of the users to donate their own money then we should all let bygones be bygones. I think I can live with that... as long as it's emphasized just how douchey it is to begin with.
Last edited:
I'm sending my money to Donald Trump!
From Celebrity Networth
Spike Lee is an American film director, producer and actor who has a net worth of $40 million.
http://www.celebritynetworth.com/richest-celebrities/directors/spike-lee-net-worth/
http://www.celebritynetworth.com/richest-celebrities/directors/spike-lee-net-worth/
-----
Francis Ford Coppola self-finances his films by selling wine:
http://wsi.indiatimes.com/Wine-News...ine-and-produce-movie/articleshow/4671062.cms
http://99u.com/articles/6973/francis-ford-coppola-on-risk-money-craft-collaboration
From Celebrity Networth
Spike Lee is an American film director, producer and actor who has a net worth of $40 million.
http://www.celebritynetworth.com/richest-celebrities/directors/spike-lee-net-worth/
http://www.celebritynetworth.com/richest-celebrities/directors/spike-lee-net-worth/
-----
Francis Ford Coppola self-finances his films by selling wine:
http://wsi.indiatimes.com/Wine-News...ine-and-produce-movie/articleshow/4671062.cms
http://99u.com/articles/6973/francis-ford-coppola-on-risk-money-craft-collaboration
8string
Well-known member
Yes, I can't get behind someone as successful as Spike begging on a platform that is meant to be for undiscovered folks who would be thrilled to get enough money to do one first film. While obviously a whole bunch of people have pledged (he's now up to 1/2 the way there), I don't feel that I should be supporting Spike Lee. This is not like his first film. If anything, I think it should be the other way around! His very presence on KS sucks the O2 out of other projects. Very weird! Subversion of the process. happens all the time. His lame attempts to say he's been there for his film students, is just that. Lame.
Think about it. He is an established box office draw. He has the connections. He knows the game. He can call people with money and status, film stars, they will take his call or call him back and go to lunch with him. Do you think they would do that for anyone else on Kickstarter? They will back his films and get their name as "Executive Producer" on the credits. Kickstarter's idea was to help us that don't know the game, don't have the connections. This seems totally like he is out of line here, and he doesn't even know it. Think about it. This is the guy who did Malcom X! Jeez! If only!
To help clarify this: I and others spent hundreds of dollars to go to Mitchell Block's seminar in Hollywood to learn a bit about how this game is played. What he taught us was invaluable. But what he taught was the secrets to how guys like Spike get funded. There are ways this game is played and Spike is an insider. All of us on this little forum are not. That's just the way it is. We need to have places like KS that are not infected with the successfull trying to co-op the process because they think it's 'cool'. It's sort of suburbanization of the process that we need to be successful folks. Another rich successfull filmmaker wanting to be "back in the hood". We will never have Spike's 'friends', nor his ring side seat at the basketball court. Our only hope to get there is KS.
I'm really appalled that he doesn't even realize this. I don't know if I will ever watch a film of his again.
Think about it. He is an established box office draw. He has the connections. He knows the game. He can call people with money and status, film stars, they will take his call or call him back and go to lunch with him. Do you think they would do that for anyone else on Kickstarter? They will back his films and get their name as "Executive Producer" on the credits. Kickstarter's idea was to help us that don't know the game, don't have the connections. This seems totally like he is out of line here, and he doesn't even know it. Think about it. This is the guy who did Malcom X! Jeez! If only!
To help clarify this: I and others spent hundreds of dollars to go to Mitchell Block's seminar in Hollywood to learn a bit about how this game is played. What he taught us was invaluable. But what he taught was the secrets to how guys like Spike get funded. There are ways this game is played and Spike is an insider. All of us on this little forum are not. That's just the way it is. We need to have places like KS that are not infected with the successfull trying to co-op the process because they think it's 'cool'. It's sort of suburbanization of the process that we need to be successful folks. Another rich successfull filmmaker wanting to be "back in the hood". We will never have Spike's 'friends', nor his ring side seat at the basketball court. Our only hope to get there is KS.
I'm really appalled that he doesn't even realize this. I don't know if I will ever watch a film of his again.
Last edited:
That's not accurate. Spike is not begging, he is promising you a DVD, or some other good or service, in return for your money. No different than any other film maker in Kickstarter. If you think the DVD is worth it, or any of the other goods and services, you can purchase it with your pledge (promise of money now for goods or services later).
By "supporting" Spike Lee you mean buying a DVD of his movie. If you arent' a Spike Lee fan then you weren't going to buy the DVD whether he pre-sold it to you in a Kickstarter or he just got financing and later released teh DVD right?
Or are you saying you WOULD have purchased the DVD of this project, but now that Spike Lee put up a Kickstarter you won't buy the DVD?
Why do you think a Spike Lee fan would support say, your project? You seem to think that someone is dying to spend money on YOUR movie, or someone like you an unknown indie, but then suddenly they change their mind to give that money to Spike Lee. What makes you think that?
No, I think Spike Lee is a douche bag because of his attitude and what comes out of his mouth. He's a very rich Hollywood insider that acts like "The Man" is keeping him down. Yea, right. We'd all like to be kept down like Spike Lee, right? Oh how horrible it would be to be oppressed like Spike....and be worth 40 million dollars and have court side seats to the Lakers, go to Hollywood parties, etc., etc. Yes, it's such a tough life Spike. We really feel for you man!
However, I do not think Spike is "taking advantage" of kickstarter. Who or what is being taken advantage of?
The fans pre-paying for a DVD of the movie or a "producer credit" or whatever it is they think is worth their money? Obviously not. No one is twisting their arm to make them break out the credit card.
The unknown indie film maker? Do you really think that Spike Lees fans, the ones that love Malcom X and think Spike Lee is awesome are the same exact same ones that were going to fund some unknown indie film makers Zombie movie? We both know that's going to be the unknown indie film makers friends, family, and friends and family of the cast, the local people in his or her town that support them, not Spike Lee fans.
Kickstarter? Kickstarter makes a percentage off the top. Kickstarter LOVES these big project by movie stars. They make a heck of a lot more money off of a million dollar plus kickstarter than 5,000 bucks or something.
So who is it exactly that is being "taken advantage" of?
Think about it this way.
Where does the money ultimately come from for ANY film? It comes from fans that go see the movie at the theater, stream the movie on netflix, or buy the movie on DVD right?
The MAJORITY of any film making kickstarter is fans pre-purchasing DVDs. Yes, theres' some parties with the director, stars on answering machines, producer credits and junk, but that's not the bulk of the kickstarter. Most of it is DVD sales, downloads of the movie.
What if Spike Lee went to those Hollywood producers to back his movie? How would it work?
Spike Lee would get funding from the producers, bankers, backers, etc. Then what? Make the movie, and sell it. Then you have to pay back the producers, bankers, backers, with a profit. Where does that money come from? Fans going to see the movie, buying DVDs, streaming on NEtflix, etc.
So Spike Lee skips the producers, bankers, backers, and instead goes straight to the fans, the same place the money will come from anyway if it's a successful movie.
Are you saying you're upset because the Hollywood producers aren't going to get their cut?
Scott F
Pug Life
^. Great thoughts.
In some cases, I feel there is a punk rock ethos to crowd funding. (Not that I'm interested in the lee project)
I would have paid $$ for a 7" or t-shirt from an independent or small label
band to support them, i don't see this being much different.
Taking the Hollywood douchebag producers with no sense of humor or creativity out of the equation is HUGE.
In some cases, I feel there is a punk rock ethos to crowd funding. (Not that I'm interested in the lee project)
I would have paid $$ for a 7" or t-shirt from an independent or small label
band to support them, i don't see this being much different.
Taking the Hollywood douchebag producers with no sense of humor or creativity out of the equation is HUGE.
I think this is the big appeal to people like Zach Braff or Spike. Braff said in his kickstarter, hey, I can get the money for this movie. There are Hollywood people ready to hand me cash to make my movie....and then tell me who can star in it, how to re-write the script to appeal to a more "diverse audience" (every idiot on the planet), how to market it, which talk shows I have to do, etc., etc.
There's a lot of artistic freedom in going straight to the fans. I think there's a lot of risk too without a good Producer to say hey, wait a minute. Let's make a good movie. Your script is good, but we need to trim some fat, or make this more of a solid story and less of a vanity project, etc. That can really help a Director that gets lost in the process.
pulpfiction007
Veteran
I think the bottom line is, if you take all the names out, the presentation was awful. I don't care if this was a movie by Spike Lee or Spike Smith from Cleveland I would never help fund this project.
To be fair, I don't think Spielberg wants to use his own money to finance his own films, so Dreamworks went to India for funding. Ironman 3 to China. But a Spike Lee movie might to too small potatoes for India and China investors. Paul Schrader Kickstarted his new movie The Canyons, he thinks the crowdfunding bubble might burst:
http://blogs.indiewire.com/theplayl...d-him-why-its-not-lindsays-porn-film-20130731
12 of the Most Insane Rewards for Kickstarter Backers of Paul Schrader and Bret Easton Ellis’ ‘The Canyons’ - See more at: http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/news/the-canyons-kickstarter-kerbl.php#sthash.OcOWYmjF.dpuf
http://blogs.indiewire.com/theplayl...d-him-why-its-not-lindsays-porn-film-20130731
12 of the Most Insane Rewards for Kickstarter Backers of Paul Schrader and Bret Easton Ellis’ ‘The Canyons’ - See more at: http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/news/the-canyons-kickstarter-kerbl.php#sthash.OcOWYmjF.dpuf
Last edited: