Old Boy remake coming up!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t38bi5dAxZY

:lol: Awesome. I love how he interrupted in the middle of the opening.

This makes me want to see his Oldboy remake.
 
Last edited:
I don't get what the big deal about him using kickstarter is. People have been doing it for their movies before, as evidenced by this site, so is it so controversial if Spike does it?
 
Last edited:
harmonica44 said:
I don't get what the big deal about him using kickstarter is. People have been doing it for their movies before, as evidenced by this site, so is it so controversial if Spike does it?
Click to expand...

I think the issue is for a lot of independent and young filmmakers, kickstarter offers them a way to get their film financed (if they're lucky, it's not easy to do it this way). If a 'big name' (such as Spike) does it, they're almost guaranteed to get funding. This takes the attention away from other, smaller, independent projects. If people are choosing between an established filmmaker and some indie kid making an experimental art film, they're less likely to chose the indie kid.

Independent filmmakers are unlikely to get funding from big production companies, or other big investors, as there is less guarantee of getting a return. Someone like Spike has a much larger chance of getting such funding.

personally, i'm split on the issue. Lee makes a good point in saying that studios don't really fund the stuff he wants to do anymore (though his way of expressing himself is a complete turn off for me). he's also correct in saying that a lot of people who'd contribute to him aren't the sort of people who normally contribute to kickstarter projects either
 
Last edited:
I think he makes a valid point at the end - these high profile projects bring new people in to these crowdfunding platforms. Kickstarter recently posted this:

"The Veronica Mars and Zach Braff projects have brought tens of thousands of new people to Kickstarter. 63% of those people had never backed a project before. Thousands of them have since gone on to back other projects, with more than $400,000 pledged to 2,200 projects so far. Nearly 40% of that has gone to other film projects."

They also have some good related info here from last year on video-game related projects:

http://www.kickstarter.com/blog/blockbuster-effects

There's a very clear 'halo' effect in which a huge project brings in new people, who then go on to contribute to other projects on the site afterwards - so ultimately it's a good thing for people hoping to use crowdfunding for their own projects.

What I think gets lost in all of this is that there's clearly a demand for something like this even from people that we think shouldn't 'need' it. There's a serious, and sobering lesson there in respect to the traditional indie film narrative. That narrative goes something like this - struggle to make a breakthrough indie film, get discovered, and go on to live the dream of being a successful filmmaker. Sounds great, but if you buy into it isn't it a little alarming when those who do seem to be 'living the dream' still seem to be struggling to get the films they want to make made?
 
ItDonnedOnMe said:
if you buy into it isn't it a little alarming when those who do seem to be 'living the dream' still seem to be struggling to get the films they want to make made?
Click to expand...

I find it difficult to believe that either Spike Lee or Zach Braff is struggling to do much of anything. If one of the most respected filmmakers alive can't get $1.25mil to fund his indie darling, then either he isn't trying, or maybe the movie isn't worth making (I suspect the former).

What bothers me about this is that people are just giving him money. Legally, he will be the producer, and will reap all benefits from the money raised through kickstarter. The same is true of all kickstarter campaigns, but I feel much more comfortable with this truth when it's a friend trying to raise a few thousand dollars, instead of a celebrity trying to raise a whole lot more than that.

When a friend of mine asks for me to contribute to a humble campaign, I can safely assume that they don't just have thousands of dollars laying around, and that's why they're asking for it. Spike Lee, however, does have millions of dollars laying around. But he doesn't want to use his money to fund his indie project, which he will benefit from. He wants to use our money, and for that, he's an asshole.
 
Cracker Funk said:
Spike Lee, however, does have millions of dollars laying around. But he doesn't want to use his money to fund his indie project, which he will benefit from. He wants to use our money, and for that, he's an asshole.
Click to expand...

How do you know? Also, he's not the only person benefitting from Kickstarter. Explained in IDOM's comment below.

ItDonnedOnMe said:
"The Veronica Mars and Zach Braff projects have brought tens of thousands of new people to Kickstarter. 63% of those people had never backed a project before. Thousands of them have since gone on to back other projects, with more than $400,000 pledged to 2,200 projects so far. Nearly 40% of that has gone to other film projects."
Click to expand...

Great point. Now we have thousands of people looking around at Indie projects funded by people like us because of Spike Lee using the site to fund his project. Seems like a win-win situation to me.

cheeseandachallenge said:
I think the issue is for a lot of independent and young filmmakers, kickstarter offers them a way to get their film financed (if they're lucky, it's not easy to do it this way). If a 'big name' (such as Spike) does it, they're almost guaranteed to get funding. This takes the attention away from other, smaller, independent projects.
Click to expand...

Spike Lee using Kickstarter has attracted more people interested in supporting filmmakers. Many of the people who have backed Lee, are now going on to back other projects. Thousands of new people are using Kickstarter.
 
ChimpPhobiaFilms said:
How do you know?
Click to expand...

Because only people with lots of money are allowed to do stuff like this (and he does it all the time):

tumblr_mgb6s10mHw1rfimo0o1_1280.jpg


Also, I know how to use IMDB and possess common sense. Spike Lee is loaded. So is Zach Braff. Yeah, I understand that they brought more potential contributors to kickstarter. I also understand that they're fucking leaches, using their celebrity to drain money from people who may be living check-to-check, so that they can get a free-ride to profit off their indie dream film. Fuck both of them. They're assholes.
 
Last edited:
Cracker Funk said:
Because only people with lots of money are allowed to do stuff like this (and he does it all the time):
Also, I know how to use IMDB and possess common sense. Spike Lee is loaded. So is Zach Braff. Yeah, I understand that they brought more potential contributors to kickstarter. I also understand that they're fucking leaches, using their celebrity to drain money from people who may be living check-to-check, so that they can get a free-ride to profit off their indie dream film. Fuck both of them. They're assholes.
Click to expand...

But he didn't have to use Kickstarter. Lee could have gotten money from his fans without a popular crowd-funding site. I believe he's using it to attract people's attention to indie projects while at the same time funding his project.

You are right about one thing, he is wealthy, and he could produce the film with the money he already has. Again, I don't think it's greed, I think it's him supporting other filmmakers that had the vision he had.

But I could be wrong. It's possible he's just being a greedy @$$hole not wanting to use his own money. Who knows.
 
are people just giving money away on kickstarter?
i thought the premise was that they are investing, not gifting
 
sfoster said:
are people just giving money away on kickstarter?
i thought the premise was that they are investing, not gifting
Click to expand...

On Kickstarter, people advertise their projects, and if other people are interested, they will "back them" (give them money). Sometimes giving more money results in getting things like DVDs and posters. Say, if you give $10 you get a poster. If you give $25, you get a copy of the film. If you give $50, you get a poster and a copy of the film. If you give $100, you get a signed poster or copy, etc.
 
Cracker Funk said:
I also understand that they're fucking leaches, using their celebrity to drain money from people who may be living check-to-check, so that they can get a free-ride to profit off their indie dream film.
Click to expand...

That just seems like a bizarre argument to me. They're not draining money from anyone. They're asking for it, and anyone is free to decide whether to give it to them or not. Why would someone living check-to-check give any significant amount of money to a kickstarter to get a film made, regardless of who's making the film?

sfoster said:
are people just giving money away on kickstarter?
i thought the premise was that they are investing, not gifting
Click to expand...

No, as it stands now crowdfunding is specifically not investing. Sometimes you get items in return for your donation, but even that's not guaranteed - you're not actually purchasing anything, you're donating, period.
 
ItDonnedOnMe said:
They're not draining money from anyone. They're asking for it, and anyone is free to decide whether to give it to them or not. Why would someone living check-to-check give any significant amount of money to a kickstarter to get a film made, regardless of who's making the film?
Click to expand...

OK, I have to admit that you're correct here. There are no victims here, everybody is free to contribute or not. I guess I just have a knee-jerk reaction to situations in which people with money get more of it from people who most likely have less. I will admit my argument is more emotional than logical.
 
Cracker Funk said:
Spike Lee, however, does have millions of dollars laying around. But he doesn't want to use his money to fund his indie project, which he will benefit from. He wants to use our money, and for that, he's an asshole.
Click to expand...

Whoa, slow down there. You have to admit, Spike Lee isn't one of those directors on the pantheon of gods who can use his own money and create art that will profit wildly for eternity. Here's one of those rare exceptions: Stanley Kubrick. He solely produced the majority of all his films and they're still making his children millions a year... and will for eternity.

Spike Lee had his 15 minutes of fame, but nowadays, he's just another aging director still trying to 'stay alive' in the business.

Just my $0.02, take with a grain of salt, your mileage may vary.
 
cheeseandachallenge said:
(though his way of expressing himself is a complete turn off for me)
Click to expand...

Yeah, I must admit, I stopped watching, I really didn't like how he was presenting himself at all. I mean, he can't be that stupid to not have known that this feeling was a) going on out there and b) going to be an issue to defend. He should have been way better prepared, and even armed with the info from kickstarter directly. And wtf is he talking to the presenter like it was her idea? Doesn't he realize what we see on TV is frequently scripted for the presenters?

Here's an update to the details IDOM posted here:

http://www.kickstarter.com/blog/the-truth-about-spike-lee-and-kickstarter-0

$1MM from 6K first-timers from the last big three movie campaigns to other projects.

I'm starting to feel like _waiting_ for one of these blockbusters before launching a campaign tailored to suck their tribe in is a decent strategy. USE their star-power for yourself!

CraigL
 
The trailer makes it look good, I'll probably be watching, but the original film was so great that I don't think this film is necessary at all. Hollywood has this tendency of remaking foreign cult classics, and to tell the truth it isn't always good. I'll wait and see, but I'm not crazy about the idea
 
Zensteve said:
Oh hai :)

http://www.deadline.com/2013/08/inv...arter-can-raise-finishing-funds-for-reach-me/
Click to expand...

NNNNNNOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

This is the worst yet! Sly Stallone is estimated to have a net worth of nearly $270mil. Why is he begging for money?! If he truly believed in the project, he would back it himself. The fact that he hasn't done that makes me think he's only in this movie for a paycheck, and doesn't really believe it's anything special.

From now on, I'm gonna root for Ivan Drago. You're dead to me, Rocky.
 
Gee, I'm not too sure about these high profile cases, especially the Stalone one.

But you know, if Kickstarter could become a significant funding avenue of independent films, not just independent of studio money, but more importantly independent of what's become fairly prescriptive content and target audience requirements for typical Hollywood films, then might it not prove to breath new life into independent filmmaking, and into a new indie film marketplace? Haven't we been reading and hearing that the market paradigm(?) for independent film has died? So if sizeable funding becomes a reality for independent films, films which would otherwise never be made if it were up to the studios, via Kickstarter and the others, could it be an answer and an antidote to the current "Hollywood Dilemma," that being the fact that Hollywood only has eyes and time for blockbusters and for the dismally conventional?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top