The Zach Braff Kickstarter Thing

So Zach Braff—a known actor/producer/director—tapped crowd funding outlet Kickstarter to raise $3.1 million for a pet project. This has people divided between two reactions:

A. "Good for him!"
B. "That asshole!"

I can see both sides, so let's review. We'll start with B.

A lot of people (mostly aspiring filmmakers) are upset that someone who has already made a name for himself, and who ostensibly has—if not the money itself—access to resources (studios, producers, financiers), would instead opt to use this independent means to raise funds for a project. The argument seems to be, "That's less for us!" And it's not entirely invalid. If a potential contributor only has so much money to donate, giving to a known entity like Braff may very well trump their giving to someone else. Braff also had the resources to get the word out about his campaign far more broadly than a lot of struggling indie writers/directors. He's been getting all the attention. (And by the way, this ongoing fuss is only giving him and his project more attention.)

Crowd sourcing or crowd funding has been seen by many who have dreams of working in the industry as a way to make that one, or two, or dozen films that will showcase their talents and break them in, get them noticed. But it's kind of like self-publishing. The easier it gets to make your own movie, the harder it is to get any one of them noticed unless it wins a bunch of awards (and even then it depends on which awards). And this is all assuming you can raise the money to begin with, which is difficult enough, even when going begging online. When everyone has a project, no one wants to give to anyone else. It's every man for himself. Sad but true. There are exceptions of course, but they only prove the rule.

On the flip side of this, crowd funding is used by many indie directors to keep from having to answer to a producer or studio about the final product. That is to say, when the money comes from a studio or production company, those entities want a say in what happens and how and when. They want to protect their investments and hopefully get a good return on them in the form of a film that makes money. But what's a writer or director to do when they want to make a movie that's not destined to be a blockbuster? When no one in the industry will sign on to make that movie? Or when they want to stay true to their artistic vision without interference from higher ups? Well, they ask friends, family, and strangers for the money in return for acknowledgement and a few prizes. That is, they crowd source.

Even indie directors who have made many films and could possibly get other forms of financial backing for their work, having proved their talents and abilities, still do this. They prefer to do it, for all the reasons I've listed in the above paragraph. They want control of the work. Final cut. A say in the casting. The ability to protect the script. &c. And these are the reasons (as I understand it) Braff says he wants to crowd fund his movie, too. So . . . Are the very people who do it for the same reasons going to fault him?

No. Again, it's the ones who have yet to make even that first film, or the ones who have only made one or two, and then a lot of these people haven't even tried to use Kickstarter themselves to fund any projects. They're more outraged at the idea of Braff using it than anything else. These are people who want to be part of the industry, the system, and can't understand someone who is in already wanting to go outside it. And I'm not disparaging them. I'm in the same place, still trying to break in, and my initial reaction was irritation too. But then I thought about it. And I thought about some of the indie directors I met at AFF who use crowd sourcing, even after six or ten or twelve films. And I concluded there are simply different ways to make a movie, and some ways are right for some films/people and others are right for others. Congress between the various sides and ways shouldn't be dammed up. Ideally, paths stay open on all sides.

Ideally. Though of course we all know how difficult it is to get to the top of that hill. At least the first time. You know how, when you drive somewhere new the first time, the trip seems long and sometimes confusing? But the next time you go, it's faster and easier. And the more often you go, the more routine it becomes. Yeah. It's like that.

Those of us who are still trying to get there the first time, well, good luck to us all. Braff made it up, now he's coming down for a bit, no rule against that, and it's his journey. Everyone gets their own. Everyone makes their own path.

Austin Film Festival: Day 4 (Panel)

I only had time to attend one morning panel on the fourth and final conference day (the festival itself continues through the week with screenings, but the conference has ended). The panel I attended was on "Independent Production: Crowdfunding Your Indie Project." Again, I'm not really sure if I will go this route, but I like to have the information so I can get a sense of all the options out there.

A quick explanation of "crowdfunding": sites like Kickstarter and Indiegogo allow filmmakers, musicians, inventors, whoever, to plead their cases to the general population. In other words, you can go on one of these sites and beg for money for your project. A little bit here and there begins to add up. The idea is that if everyone gives just a little, as opposed to having a big investor, the creative artist can realize his or her dream without the interference that big money tends to bring. Or, really, if you can't get the big money, get a lot of little money.

The panel was moderated by Evan Fitzmaurice and featured Jeremy Cloe, Lisa Rudin, and Victoria Westcott. Mostly these three spoke about their own experiences raising money via Kickstarter, as each has done so successfully. For example, Cloe stated he had already made a short film, which he posted on Kickstarter to give backers an idea of what the feature he was planning might look like. (I probably should have asked what a writer can hope to post to get people to give, since it sounds like Kickstarter requires a video of some kind, and my sitting and talking about the project wouldn't be terribly interesting.)

Of course, having a social media presence is key to a successful crowdfunding campaign. One can't start with just three Facebook friends and hope to get $10k. Well, you can, but you shouldn't be surprised when you don't raise the funds. (By the way, stats show that while the average goal is about $4500, campaigns are more successful when they ask for $10-20k.) It was suggested by one of the panelists that you make a contact list of pretty much everyone you know and start there. Roll it out to friends, family, online acquaintances, and try to get the word to spread. Another interesting statistic that came up: it takes an average of seven times of reading/hearing about something before a person is likely to act. That means seven times of seeing your e-mail or Tweet or FB posting before they might actually go look at your Kickstarter page and give some money.

Thirty days seems to be the right amount of time for a campaign. Rudin said if you start strong, that's a good sign. From the sound of things, a strong start and finish are the key; in the middle, don't panic if there's a little bit of a plateau. Of course, if you don't get that strong start . . . Maybe panic then.

Swag is a good way to get backers. Promising little perks at various donation levels. But it's also important to be honest and clear when dealing with donors: they will not make their money back, they will not get a return on their "investment." At best, it's a tax write-off. Meanwhile, promise those who give $75 a copy of the DVD, and give really major backers an acknowledgement in the credits, a ticket to the premiere, whatever. Just also remind them to be patient since making a movie takes time as well as money. If you can guess as to when these goodies will be available, that's great, but also be clear that schedules are subject to change.

Now Kickstarter recently came under fire when it was noticed that some less-than-worthy types were using it to raise money and then never deliver the project. (This happened to me when I bought into an of-the-month club on Etsy, so I can understand that frustration.) Kickstarter is working to crack down on this, which is why it requires so much from the artists hoping to raise funds: the video, the plan, a promise that if you get the money, you will make the project. There are legal ramifications and SEC issues swirling, but I won't go into those. Sufficient to say that if you use Kickstarter or its brethren, you must have a solid project and present yourself as utterly trustworthy because you will be fighting a certain amount of skepticism. This is why the social network is so important, since having people to vouch for you goes a long way.

Meanwhile, don't under- or over-report things. If you show up too much in a person's Facebook feed, they'll probably hide you. Only send updates—whether via e-mail, Tweets, or FB—when there is interesting or important news. Some people may want more, but don't put it in their faces. Instead, keep up a production blog that lets them go deeper if they so desire. This will also put your backers at ease that the project is real and is happening; you haven't taken their money and run.

That sums up what I took away from this particular panel. A lot of good information. It may seem like common sense, but it's always nice to hear from people who've been there and done that.