There are countless film projects
that never quite make it into production, usually due to lack of funding and
support. But, thanks to sites like Kickstarter, audiences can make donations to
a project to get the film into production. These sites, and the users that
support these projects, have the power to change the film industry.
According to the article “Crowdfunding:
The Future Of The Film Industry? ”by Ilya Pozin, crowdfunding not only brings
to donations to a film project, but also attracts early viewers who would generate
early interest in a project and help market it. Crowdfunding sites offer
incentives to those that donate. The incentives could be anywhere from your
name in the opening credits, to a signed DVD, or even credit on IMDB. Offers
like this have never been given to those that have donated in the past because
opportunities to invest in an artistic project have been illegal until the
passing of the JOBS Act, which allows people to make small donations to
companies or projects like a film.
According to Ilya Pozin, “This
combination of potentially infinite resources and independent filmmaking is an
important change of tides for the future of film… it could pave the way for a
new model of film production, one that more closely aligns the moviegoing
public with the films they choose to see.” Kickstarter, and companies like it
have the power to overthrow Hollywood in the sense of giving people the power
to choose what films they want to see by only supporting those that they are
interested in seeing come into fruition. The film industry tends to focus on
putting out the best movies leading up to awards season. However, the rest of
the year, all the lesser worthy films are put out and audiences have to suffer
through them. What if crowdfunding was away to put out films that we actually
want to see? It seems that Hollywood is catching on. According to the article, “Who
needs an Oscar? Hollywood basks in industry’s comeback” Glover states that “Tinseltown
might just be striking the right balance between making what people want to
see, getting it to them in a way that works and letting them share their buzz
over social media. According to the article, “Crowdsourcing success: Veronica
Mars movie raises over $2.5 million with Kickstarter “ Suis states that “So
much has been said about how social media has turned opening weekend into
opening day. Word-of-mouth can destroy
bad movies much quicker than they used to. As this Kickstarter campaign shows,
it can also work in reverse. Good programs may be subject to cancellations by
executives or declining ratings despite a rapt fan base.”
Currently the biggest success
Kickstarter is having with bringing a film into fruition is the Veronica Mars
movie. After the popular television show was cancelled, its creator Rob Thomas
had talked about turning it into a movie. This could finally come true. If they
reach their goal $2 million they will start shooting this summer. Well,
according to Suis, the campaign has already reached $2.6 million dollars. They
met their goal of $2 million in just eleven hours. It also shows that the
Internet and social media play a crucial role in getting projects noticed and
funded.
According to the article “How
crowdfunding is changing the way movies are made” Geist states that “By the end
of this year, over 100 Kickstarter-funded films will have been released
theatrically in North America. In 2012, three Kickstarter funded films ranked
among the best reviewed films of the year with six films – two documentaries, a
live action short, and three documentary shorts – garnering Oscar nominations.”
Could crowdfunding help underfunded
films succeed? Though the studio has the final say in whether or not a film
project get the green light to be shown in theaters, could more indie film make
it mainstream? Could crowdfunding hurt the film industry after it has just seen
so much gain in profits?
Works Cited
Geist, Michael. "How ‘crowdfunding’ Is Changing the Way
Movies Are Funded: Geist." Thestar.com. The Star, 01 Mar. 2013. Web. Mar.
2013.
Glover, Ronald. "Who Needs an Oscar? Hollywood Basks in
Industry's Comeback." Reuters
Pozin, Ilya. "Crowdfunding: The Future Of The Film
Industry?" Forbes 20 Dec. 2012.
Suis, Sarah. "Crowdsourcing Success: Veronica Mars
Movie Raises over $2.5 Million with Kickstarter." 'Screener' Screenerblog,
14 Mar. 2013.
Stephanie Griffin
ReplyDeleteQuinn,
I really enjoyed your blog about the aspect of crowdfunding. Although I try to stay on top of the best movies from each year, I have never heard of this term until you brought it up. The idea of movies being funded based on what people would want to see is brilliant. For once, the money being put into movies is worth it. I could certainly see crowdfunding helping underfunded films succeed. Unfortunately, there are great screen writing talents out there that can only reach a certain amount of people to view their film.
Although I never considered myself a film major, for someone who does still go to the movies at least once a month, I have noticed many of the reasons why some movies that made it to theatres may still have been successful even without an Oscar. One reason is through the focus on characters, as the article "Hollywood Eyes Record 2013 With 'Star Trek,' 'Hobbit,' 'Hunger Games' Sequels” from Advertising Age discusses. The article reads, “While studios are making fewer films, they are focuses on characters with global appeal that attract broad audiences” (“Hollywood Eyes Record”). For myself, I tend to be more involved with a movie if the character seems relatable or almost a hero in the story. A great example of this would be Katniss Everdeen from the Hunger Games. Jennifer Lawrence’s character is surely relatable for me as a big sister and caregiver for others. Having characters like this could also sway the crowdfunders into supporting a film that should be produced knowing the relationship between character and audience could lead to such success of that film.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteGriffin Part 2-
ReplyDeleteAnother aspect that caught my attention after the Oscars was the power of film that is original. The movie “Life of Pi,” for example, was noted as “one of the most unusual megahits ever to hit the big-screen” according to David Germain in his article, "Overseas Slice of 'Pi' Flips Hollywood Formula” (Germain). I still have not had the opportunity to watch the film, but from what I am hearing, it is a movie to see. The originality of the film and its cultural impact through Americans eyes allows us to appreciate life from another world. As Germain writes, “’Every big movie doesn't need to be American. This movie had virtually nothing American about it,’ said Gitesh Pandya, ‘The more we see examples of these unorthodox films with global settings that are actually making the cash registers ring, it's a step in the direction of trying to find more of them’” (Germain). It is great that a movie like “Life of Pi” was able to become popular within America because it is foreshadowing the future of the film industry. Based off the article, audiences can make or break the success of the movie by having the control to see it. The director of “Life of Pi” is quoted at the end of the article stating, “It's just that I think they have to be more opened up to different types of filmmaking," added Lee, who figures the enormous business "Life of Pi" did overseas will help that along — a bit. "It's a gradual thing. It's not going to dramatically change anything. But just look at the number. You have to pay attention to it. The number of what the world did on this movie. The market in America didn't dwindle. It's everybody else in the world. They stood up. They did their share” (Germain). In other words, the idea of crowdfunding that you bring up certainly will be making an effect on the film industry if it hasn’t already. People want to be entertained, but I feel there will only be so much of the same movie we will be able to see. Therefore, having crowdfunding will be a benefit to the film industry, so movies like “The Hunger Games” and “Life of Pi” that can intrigue audiences through their plots and characters will have a chance to become a great success.
Works Cited
Germain, David. "Overseas Slice of 'Pi' Flips Hollywood Formula." Associated Press. N.p., 17 Feb. 2013. Web. 17 Mar. 2013.
"Hollywood Eyes Record 2013 With 'Star Trek,' 'Hobbit,' 'Hunger Games' Sequels." Advertising Age. N.p., 28 Dec. 2012. Web. 17 Mar. 2013.
DJ Mahoney
ReplyDeleteQuinn, I thought that this was such a great topic to bring to the class’s attention because it’s current and has the potential to change the types of films we will be watching in the future. I think that crowdfunding is a really smart way to get the audience involved with a project from its earliest stages. Many film studios may be hesitant to commit to a film because they might be unsure of its economic success once released; however, websites such as Kickstarter allow these studios and corporations to see the film’s following before a trailer is even released.
In the article, “Overseas Slice of ‘Pi’ Flips Hollywood Formula”, the author declares that Hollywood remains at a formulaic place when it comes to making films. (Germain) Life of Pi director, Ang Lee is even quoted saying, “It’s just that I think they have to be more opened up to different types of filmmaking.” It’s as if they have a checklist or a set of rules in which they must follow to create a successful film. By using crowdfunding and sites such a Kickstarter, the creative team behind a film is given the opportunity to completely alter this formula and create something original and new. If fans are in support of this new idea, they will decide to donate to see the idea come to life. Having more filmmakers to things on their own terms may end up making films more exciting to watch because they are no longer as many predictable endings.
Over the past decade, we have seen that the major film companies have released less films per year yet are receiving more revenue for the ones that are produced. I believe this is because those companies have shifted their focus on creating films; it was once to inform the audience, to force them to think, and ultimately to entertain them whereas now the audience is influenced to become united based on a hero or a fictional world that is intriguing, familiar things that are used again and again just to guarantee that movie theatre seats will be filled. In the article, “Who Needs and Oscar…” Universal Pictures Chairman Adam Engleson says, “Give the consumers something that’s interesting and you can still get them to come out of their house.” (Grover) Sites like Kickstarter are doing just that; they are finding topics that audience members find interesting enough to donate their own money to see the project lift off from the ground and be put into production.
While the film industry is now focused on competition in the box office and worldwide revenue on not only films but also the advertisements and products that are associated with their films, at the end of the day, “when those lights go down, it’s always about the movies.” (Advertising Age) All of the expenses and monetary goods should come second to the actual films being produced and viewed each year. The purpose of films is to commend the creative works of the cast and crew, to cinematically introduce a story, and to entertain the audience. With the rise of crowdfunding and websites like Kickstarter, I believe more films will be produced in the future that execute those three components and enhance the field of film for the better.
Works Cited
Germain, David. "Overseas Slice of 'Pi' Flips Hollywood Formula." Associated Press. N.p., 17 Feb. 2013. Web. 17 Mar. 2013.
Glover, Ronald. "Who Needs an Oscar? Hollywood Basks in Industry's Comeback." Reuters
"Hollywood Eyes Record 2013 With 'Star Trek,' 'Hobbit,' 'Hunger Games' Sequels." Advertising Age. N.p., 28 Dec. 2012. Web. 17 Mar. 2013.
Brandon Schindler
ReplyDeleteQuinn,
This idea of crowdfunding is very intriguing. Like Stephanie, I had absolutely no clue that something like this existed before this posting. I think that the idea could help the movie industry out tremendously. I know many people that would certainly jump at the opportunity to have their name on credits of a movie, or their name on IMDB.
Recently, there were some movies that came out that according to the article entitled “Who needs an Oscar? Hollywood basks in industry’s comeback” by Ronald Grover there is mention of The Avengers, The Dark Knight Rises, and the Hunger Games and how they won’t be looked at too closely at the Academy Awards (Grover).Personally, I was a huge fan of these movies. There is action and suspense in them, which is something that I do enjoy in a movie. Now the question that comes to mind is how can crowdfunding help in getting some of the elements from the more popular movies, and getting those elements into the underfunded movies. I think that the companies who crowdfund, could easily work with the companies that produce movies such as the ones mentioned above, to help boost the underfunded films. So in this case if some sort of deal could be reached, there is benefit for both parties.
Looking at this from a different perspective, one of the articles entitled “Hollywood Eyes Record 2013 With ‘Star Trek.’ ‘Hobbit,’ ‘Hunger Games’ Sequels”, there is reference to the fact that a decade ago there were 209 movies made by six of the largest companies, and now within 2012 there were only 130 movies made (“Hollywood Eyes Record”). It seems like this is a golden opportunity for the for some of the underfunded films to pick up some of the slack. In one of the articles in this week’s reading entitled “Overseas slice of ‘Pi’ flips Hollywood formula” by David Germain it is very apparent that the movie “Life of Pi” was very successful. “With 11 Academy Awards nominations- second only to “Lincoln” with 12- and the sort of global box-office receipts normally reserved for superheroes, “Life of Pi” is one of the most unusual megahits ever to hit the big-screen” (Germain). In that quote, one of the words that really stands out to me is the word unusual. The thought that comes to mind when unusual is said, is an underfunded film. To me they are unusual because they just can’t keep up with some of the more major films that are out today. One thing that runs through my mind is why when ‘Life of Pi’ was unusual, and that was a hit, the underfunded films can’t be hits as well. In closing, I want to address one of the questions that was asked at the end of the post. That question deals with crowdfunding and the industry. I firmly believe that crowdfunding can only benefit the industry. I think that if crowdfunding were used in both underfunded and successful movies, there would be more money coming into the industry.
Works Cited
Glover, Ronald. "Who Needs an Oscar? Hollywood Basks in Industry's Comeback." Reuters
Germain, David. "Overseas Slice of 'Pi' Flips Hollywood Formula." Associated Press. N.p., 17 Feb. 2013. Web. 19 Mar. 2013.
"Hollywood Eyes Record 2013 With 'Star Trek,' 'Hobbit,' 'Hunger Games' Sequels." Advertising Age. N.p., 28 Dec. 2012. Web. 19 Mar. 2013.
Kim,
ReplyDeleteI agree with your post wholeheartedly. Hollywood has been putting out more sequels than ever and because of that, is reaping in the money. With franchises, especially the ones coming from books being picked up constantly, they are assuring themselves a guaranteed audience, if not more than the first one, at each showing of these sequels. I think you are right to say that it is the familiarity of these characters that brings people back to theaters, but not just from seeing the first movie. By making these huge franchises out of books, you are taking characters that most people are already familiar with from the book. This can be directly seen when it comes to beloved series such as Harry Potter, Twilight, and The Hunger Games.
In the article Hollywood Eyes Record 2013 with ‘Star Trek’, ‘Hobbit’, ‘Hunger Games’ Sequels by Advertising Age, it is stated.
“Major studios have relied on popular characters from books and comics to attract fans to films, such as Disney's "Marvel's The Avengers," the year's top-selling movie at more than $1.51 billion worldwide, according to Box Office Mojo.”
This could not be truer and Hollywood execs are finding ways to capitalize off that further, mainly by splitting the last movie in the series into two separate movie. We saw this first with Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, than the Twilight Saga followed suit and it was just announced last year that the conclusion to the Hunger Games Trilogy would be split into two separate movies as well. While some moviegoers, especially the ones that read the books, are critical of the necessity of the two movies they will obviously still come out in full force to see the ending of their favorite franchises. Two more action packed book series were just picked up for movies as well, The Mortal Instruments, which will come out these August and the Divergent series which does not yet have a release date. I think Hollywood saw the goldmine when they first put out Harry Potter and will now continue to take advantage of any bestselling franchise, including what I’m sure will be interesting, 50 Shades of Grey.
What makes these books so marketable is the fact that people are already intimately familiar with the characters, allowing for ridiculous marketing campaigns. In the article Who needs and Oscar- Hollywood Basks in Industry’s Comeback by Ronald Grover he says,
Lionsgate boosted ticket sales for "The Hunger Games" in what analysts say was Hollywood's most aggressive online marketing push. The studio stoked interest among the film's core younger audience by starting a year early with a near-constant use of Twitter and Facebook, a Tumblr blog, a YouTube Channel, and live streaming of the premiere on Yahoo.
The fact that we are anticipating these movies so much because of the books allows Hollywood to take advantage of that as we are eagerly taking whatever little bits of the movie we can before it actually comes out. And they can continue to do this with the sequels. It’s genius really and in the end, everyone is coming out happy.
Glover, Ronald. "Who Needs an Oscar? Hollywood Basks in Industry's Comeback." Reuters
"Hollywood Eyes Record 2013 With 'Star Trek,' 'Hobbit,' 'Hunger Games' Sequels." Advertising Age. N.p., 28 Dec. 2012. Web. 20 Mar. 2013.
Quinn,
ReplyDeleteThis is a very interesting idea that I had never heard of before, and could have a serious impact on the film industry if it picks up. I had never heard of crowd funding before, so this concept is completely new and foreign to me. Before I read your articles, I thought there was no way something like this could be feasible or taken seriously. The fact that audience members funding a movie’s production with their own money seemed a little too far-fetched. However, Ilya Pozin’s article on crowd funding illustrates how in today’s world of consumer-generated content in media, something like this is very possible. Independent filmmakers are always trying new things to push boundaries in the film industry, and this new idea seems to actually be working. What surprised me was the number of reputable and accredited directors and producers who have used crowd funding recently. Bill Johnson and Charlie Kaufman, both “Hollywood heavyweights” according to Pozin, weren’t the type of producers I imagined to see using crowd funding.
In Ronald Glover’s article, he notes how the Veronica Mars movie raised over $2.5 million using Kickstarter, which was shocking to say the least. However, Pozin and Glover both only briefly touch the topic of who actually pays for crowd funding. I would have liked to see an interview with a crowd funding consumer, one who actually pays these producers through Kickstarter. I managed to surf around the website for a bit, and was amazed at how much money some of these projects are generating from people. Everything from documentaries and short films to video games were featured on Kickstarter, each enclosing how much they wish to get funded, and how far along they are. Something as simple as a “Gluten-free cookbook” was even featured, with a goal of $5,000, and $1,600 of which was already donated. Some ideas were really cool, including one man’s project to turn an old oyster boat into a mobile oyster bar, with a funding goal of $75,000. From these observations, I am now a firm believer that crowd funding is a serious niche market of the media industry that will only pick up steam and popularity moving forward. What will be interesting to see is how much impact consumers can have on the actual content of these projects. It wouldn’t surprise me to see a trend of some high-rolling film enthusiasts paying for their actual scripts to be picked up by producers.
Geist’s article on crowd funding discusses how the best documentary short winner at the last Academy Awards, Inocente, amassed over $52,000 through Kickstarter. Yet, for every project like this, I can only imagine there are dozens that are relatively unsuccessful. If users donate so much money to projects that never amount to anything, how will sites continue to entice users with incentives? In other words, is crowd funding a serious new aspect of film making, or is it just a trend? I believe it has the potential to be more than a fad, but needs more incentives and consumer-generated content to thrive. I could also see crowd funding being applied to big-name studio’s movies, who could offer a package for users that would include the movie’s DVD, a T-shirt, autographed picture of an actor or actress, and some other type of memorabilia.
What this topic and articles have proved is that our media is becoming much more user-friendly, as the rise of social media allows consumers to also be media producers. Crowd funding companies like Kickstarter have capitalized on this and made huge profits, as well as helped the production of thousands of projects. I look forward to seeing how this idea will take off in the next few years, and potentially become a staple in the film industry,
Geist, Michael. "How ‘crowdfunding’ Is Changing the Way Movies Are Funded: Geist." Thestar.com. The Star, 01 Mar. 2013. Web. Mar. 2013.
Glover, Ronald. "Who Needs an Oscar? Hollywood Basks in Industry's Comeback." Reuters
Pozin, Ilya. "Crowdfunding: The Future Of The Film Industry?" Forbes 20 Dec. 2012.