Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Spike Lee Using Kickstarter to Raise $1.25 Million for Film

Wow, Soderbergh backed it too, wonder if he'd try to convince Spike to shoot digital this time, given the smaller budget. Or not.
 
There should be a Failed/has-been Celeb Kickstarter 'Hall of Shame' - LOL.
 
Michael Millichamp said:
Are you guys serious?

Spike Lee shouldn't even be allowed to have a Kickstarter. It's in the rules of Kickstarter that you can't just ask people for money for no reason and offer them rewards... Which is exactly what he's doing. He doesn't have a script, stars, or anything. He has an idea and he wants you to fund it. Kickstarter is just using this to promote their website more.

I understand Veronica Mars doing it. They had a huge show everyone wanted to watch, but after 7 years of trying to finance it, they just couldn't.

Zach Braff is a little different, he has a huge following but I think he could have chose a different route and succeeded just as much.

Spike Lee just directed fucking Old Boy.... HE JUST GO PAID. That dude has money but he doesn't want to use his, he wants to use yours so HE can make a movie about what HE wants. He isn't asking you if you support his script, he's asking you if you support him. He could raise 1.25 Million dollars and then direct a stop motion movie, which if people knew what he was directing, they wouldn't have helped fund it.

He is a pompous ass who thinks he is amazing.

I hope he doesn't get funded...
Click to expand...

Agreed. What I think is even worse that you didn't mention on top of it is not only could he afford to do the project (whatever the project is) himself, and that he is breaking a lot of kickstarter rules to do so, but he is asking YOU for YOUR MONEY so he can make MORE MONEY. Think about it, without investors that he doesn't have to give financial rewards to ie profits on the film, he can then in turn use his distribution contacts to make profit on the film based on his name and loyal fanbase alone no matter what the project is that brain farts out of all this and if its actually a good movie, look out, Spike is gonna have some major distribution leverage with whichever company decides to pick up the film. And, the 1.25mil may not even be what he needs to make whatever movie he's planning on making, but use of leverage of the kickstarter audience to achieve better financial backing from a third party. The fact that there is no story attached to his campaign is ludicrous and really insulting to the filmmaking community and shows just how low some will go to make money. Because believe me folks, that's what this is about, not the fact that Spike has an indie story that he's been dying to tell and shopping around to no prevail for years and years, but the fact that its easy money. This is blatent arogance on behalf of Spike Lee and I blame Kickstarter for supporting it due to the rule violations in question here.
 
A number of you make valid points and have real concerns. I don't know if I would personally contribute to Spike this time, but whichever way it goes I think it can benefit Kickstarter, and therefore us all.

Is the biggest benefit of Kickstarter the ability it creates for little guys to raise money or is it potentially more valuable as an engine that enables the creation of artworks on a grand scale? Are we contributing for the reason of helping each other, or are we more concerned about what is in it for me? It is a defining question, methinks. It is a question that makes this social experiment fascinating to watch unfold.

mikeburton said:
Agreed. What I think is even worse that you didn't mention on top of it is not only could he afford to do the project (whatever the project is) himself, and that he is breaking a lot of kickstarter rules to do so, but he is asking YOU for YOUR MONEY so he can make MORE MONEY. Think about it, without investors that he doesn't have to give financial rewards to ie profits on the film, he can then in turn use his distribution contacts to make profit on the film based on his name and loyal fanbase alone no matter what the project is that brain farts out of all this and if its actually a good movie, look out, Spike is gonna have some major distribution leverage with whichever company decides to pick up the film. And, the 1.25mil may not even be what he needs to make whatever movie he's planning on making, but use of leverage of the kickstarter audience to achieve better financial backing from a third party. The fact that there is no story attached to his campaign is ludicrous and really insulting to the filmmaking community and shows just how low some will go to make money. Because believe me folks, that's what this is about, not the fact that Spike has an indie story that he's been dying to tell and shopping around to no prevail for years and years, but the fact that its easy money. This is blatent arogance on behalf of Spike Lee and I blame Kickstarter for supporting it due to the rule violations in question here.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
I don't think it's about what's in it for me. I've never created a campaign nor do I have any plans to in the near future. As a whole I like the idea although I think it needs some form of regulation and penalties for projects that disappear into thin air etc. What I don't like seeing is the system being taken advantage of and Kickstarter making an allowance on behalf of Spike Lee. If you or I were running this exact same campaign it would not have been approved. This is how a good system becomes corrupt and will be overly abused by other celebs in the future. And it's because it all comes down to the mighty dollar. Period. That isn't inspiring, it's not art, it's not for the better good of all filmmakers nor other artists either. If this campaign was created responsibly I'd be singing a different tune, like I mentioned earlier, I'm a fan of some of Spikes previous work. But this campaign is ugly from the second rate video they produced all the way to the bank.
 
Yeah, those are my concerns as well Mike. My first Kickstarter was very successful. In fact only 10 narrative film campaigns had more total backers than mine (mostly celebs). My second campaign was rejected and banned (can't resubmit) by Kickstarter not because I broke any of their rules, but apparently because my campaign video said it was cooler to back underdogs with projects that would otherwise never be made than celebrity campaigns.

Here's the video they banned:

 
Brandon,

Well done!
If you didn't break any rules what reason did they reject your project? They have unwritten rules?
 
Corey_O said:
Brandon,

Well done!
If you didn't break any rules what reason did they reject your project? They have unwritten rules?
Click to expand...

Thanks Corey.

They didn't officially give me any reason and ignored my support ticket. A little bird told me they will never let this video be on their site because they are so aggressively trying to get celebrities to launch campaigns with them and my video might reflect poorly on them.

They are full of unwritten rules.
 
mikeburton said:
I don't think it's about what's in it for me.
Click to expand...

OK, I have no reason to doubt you.

The reason I posed the question (Not so much to you, or any of the RedUsers but in a general sense) is this; If our motives are purely altruistic then it wouldn't or shouldn't really concern us if Spike did use his pledges to make a film and exploit it for personal financial gain. In fact that would be the preferred outcome; that he be able to engage in his art, whatever it is, for his own personal enrichment, spiritual, financial or otherwise.

Some of the criticisms of his campaign, as legitimate as they may be are about exactly that. I get the impression that people object to him getting rich off of this simply because he already has money. If it were an average Joe hitting the Kickstarter jackpot folks would be cheering. That seems wrong somehow.

So I ask again but I paraphrase; Is the Kickstarter mission to help little guys finance their films and have a chance to get rich, or are their ambitions larger than that? The latter seems to be the case. Their pursuit of celebrities seems to suggest they are out to change the paradigm by creating a new financial engine... A new business model, designed to take corporate blandness out of cinema, re-inject an edge and make controversial films with a budget possible.

I wouldn't be surprised if they courted Spike specifically and aggressively because he is just that sort of guy. It may even be possible that is why his campaign is irreverent and poorly thought out. Maybe it is because he has little real interest in putting any effort into the campaign. Maybe he just said "Fuck it. let's see what happens if I do next to nothing." He has nothing to loose and Kickstarter has everything to gain. Like someone else said, it's free money.
 
Scott Crawley said:
OK, I have no reason to doubt you.
I get the impression that people object to him getting rich off of this simply because he already has money. If it were an average Joe hitting the Kickstarter jackpot folks would be cheering. That seems wrong somehow.

So I ask again but I paraphrase; Is the Kickstarter mission to help little guys finance their films and have a chance to get rich, or are their ambitions larger than that? The latter seems to be the case. Their pursuit of celebrities seems to suggest they are out to change the paradigm by creating a new financial engine... A new business model, designed to take corporate blandness out of cinema, re-inject an edge and make controversial films with a budget possible.

I wouldn't be surprised if they courted Spike specifically and aggressively because he is just that sort of guy. It may even be possible that is why his campaign is irreverent and poorly thought out. Maybe it is because he has little real interest in putting any effort into the campaign. Maybe he just said "Fuck it. let's see what happens if I do next to nothing." He has nothing to loose and Kickstarter has everything to gain. Like someone else said, it's free money.
Click to expand...

Like I've mentioned, I am not completely opposed to celebs doing Kickstarter campaigns. That's not the issue. I'm not fighting the fight of celebs versus the little guy here. I'm fighting the hipocricy of the system and how it is twisting and morphing itself within its own rules to satisfy the likes of an individual and ultimately pad the pocketbooks of its own entity by not making a universal playing field for BOTH celebs and all of us nobodies. Allowing Spike and his blatent misuse of the system to run wild within the parameters of a well established system is comparable to the Wall Street / banking system goons who put the economy in the shitter and not one person was prosecuted by the corrupt gov't because it wouldn't be in everyone's best interest come election time. And yes, maybe there is a double standard in play here, but I think this is about what's right and what's just plain wrong. This feels wrong to me in my gut and everytime i try to look at it from the other side of the fence i can't help but shake my head in disgust. Its not right and I hope his campaign fails.
 
Wasn`t "Only God Forgives" also partially financed by crowd funding?

I think using Kikstarter or any other kind of crowd funding methods to finance stablished directors movies a good idea, if this means that they are allowed to make the movie they want to make, without any constraints from the studios.

But I believe that there are a few things that should be implemented for the supporters.

The Scripit should be made available for anyone, so they can decide if they want to support it or not.

A U$ 20,00 deposit should give you back, at least a 1080P Apple TV quality copy (and a 4K copy for U$ 50,00 more or less)

There should be an option to become an investor over a certain amount of money (let`s say over U$ 200,00) so people can generate revenue if the movie turns to be a comercial success.
 
If SPIKE LEE had a vision he wouldn't be on kick start...he doesn't even pay the kids in his camp for their film ideas, He told them that they will get the experience of making a film instead of the money. he's a bum!
 
Tony Harris said:
If SPIKE LEE had a vision he wouldn't be on kick start...he doesn't even pay the kids in his camp for their film ideas, He told them that they will get the experience of making a film instead of the money. he's a bum!
Click to expand...

Perhaps Spike Lee's "vision" is one that he wants to realize without the meddling adulterators that are so typical in the conventional film funding arena.

But I do feel for Brandon, that was a tough break, his looked like a strong and worthwhile campaign, and the reasons for banning him were worse than lame.
Spike has already said as much, and more.
 
Bill Anderson said:
Perhaps Spike Lee's "vision" is one that he wants to realize without the meddling adulterators that are so typical in the conventional film funding arena.

But I do feel for Brandon, that was a tough break, his looked like a strong and worthwhile campaign, and the reasons for banning him were worse than lame.
Spike has already said as much, and more.
Click to expand...

I wasn't under the impression that they banned Brandon, but the video he posted and maybe the campaign. Is that right Brandon?

Their reasons are unclear. Was there something specific in the video that they objected to? Could you re-submit a modified version if you wanted?
 
Last edited:
Scott Crawley said:
PIE wasn't under the impression that they banned Brandon, but the video he posted and the campaign. Is that right Brandon?
Click to expand...

Correct though I doubt I'll ever get anything approved by them again since I've spoken publicly about this. Anyways, they can't block me entirely since I need access to the account to manage the backers from my first campaign.

I'm not for restricting anyone from using the site including celebrities. What I want is Kickstarter to actually be what they claim they are. A transparent mechanism to facilitate crowdfunding various artistic pursuits. They claim on their own website that they only look at specific legal criteria when approving projects and any projects that fit the criteria are approved. Unfortunately, that's not at all how they are in reality at all even though legally I believe that is how they must function to avoid responsibility if someone with a project scams people.

Kickstarter rejecting my campaign is a devastating blow to my film that I'm still scrambling to recover from. I put years into making this film happen and literally the day before we're to launch they slam the door in my face. I followed all their rules, backed over 200 other projects and promoted them heavily. I've also helped numerous people succeed with their campaigns. So, yeah. It's heartbreaking, totally unexpected and absolutely unfair.
 
That's a cautionary tale to be sure.

You have an indiegogo campaign ready do you? Are there any other crowd sourcing sites that you are considering?

Brandon J.F. said:
Correct though I doubt I'll ever get anything approved by them again since I've spoken publicly about this. Anyways, they can't block me entirely since I need access to the account to manage the backers from my first campaign.

I'm not for restricting anyone from using the site including celebrities. What I want is Kickstarter to actually be what they claim they are. A transparent mechanism to facilitate crowdfunding various artistic pursuits. They claim on their own website that they only look at specific legal criteria when approving projects and any projects that fit the criteria are approved. Unfortunately, that's not at all how they are in reality at all even though legally I believe that is how they must function to avoid responsibility if someone with a project scams people.

Kickstarter rejecting my campaign is a devastating blow to my film that I'm still scrambling to recover from. I put years into making this film happen and literally the day before we're to launch they slam the door in my face. I followed all their rules, backed over 200 other projects and promoted them heavily. I've also helped numerous people succeed with their campaigns. So, yeah. It's heartbreaking, totally unexpected and absolutely unfair.
Click to expand...
 
Scott Crawley said:
I wasn't under the impression that they banned Brandon, but the video he posted and maybe the campaign. Is that right Brandon?

Their reasons are unclear. Was there something specific in the video that they objected to? Could you re-submit a modified version if you wanted?
Click to expand...

I believe they took exception to Brandon's comment @ the 4min mark on the video: "… now, I know it's cool to back celebrity kickstarter campaigns, but it's even more cool to back an underdog".
I thought this worth repeating since it's a pretty innocent remark, and telling response.

If I've understood Brandon correctly he could not resubmit the campaign (and that was before he made this public and, perhaps, further alienated himself).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top