| |
In the Trades
We are now "the other hand" of the other hand.
Artemis Eternal in a Variety funding article: Subscription link | Non-subscription link
Thank you, Gordon Cox, for researching and writing about this topic. It's interesting to see where other people's heads are at in terms of the technique. I have to admit that I've never loved the buzzword "crowdfunding" (originally coined by Wired). What we're doing is continuously architected to be much greater than that. In due time, of course.
If you get a sense that this idea is viewed as rather playschool by the industry, then you're correct. It is not a progressive business and most filmmakers don't have the experience to do something like this at a caliber and strategic level.
There's a mention of success meaning "funded" in terms of using third-party sites. I don't consider "funded" to mean success in filmmaking. Whether it's extremely low 10k amounts quick-and-blind funded online or multimillion-dollar Hollywood threequels funded by hedge funds, we know cash isn't a useful metric of story quality or community advancement. It's not meaningful.
That being said, when I spoke to the reporter, we were both aware of only one other crowd-funded film that has raised as much or more than ours. I was not surprised to learn that the other has a religious bent as a call to action.
In the meantime, this article is a good overview of the landscape, which seems to have been hijacked by a small group of third-party sites that did not exist when we started. I continue to urge filmmakers to think long term and cultivate their own independent web presence and community instead of building up template gatekeepers who reserve a fee without adding anything unique or long-lasting to your equation or our eco-system. There is no shortcut to building a career and a defining production company and there is nothing vanguard or artistic about training audiences to rely on another middle-man.
I say that with great passion and affection because, beyond making great films, the proof of concept we're contributing will end with great value and be useful to others. In due time, of course. So we're committed to the toil and effort with alacrity as we face and solve the same challenges.
Finally, whenever I speak to other filmmakers or to press, I'm proud of Wingmen: you are savvy, great partners in both adventure and movie-making. If I were another filmmaker who was trying to fund a film in a similar way, I'd be talking to you first vs. general audiences. You're just that good, and discerning, and that is meaningful.
1/9 Update: After a few confused letters and comments from you about the usage of the term "legit" in the article, allow me to explain that as an industry trade this publication uses slang and jargon. Legit is actually a term used (mostly in NYC) to describe theater! So no, via use of the word legit Variety was not making a comment on the professionalism of any of the film projects listed. From their site:
"legit -- legitimate (live) theater. The term seeks to differentiate serious theater (think Shakespeare, think O'Neill) from vaudeville or burlesque; 'Choreographer Michael Kidd distinguished himself in legit before working in pictures.'"
In related news, my personal favorite theater slang continues to be "corpsing".
Permanent Link | RSS
|
|
|
