
Wish I was here by Zach Braff - taytus
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1869987317/wish-i-was-here-1
======
podperson
Here's what I think is missing from this kickstarter (and was a huge part of
the Veronica Mars kickstarter success) -- you can't pay a reasonable amount of
money and _get the final product_.

I realize he probably can't sell advance tickets (beyond special cases like
opening night) but how about, say, the DVD/Bluray/iTunes/Amazon version when
it becomes available. I'm not a _huge_ Zach Braff fan, but I liked Scrubs a
lot, and I enjoyed Garden State. I would totally pay $20 to get the production
diary + digital version when it becomes available.

Personally, I think the "pay me to make this movie/tv series and if I get the
money I will deliver it to you" model is the future for a lot of entertainment
(especially for known quantities like -- say -- the people who produced
Stargate SG-1). The inefficiency of paying a network to speculatively create
and back TV shows based on guesstimated potential advertising revenue and a
tiny chance of a massive payoff if the show is a hit is horrendous.

~~~
drzaiusapelord
Hold on, the original Garden State cost only 3.5 million to produce. You're
telling me Braff doesn't have 3.5 million to finance this thing or get a loan
from a traditional outlet/rich friends/George Harrison's Estate?

It sounds like this is his pet project, with him starring, and him getting
most of the profits, but he wants his fans to take all the risk? Seems off to
me. Granted, he may not want to personally take on the risk, which is
understandable, but its a personal vanity project no one is demanding. Just
bankroll it, Zach.

Kickstarter being used by well funded celebrities who just want to minimize
their risk to zero seems wrong to me. It should be for startups and good ideas
that can't get funding elsewhere.

~~~
webwright
He's worth about 22million (according to a google search). I imagine much of
that might be tied up in stocks/real estate, etc. 3.5M is not a trivial sum at
that level of wealth.

He could certainly borrow it (with interest), but why? Fans aren't taking
risk-- they are buying something that they want.

Rich/influential people can dodge most risk. Example: the top 7% of the US had
their net worths soar 28% from 2009-2011. The rest of us lost 4%. (source:
[http://www.latimes.com/business/money/la-fi-mo-economy-
wealt...](http://www.latimes.com/business/money/la-fi-mo-economy-
wealth-20130423,0,3711482.story) )

~~~
wmf
Fans are taking the risk that the project will not be delivered.

~~~
webwright
Do you really think this is a meaningful risk here? Would be a huge hit to his
reputation if he broke $2M and bolted. With a risk of $1-75 for most folks,
that risk/reward ratio seems fairly trivial.

~~~
wmf
It's unlikely that Braff would "bolt" with the money, but I could imagine the
movie getting canceled after the money has been spent, leaving backers with no
movie and no refunds.

~~~
smackfu
That seems pretty unlikely, and kind of highlights how this transforms the
risks. If Braff funded it directly, his risk only pays off if he makes the
movie and it makes enough money. While using crowdfunding, the backer's risk
is only if the movie is not made.

------
dantheman
I really don't like that they don't do a $10 - $15 digital download. You can
provide the download after the film is in theaters, it can be thought of as a
preorder of the dvd only cheaper for them.

~~~
bkanber
They respond to this on the Kickstarter page:

> Why aren’t you offering a Digital Download or DVD reward?

> I wish I could give you all everything you want. Unfortunately, giving away
> the movie could scare off the good distributors for movies like this,
> because the theater chains insist on having the “first run” of movies before
> they are available on DVD or digitally. I want all my fans to be able to see
> this movie in their hometown theaters on the big screen if they want to. I
> hope you like the rewards I am offering, and if there’s something you don’t
> see on the page, please comment and let me know.

~~~
surrealize
That says that theater chains insist on being first. But the download/dvd
could come after the theatrical run. It would be nice if, in exchange for
helping to fund the movie, I could get, you know, _the movie_.

The movie is the point of the whole enterprise; it seems like a natural
reward.

~~~
loumf
But, everyone will be able to buy that. If you want the DVD after the run, you
can have that.

The rewards are all things no one can buy except by backing the kickstarter.

~~~
dantheman
I don't care about any of the rewards.

I want to fund the movie - not to get a t shirt, or picture. I want to fund it
so I can watch it.

~~~
smackfu
You can pledge whatever you want and then select No Reward ("No thanks, I just
want to help the project.").

------
kreek
The negative feedback on here is astounding, really the worst side of HN. I
thought the promo was very funny and poignant, very inspiring. The brief is
detailed and the rewards make sense giving the restrictions of producing and
distributing a film.

~~~
danso
What are you talking about? The feedback here has been overall very
constructive.

~~~
kreek
Might of been a bit harsh myself, but most comments start off with a negative
outlook.

------
VLM
His "Garden State" movie and the plan for the new one don't look very
formulaic. I stopped going to movies when I didn't need to find a place to
make out with my girlfriend anymore and I stopped watching fiction movies when
I got bored of seeing the same old stuff over and over.

He should list this in his discussion of risks, in that he never quite
explains why its bad to put the financiers in editorial control of his movie,
although they clearly do a good job of narrowcasting typical formulaic movies
(to the small fraction of the population who likes that kinda stuff and
therefore might not like his stuff). Also as per the narrowcasting comment his
movies now sound interesting to me although I got bored with movies and
stopped watching a long time ago (like most people, looking at percentages).
So his risks section also needs a better plan to reach outside the usual movie
going public than a kickstarter and maybe the Sundance festival.

He may get more money from the general public if he writes to a general public
audience who has no idea who he is, rather than what appears to be indie movie
fans. I'm not asking for a major editorial content change, just add another
10% length explaining why would the average dude off the street who doesn't do
the movie thing since he was a kid, care, much less send him some dough?

Note that I've personally sent/kickstarted Jason Scott the nonfiction
documentary producer enough to buy a plane ticket or two over the years, this
isn't a new idea.

Now this is assuming what I got out of imdb and kickstarter has any relation
to reality. Maybe Garden State is just another boring romantic comedy or teen
fart joke formula movie. Can anyone who's actually seen his movies, comment?

~~~
jmduke
_Garden State_ is one of my favorite movies, and even I'll admit it's a pretty
formulaic bildungsroman, very much in the vein of Cameron Crowe. The strengths
of the movie are less in the overarching plot and with the details, such as
the soundtrack, cinematography, and excellent script.

At first blush, this new script looks remarkably original. That being said,
everything's relative: there's the old cliche that every possible story has
already been told, and I think the trick is less to put forward something new
and more to put forward something great.

In terms of the strategy behind the campaign: it seems very much in the vein
of the Veronica Mars kickstarter
([http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/559914737/the-
veronica-m...](http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/559914737/the-veronica-
mars-movie-project)), in the sense that its appealing more to the fans of the
original work (I'd imagine the cult of Veronica Mars fans and the cult of
Garden State fans has some significant overlap.)

~~~
WA
Sorry for hijacking this thread, but it is totally fascinating to me which
German words make it into the English language. "Bildungsroman", nice one. Is
this actually used often?

~~~
NickPollard
In mainstream discourse? No. In literary criticism, yes.

------
cwb71
Just noticed this response from Braff’s AMA:

“You can’t really raise enough money on Kickstarter yet. There are some new
sites starting that will eventually allow anyone and everyone to own a piece
of a movie; invest in it like a stock. But you can imagine the amount of legal
issues this raises. So look for it sometime around 3012.”

[http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/19uwm9/i_am_zach_braff...](http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/19uwm9/i_am_zach_braff_ask_me_anything/c8rjdg9)

What a difference a month (and a $5.7 million Veronica Mars Kickstarter)
makes!

~~~
Samuel_Michon
Little has changed, on Kickstarter you still can’t buy a piece of a movie,
invest in it like a stock.

Braff clarifies in this Buzzfeed article[1]:

“I would love, more than anything, to have it be you get an equity stake. You
have 10 bucks, you make your 10 bucks back with the percentage of profit, like
a stock. But that's not legal yet. I think it's an exciting idea, that you can
go, "Oh, I like x, y, and z, I want to buy a piece of that potential film
project." I think that that's coming. But we're not there yet legally.

So what do you do in the meantime? You offer them any and every incentive you
can think of. But at the very least, if you pay 10 bucks, you're joining what
I like to think of as this club. You see how active I am on social media. I
drive my family, friends, and girlfriend crazy. I get a lot of joy out of it.
So turning that into an online behind-the-scenes filmmaking magazine, where
there will be videos and content and people who are interested in the behind-
the-scenes of the making of a movie will go on this ride alongside me — I
think that's cool for 10 bucks.”

Buzzfeed: _You're right — last year Congress passed the JOBS Act, which does
allow for equity-based crowdfunding, but it can't happen until the SEC issues
rules on how to do it. Which they haven't done yet._

[1] [http://www.buzzfeed.com/adambvary/zach-braff-on-why-
kickstar...](http://www.buzzfeed.com/adambvary/zach-braff-on-why-kickstarter-
is-the-next-best-thing-to-actu)

------
ctdonath
Article includes:

 _“The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and
expecting different results." - Albert Einstein_

An irritating quote. I keep doing the same thing over and over again because I
keep _getting_ different results - at least where people are involved.

~~~
mseebach
If "different result each time" (i.e. non-determinism) is the expected result,
then you're not expecting a different result.

~~~
ctdonath
[head explodes]

------
smackfu
Pretty clever choices of rewards. There's nothing physical as a reward until
the $40 t-shirt level. And the digital stuff is generally ephemeral, like a
stream of the soundtrack vs a download of it, or a stream of the movie vs a
download of it.

A lot of movide / documentary Kickstarters make the mistake of having a lot of
physical rewards, on different timetables that need to be shipped separately,
and end up not getting much money for the movie.

------
niggler
Looking back on the veronica mars kickstarter
([http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/559914737/the-
veronica-m...](http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/559914737/the-veronica-
mars-movie-project)) I'm surprised to see that most of the largest pledges
were hit (1/1 at $10K, 3/3 at $8K, 3/3 at $6.5K, 4/5 at $5K, 10/10 at $3.5K,
30/30 at $3K, 20/20 at $2500, 300/300 at $1000)

~~~
danvideo
True, but the smaller ones look like they generated a crap-ton of money:

Pledge $35 x 22997 backers - digital download

Pledge $50 x 23227 backers - dvd

Braff's project isn't offering these pledge rewards, a decision he seems to be
OK with for distribution but would probably generate TONS of backers.

~~~
niggler
In this project, the tee is $40. In VM the tee is $25.

But I think the soundtrack was seen by Braff as a Big Deal, which is probably
why it shows up at a lower price point ($20) than the tee.

~~~
InclinedPlane
I glanced through the reward levels and I think he's done a smart job of
pricing them.

A lot of people make the mistake of setting the reward levels at store pricing
levels rather than rewards. Printed t-shirts are fairly expensive, especially
when you add in shipping, so it's easy to end up with very little margin on a
reward level that includes a t-shirt, especially if it's near the $15 dollar
level (which is pretty much cost). It's smarter to use intangible rewards
(like digital goods) that have near zero incremental cost or to make sure that
you have at least 100% margin on anything else. Assuming that you're running
your kickstarter for financing and not as a pre-order store.

~~~
niggler
especially if it's near the $15 dollar level (which is pretty much cost).

I remember ordering once (this was 7 years ago) at $5-$7 a tee and USPS
charged around 2.75 at the time, for a grand total closer to $10

~~~
akiselev
Yes but if the T-shirt award level had tens of thousands of backers, they can
hire a large company like threadless to print and distribute the T-shirts
(Even complicated Threadless t-shirts are mostly $20 with a nice profit
margin, with free shipping on orders over $50). At these scales $25 is quite
profitable.

~~~
niggler
You misread my statement. The claim the parent made was that $15 was near
cost, and I was stating my experience that the soup-to-nuts cost is closer to
$10 (and could be lower)

------
androtheos
Anyone else have an issue with funding someone else's dream when their net
worth is say $20M and yours is maybe $100K or less?

~~~
criswell
Personally, I do. It's not my money, though, so it's none of my business.

------
bluetidepro
I wonder how much this will help Kickstarter, to gain some big attention like
this. It would be interesting to see more celebrity types doing their own
projects.

> _"You will provide your own travel and accommodation."_

I found it sort of funny that if you pledge the $10,000+ you still have to
provide your own travel. Kind of cheap, don't you think, Zach? Haha

EDIT: Yes, I understand the logistics of people making their own travel plans,
I just thought it was funny (in general).

~~~
citricsquid
$10k from someone that lives down the road = $10k for the campaign

$10k from someone the other side of the world = $6k for the campaign

you see the problem here with deducting travel costs from the backing cost,
right?

~~~
rplnt
Don't forget $500 for kickstarter and about $200 for amazon.

------
grecy
I've wanted to see some big names kickstart their own movies for a long time.

I sincerely hope this is the start of a very positive trend.

(For what it's worth, I'd drop $500 right now for Cameron/Schwarzenegger to
make Terminator 5&6)

------
dakrisht
I think it's brilliant. For a variety of reasons:

First, you lose the legacy financing model to make an independent (sub-$10M)
movie. So you not only get to make your feature, but you get to keep all
worldwide distribution rights. You're already winning.

Second, you make the status quo a part of the movie-making process. Something
that has always been very "private" for filmmakers and "exclusive." Or at
least that's what Hollywood has had the world believing for the past century.
Even today when you visit a set (from experience in developing software for
these guys) the entire on-set dynamic is a very closed system. People just
don't want outsiders there. So Braff is changing this by allowing people to
visit set, interact with the picture, be extras, get credits, even offering a
role in the movie.

Three, this and Veronica Mars are changing shifting the paradigm for getting a
movie funded. Sure - there's a lot of risk. These guys might not even make it,
but if they plan right, budget accordingly, and have professionals involved
(which I will assume they do) - they will make the movie. So I foresee a lof
of indies going this route.

I agree with others that NOT having a digital copy / DVD for an $X dollar
donation is a bad thing. But it makes sense why he doesn't want to do it. (He
can, he's just not doing it because he wants to make more money on domestic
and international traditional distribution deals).

BUT eventually, this model will shit away from the traditional way films are
sold/distributed. If an owner of a project can raise MORE money to individual
buyers (funders) vs. a 5-year distribution deal - than he/she will give up the
rights and traditional distributors will be put out of business (no more
movies for them, all online).

So again, I think this is the start of many more indies funding this way. It's
pretty brilliant, they are already at $1.25M and will exceed the target 100%.

~~~
warmwaffles
I think you meant to say "BUT eventually, this model will shift away", but yes
you are correct

~~~
dakrisht
Excuse the typo(s)!

------
lenazegher
Shouldn't it be 'Wish I _were_ here'?

~~~
curveship
OED, OAAD, Webster's all say either form is considered correct. Language is a
living thing. "Was" was correct before "were" was proscribed by the
Latinizers. Now they're deemed equally correct.

~~~
_delirium
It's now accepted widely enough that I generally recommend English learners
should avoid the subjunctive entirely: people coming from languages like
Spanish are much more likely to over-use it in jarring ways than under-use it,
since the few remaining uses of it in English are not even used by many native
speakers.

I think I would say "were" in this situation myself, though.

------
replicatorblog
It's interesting to see how celebrity doesn't necessarily lead to huge wins on
KS. Veronica Mars raised almost $3MM on day 1. Melissa Joan Hart launched a
Kickstarter over a week ago and was met with a very weak response, $$30K over
two weeks.

[http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/318676760/darcis-walk-
of...](http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/318676760/darcis-walk-of-shame)

Zach Braff has more indie cred, but lacks the cult following Veronica Mars
had. If Braff stalls at around $1MM and MJH's maxes out at $50K, I wonder if
that will be the last we see of celebrities for a while? It must be a pretty
huge blow to the ego seeing that your celebrity isn't quite as bankable as you
hoped.

~~~
InclinedPlane
Celebrity is more or less orthogonal, I think.

Obviously being well-known is important, but it's about reputation more than
anything. Zach has a reputation for have a strong creative hand in film and tv
projects which have had a very strong connection with fans, as his work on
Garden State has demonstrated. The same goes with the Veronica Mars team. Had
Rob Thomas or Kristen Bell tried to use Kickstarter for some non-Veronica Mars
related project they may not have received as much enthusiasm, because
Veronica Mars as a project and as an entity on its own definitely has fans and
definitely engenders a significant amount of trust that they'll deliver a
product that is worth the investment.

Also, I don't think you have any concept of Zach Braff's reputation or
following, and I suspect this project will probably exceed its goal faster
than the Veronica Mars project did.

~~~
replicatorblog
Fair points, I'm not a huge Garden State fan and always saw Scrubs as an
ensemble more than his starring vehicle. I can see that he's got a lot of
Reddit cred and an enthusiastic twitter following. Will be interesting to see
where it ends up.

------
methodin
Anything that bucks the status quo in the entertainment industry is a good
thing. Expect to see more and more of this and expect the traditional middle
men to get more aggressive to prevent it from happening.

~~~
dakrisht
Agree with this 100%. This and Veronica Mars are totally changing the dynamic
of how indies are funded. Studios are fuming right now.

------
agotterer
Will the passing of the Jobs Act allow everyday people to make an actual
investment with upside potential in something like a film? Is the corporate
structure similar to that of a startup?

~~~
InclinedPlane
If the SEC ever manages to implement it, yes.

------
coherentpony
Disclaimer: I haven't read the page.

Why on _Earth_ was this upvoted? The quality of articles on the front page has
been truly disappointing recently.

This is not tech news.

~~~
why-el
It is using a technology platform. Any artist who goes out of their way to
capitalize on what we developers build will be a star on HN,especially if they
cut the middle man and show a commitment to platforms we associate with
openness or coolness. At least that's how I view it. Louis C.K. is a great
example.

------
briholt
The remarkable thing here is how elaborate his Kickstarter page is. He's a
famous actor/director, he could have just phoned it in, but instead he put the
time and effort into making a great page. It shows the type of person that
spends the effort to make great movies spends the effort to make all their
projects great - including making a kickstarter page.

------
andydrizen
Doesn't want to take money because it alters his vision of the movie. $10K -
have a line in the film. $7K - name a character.

~~~
InclinedPlane
So, let's review. On the one hand we have: change the casting of the major
characters, rewrite the script until it completely changes the tone or meaning
of the film. On the other hand we have: effectively become an extra in some
random part of the film with a single line written by Zach, pick a name for a
character that will be spoken at least once, at some point in the film.

Let's play "which of these completely changes the movie and which is an
inconsequential and minor modification".

------
_delirium
> I was about to sign a typical financing deal [...] It would have involved
> making a lot of sacrifices I think would have ultimately hurt the film.

It'd be super interesting to have some more specifics on what kinds of
compromises these would be, just to get a better idea of what kinds of strings
such deals come with.

~~~
vinceguidry
He describes them, mainly not getting final cut and not getting his first
choices on casting. You can't get more specific than that because the casting
choices haven't been made and the movie hasn't been made yet, so there's
nothing yet to say.

------
Deutscher
Maybe I do not understand this particular Kickstarter (and the
economics/dynamics of movie-making, among other things), but I did not find
'revenue', 'profit sharing' or other related words/phrases anywhere on the
page, or in this HN discussion. I've seen the rewards column, and though I'd
like to add 'indie movie producer' to my resume, I don't see any prospective
returns for what is essentially a risky investment (term used loosely).

Zach Braff is a very successful TV/movie star, does he seriously not have $2m
of his own to make this movie just the way he likes it? Like others, is this
crowd-funding exercise also mostly for 'social proof'?

Thanks to all who reply.

~~~
edanm
I'm not sure you understand the concept of Kickstarter. You are _not_ an
investor when you back a Kickstarter project. You're only paying in the hopes
that this will help the project succeed, and for getting various prizes. For
most Kickstarter project, you also get a first edition of the product or
something similar if you pledge enough.

Quite simply, there is no profit-sharing or anything like that for
Kickstarters. You pay money, get your reward (maybe - like you said, it's a
risky investment). And that's the end of the transaction.

~~~
cmsmith
I understand that this is how kickstarter works, but don't really understand
why everyone is OK with it.

Kickstarter is like a bake sale, where you pay more than the fair market value
for things as a form of charity to support some activity. But projects like
this remind me more of a bake sale to support your local major league baseball
team (e.g. profits are used for the enrichment of a corporation/person(s)).

I would be much more likely to contribute to this project if, in the situation
where the movie makes money, $2M (less the true cost of the rewards) were
donated to something other than the bottom line of the real investors.

------
bryanlarsen
It's very strange that one of the rewards isn't a copy of the film. It
probably impacts his ability to sell distribution rights to the film, so it's
understandable. It does limit the appeal of the kickstarter to casual fans,
though.

------
scott_s
Eventually, Joss Whedon will do this, and he will break records.

------
cadr
Does anyone have any examples of any films actually getting made from crowd
sourcing? I would guess this and Veronica Mars stand a good chance since the
people involved have made movies before and have built-in fan bases, but I am
not aware of any actually working out so far.

I donated to one years ago (<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Swarm_of_Angels>)
and that went nowhere...

~~~
night815
Blue Like Jazz

[http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/2128223578/save-blue-
lik...](http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/2128223578/save-blue-like-jazz-
the-movie-0)

This is a far cry from 2 mil but they did get it made. I do believe they had
one backer, before kickstarter, that was in for 500k and match whatever
Kickstarter brought in. I donated 100 bucks after kickstart, so they got more
funding not shown on kickstarter, and got a t-shirt and my name in the credits
(along with several thousand others).

The movie wasn't great but the book that it is extremely loosely based on is
good. Donald Miller wrote A Million Miles in a Thousand Years while writing
the movie version of Blue Like Jazz. That book is even better.

------
crikli
Off-topic: what if Kickstarter had been around in 2006 for Arrested
Development? Perhaps we wouldn't just now be getting a season 4.

~~~
intended
I suspect the same could be said of other shows, and in particular firefly.

~~~
bobsy
Personally I would love to see Jericho picked up again!

~~~
DanBC
I wonder what would happen to a show like Firefly[1] or Jericho[2]
Caprica[3]if they were suspended after the first season, and the studio put up
a kickstarter saying "We'll cancel unless we get $2m from fans of the show".

At least those shows do stand a chance with fan-backing. Something like
'Rubicon' would, I think, totally fail at kickstarter even though it was good.

[1] A great show. I'm not sure how well it would have lasted with the
traditional US "spin out a series for as long as possible" format. But, with
careful plotting, it would have been an amazing 3 season (12 episodes per
season) show.

EDIT: Fox _hates_ the Firefly fanbase. ([http://io9.com/fox-bans-the-sale-of-
unlicensed-jayne-hats-fr...](http://io9.com/fox-bans-the-sale-of-unlicensed-
jayne-hats-from-firefly-471820413)) Really, this is just open contempt for
people who are willingly promoting your content.

[2] I really wanted to like this. I did like the first series. I _really
wanted_ an OQO (the tiny handheld computer that one of the characters has).
But the second series was daft. This could have been a pretty good show and
it's a shame it's gone.

[3] Caprica was good, I thought. Had some interesting concepts.

~~~
aninhumer
>A great show. I'm not sure how well it would have lasted with the traditional
US "spin out a series for as long as possible" format.

I think Joss Whedon has shown himself to be capable of maintaining quality in
long running shows with Buffy and Angel. There are a few dips in both, but on
the whole they pretty much just get better and better.

------
ebbv
By the success of the campaigns I must clearly be in the minority here, but I
find the use of Kickstarter by millionaires to be offensive.

I perfectly understand his unwillingness to give up creative control. That's
respectable. But Zach Braff has GOT to have 2 million dollars. He could
totally fund this himself.

~~~
amorphid
I think the hole idea of raising money for free via Kickstarter and similar
sites is very odd. It feels like high class panhandling to me. Maybe I'm just
too proud to ask for money and don't understand why it's so popular. Still, I
spend money on some stupid stuff. If the cast of Stargate wanted to make
another movie or TV type show, I'd back it. I guess the world is changing and
I haven't caught up yet.

~~~
ebbv
It makes sense if you're an average person with a great idea and you lack the
funding to get your idea off the ground. The original purpose was inventors
and stuff. Then indie game developers got on board and now celebrities are
abusing it.

The celebrity thing has gotta be like crack cocaine to Kickstarter. It gets
them so much attention and so much money, but ultimately I think it is eroding
their brand and building resentment.

------
lorenzfx
Since I believe Zach is going to make a great movie, I would love to help
really crowd fund this (as opposed to crowd gifting as it is at the moment)
and than get a share of the money the movie makes. But I guess this ain't
possible on kickstarter just yet.

------
cadr
Who are the people who scoop up the 10K "be a cast member" thing immediately?
Same thing happened on the Veronica Mars one. It was announced, and _bam_
someone drops a ton of change to get to be in it.

------
rmrfrmrf
I don't like seeing Kickstarter as a celebrity offering plate . I also find
the "rewards" to be incredibly self-aggrandizing: "For just $250, I will take
15 full seconds out of my day to acknowledge you as a human being and utter a
phrase of your choosing into a microphone. Or, for $10K, I'll give you the
incredible privilege of _working for me_." Gee, thanks.

Not to mention that Garden State was basically an hour and a half of me
rolling my eyes from how _obsessively hard_ Braff tries to be 'original'. I'll
pass.

~~~
jmduke
In my opinion, the beauty of Kickstarter is that it's a democratic platform.
If you don't think the rewards or the project itself are worth backing, then
don't back it. If you do, back it.

It's not as if Kickstarter is this magical service to give celebrities more
money: for example, Melissa Joan Hart's Kickstarter is doing pretty poorly
([http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/318676760/darcis-walk-
of...](http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/318676760/darcis-walk-of-shame)).

------
kolodny
The kickstarter amount climbed 80k while I was watching the promo. I don't
think he'll have any trouble raising the desired amount.

------
lacker
I'm hoping for a Futurama project on Kickstarter.

------
alenart
Is he not getting any more of those sweet residuals checks from 'Scrubs'?

------
workbench
Find it hard to believe he would have trouble financing that elsewhere or out
of his own pocket.

~~~
threeseed
As was said on the Kickstarter page, he could.

But then again he would potentially lose final cut, character choice, location
choice etc.

~~~
esrauch
I think workbenches point is that he could have just financed the movie
directly himself, not just that he could convince someone else to finance it.

