dglsplsblg said: yea haters. talk about a over simplification. then again, i shouldn’t expect any better from you guys.
hgprime said: I think people get mad when someone with a recognizable name does it because they probably have access to funds at their disposal via normal means while unknowns, who the sites like Kickstarter and Indiegogo were meant for, do not.
» SFB says: You’re both misunderstanding why Braff got the money. He wasn’t taking away money from other projects—rather, he had a built-in audience that would spend money on his projects. As Seth Godin explained in a post on the matter last year, “Kickstarter appears to be a great way to find fans for your work. You put up a great video clip and a story and wait for people who will love it to find you. But that’s not what happens. What happens is that people who ALREADY have a tribe, like Amanda Palmer, use Kickstarter to organize and activate that tribe. Kickstarter is the last step, not the first one.” In other words, Braff didn’t take money away from other projects—he leveraged his own audience, who may or many not have had an interest in any other Kickstarter in the first place. That Braff is able to raise money with this audience doesn’t make him a bad person, and it doesn’t mean that other people won’t be able to get their Kickstarters funded. It simply makes him able to use different means to reach his audience.
Another point to be made here: Getting financing in the film industry is tough, and there are almost always strings attached. You like Paul Thomas Anderson movies, the way that they’re uncompromising with the source material? It seems like it takes him forever to make them, doesn’t it? Well, there’s a reason for that: Quite often, studios aren’t willing to play ball on certain kinds of productions. His last movie, “The Master,” only got made because he happened to get funding from Larry Ellison’s daughter, because the studio system would have forced him to compromise the film’s vision too much. That’s what Braff was trying to do here—he would have had to make a lot of compromises to make his movie other ways. The funding method allows him to keep his film’s integrity, no matter your opinion on said film’s integrity. Sure, he has a bigger tribe than most, but he was able to build it, so why shouldn’t he use it? — Ernie @ SFB
You know what the real problem is? There is nothing interesting about this video game at all. The gameplay is nonexistent, and instead of having a controller to play it. You have to sit in a theater and watch a really long cutscene. This game lacks any gameplay whatsoever.The best user review of “Wreck-It Ralph” on Metacritic.
When SOPA-PIPA blew up, it was a transformative event. There were eight million e-mails [to elected representatives] in two days. People were dropping their names as co-sponsors within minutes, not hours.MPAA CEO Chris Dodd • Discussing the aftermath of the death of SOPA/PIPA during a speech at the Commonwealth Club in San Francisco on Tuesday night. While the former Democratic senator didn’t seem thrilled to discuss the topic, attendees seemed unwilling to let Dodd avoid the subject. Eventually, Dodd did say he felt that portrayals of the bills’ reach was “over the top”, but also said, in no uncertain terms, that they would not return in the future. “These bills are dead, they’re not coming back,” said Dodd, adding, “And they shouldn’t. I think we’re better served by sitting down [with the tech sector and SOPA opponents] and seeing what we agree on.” source