Moonlightaholics

I'm reading back now -- I guess, technically, he didn't offer. It was her idea. He didn't say no, however.

librarian_7 wrote:From what I'm reading, he's pretty amazed.

He was being interviewed by the Today Show at the time it rolled over 3 million. I don't know when that's supposed to air.

He should have said no to the taser. She'd probably do it.

Not if he was holding a sloth.

Lilly wrote:He may be wishing he didn't offer to let Kristen Bell taser him if they hit $5 million.

Lilly wrote:I'm reading back now -- I guess, technically, he didn't offer. It was her idea. He didn't say no, however.

Good Lord! Please tell me they were only kidding. Why would anyone consider tasering someone a form of entertainment?!

Of COURSE, they were kidding. Just like Rob was kidding when he threatened to kill Logan if the $3 million mark wasn't met. And I was kidding in my remark above.

They're being outrageous and irreverent and having a blast.

To quote the great Foghorn Leghorn: "It was a joke, son. A joke." They are ridiculously good friends and I'm sure Kristen would never consider doing something like that to him. They just riff off each other that way.

ETA: Lilly, you and I cross-posted.

and

I was kidding, too...just basing on fictional Veronica's readiness with her taser! She's a feisty girl...

librarian_7 wrote:I was kidding, too...just basing on fictional Veronica's readiness with her taser! She's a feisty girl...

Yeah, well, confession time here. You have a member who has never seen VM (Don't tazer me, Lucky ), hence the spoiler avoidance tactics when it comes to the articles. Though I've heard it's good.

Evidently there has been a bit of a backlash to the success of this campaign. I haven't read the complaining articles, but I was very impressed by this defense of crowdfunding in general, and this campaign in particular, by Noah J. Nelson. His blog post, originally in Turnstyle, was picked up by the Huffington Post. The link was posted on Facebook by Andrew Disney, who created Searching for Sonny. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/turnstyle ... 79715.html

allegrita wrote:Evidently there has been a bit of a backlash to the success of this campaign. I haven't read the complaining articles, but I was very impressed by this defense of crowdfunding in general, and this campaign in particular, by Noah J. Nelson. His blog post, originally in Turnstyle, was picked up by the Huffington Post. The link was posted on Facebook by Andrew Disney, who created Searching for Sonny. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/turnstyle ... 79715.html

This article made me cranky. I didn't read the complaining one either but I don't understand why it matters where the money comes from as long as in the end we get a movie we've all wanted to see made for quite a while. No one held a gun to anyone's head and made them contribute.

Another part of my revulsion is, yes, likely to do with the simple fact that art-related Kickstarter campaigns strip away the pretense that art and commerce aren't inextricably linked. ... Crassly bringing money into the conversation sullies everything.

Can I tell you how much I hate it when snotty people act like art shouldn't make anyone any money. Artists gotta eat too. Commercial success isn't a terrible thing.

aaarrrrggggghhhhh

Just to clarify, the article I linked to was refuting that statement. That is a quote from the complaining article, and the author of this blog goes on to explain why he disagrees with it. The guy who wrote the blog I linked to is very much in favor of crowdfunding and of the Veronica Mars movie project. He did a good job, I think, of explaining what Kickstarter really does--and in a very positive, thoughtful way.

That is a fascinating article, Alle. The complaint that Clair quoted (and with which the article disagrees), is rather telling. The person who made it would essentially be arguing that what is art is best not left to our own sensibilities, but must be judged worthy of pursuit by some large entity.

The complaint that Grassroots patronage of the arts is somehow "too easy" to make it a legitimate art form doesn't make sense to me. I don't know how inserting a corporation, who will (a) take their cut, and more importantly, (b) have the coercive financial power to require their view of the world be portrayed, could possibly be described as a more "purely artistic" model. Either way, the talent will get paid, but with decentralized funding no individual party has undue influence over the artistic process.

It seems from the article that Warners has taken a huge risk in allowing this to proceed on Kickstarter. Grassroots funding actually dilutes their stronghold over the film making process.

One more thing about this model. From a business perspective, eliminating the middle man and having a real budget with upfront funding is quite a coup. These guys know they have to deliver. They also know they have the resources to do it.

Based on these observations I may just add my two cents worth to the project on principle alone.

Right after that, NM, you need to run out and buy at least the first season of VM and see how good a series it is.

Kristen made a comment on her twitter feed that maybe we should have weekly times set up to watch the episodes together and she and Rob would do live feeds. I think that would be fun. I'll let you know if it happens.

It does seem that the backlash is basing its objections on the concept that this is "charity". I, too, would object to giving Warner Brothers charity but that's not what's happening here. We, the fans, are over-ruling WB by saying we want this movie. That's empowering.

ETA: Article on the whole adventure

http://www.hitfix.com/whats-alan-watchi ... e-campaign