Penn Jillette is crowdsourcing now

[Noodle Lizard]

Yep.  The Vegas superstar worth $175million (if CelebNetWorth is to be believed) needs some cash to make a questionable-sounding "scary intellectual mystery" film which is "too smart" for the Hollywood studios.

http://fundanything.com/penn

Now then, now then, now then.  I do admire Penn as a magician and occasionally as a raconteur/atheist rambler, but nothing he's done has me convinced of any behind-camera or writing talents.  'Penn & Teller Get Killed' is sort of alright as a bit of 80s schlock, but nothing astounding.  As far as acting goes ... well, if that short video is anything to go by, I'd be very skeptical of his abilities to play anyone but himself.  That said, I'm sure with the right input he could make a half-decent film, and that confusing meta-narrative element may just pay off.

But crowdsourcing it?  Come on, dude.  If you keep hammering on the point that it won't cost much to make, surely more people are going to start wondering "How can a Vegas superstar who sells out $100-a-seat shows in his own theatre every night not have a bit of spare cash floating around to make his vanity project?" (and it is a vanity project, I have no doubt in my mind).  In the same way his podcast has more commercials per episode than something like WTF? has in ten, I'm left wondering why he doesn't just fund it himself if it's truly just because he wants to see it made.

On the plus side, at least the prizes are fairly good for fans of his compared with some of the utter shit offered by James Franco or Zach Braff, for instance.  Still leaves a pretty sour taste to me.

[jutl]

He's a prick, so this is unsurprising.

[syntaxerror]

Yeah. I like Penn & Teller as an act, but Penn Jillette is a boorish loudmouth. I find his opinions on economics particularly disagreeable and tedious. He's only asking for $1Million on that link, which is about £600k. Now, I don't know how much he has sat in the bank, but I do know that crowdsourcing isn't really meant for people who have already made it. What is particularly irksome about the recent trend of 'slebs using crowdsourcing fundraisers is the pretence that they're 'giving something back' to the fans. If you're making them pay, you're not giving anything back.

[Famous Mortimer]

Do other sites / news places feel the same way we do? Has he not seen the mauling that people like Zach Braff got when trying to go down this route? Or is any publicity good publicity for this lot of scum?

[Noodle Lizard]

He probably thinks it's okay because he has more of a "cult" following than the others.  Which is kind of true, the people likely to donate aren't the same ones who maybe saw Penn & Teller's show once.  They're the avid listeners of his podcast, watchers of 'Bullshit', purchasers of his books, and they probably attended his Bacon & Donut party at TAM.  They're me, basically.  But I'm not giving a cent to this thing unless some info comes along which fucks me sideways. 

Fact is, he's almost certainly wealthy enough to fund this himself, and if not he's influential enough and has enough contacts to get a lot of stuff done for very little, and making a movie of this kind of scale doesn't really cost that much anyway, especially without a studio attached.  To put it in perspective, 'Insidious' was made for the same budget.

He'll definitely make the goal, and we'll also have the pleasure of listening to some (in all likelihood) complete dullards with a bit too much disposable income appearing on his podcast.

[Famous Mortimer]

It reminds me of podcasting itself, which for a while there was a glorious land of unknowns until famous people figured out they could use it to promote themselves / make money (I had a first gen iPod and wore it out on podcasts).

You're right about the cult thing, of course. A few of my friends saw them in Vegas, and they were disappointed at the ra-ra pro-USA tone of the show; that, with the gun control is for suckers episode of "Bullshit!", soured them to Penn and Teller for ever. If I'd told them about a tearful Teller leaving a screening of Atlas Shrugged telling the other patrons that this was the society he wanted to fight for, it might have pushed them over the edge.

I just think a few more of these, and crowdsourcing for anything other than already wealthy peoples' pet projects will be effectively dead, and it makes me sad.

[Ignatius_S]

Essentially, he's funding it by taking pre-orders – I don't see an issue myself.

[Tiny Poster]

He probably thinks it's okay because he has more of a "cult" following than the others. 

I wouldn't have thought he'd care. He's an arch-capitalist, so I expect his reasoning is as simple as: if people want to contribute, they can and will.

[Noodle Lizard]

You're right about the cult thing, of course. A few of my friends saw them in Vegas, and they were disappointed at the ra-ra pro-USA tone of the show; that, with the gun control is for suckers episode of "Bullshit!", soured them to Penn and Teller for ever. If I'd told them about a tearful Teller leaving a screening of Atlas Shrugged telling the other patrons that this was the society he wanted to fight for, it might have pushed them over the edge.

I saw their show earlier this year and there really isn't much of a pro-USA tone to it, considering they burn a flag (twice) and have an (admittedly forced) routine against the TSA.  This all accounts for about 5 minutes of the show, the rest of it is sawing ladies in half and shooting each other in the face.  That's also not to say that being pro-USA is necessarily a bad thing, provided you're not just blindly nationalistic (which they're not in the slightest).  The show was actually disappointing overall, mind.

I'll defend 'Bullshit' indefinitely because I think it's insane for people to expect to watch a show of about 50 episodes each taking a strong stance on different subjects and just expect their own beliefs to be confirmed every time.  A good few of them are complete misfires for me, too, but one or two of them did make me reconsider a couple of things and they're usually entertaining enough.

That all being said, yeah, he can fuck off with this crowdsourcing shit.

[Noodle Lizard]

I wouldn't have thought he'd care. He's an arch-capitalist, so I expect his reasoning is as simple as: if people want to contribute, they can and will.

But I'm fairly sure he'd have concerns for what it might do to his reputation.  Then again, he appeared on Celebrity Apprentice twice in a row and won't stop going on about it, so ... perhaps not.

[Noodle Lizard]

Essentially, he's funding it by taking pre-orders – I don't see an issue myself.

That's what most of them do.  The problem is that you're paying above the odds for a pre-order of a vague idea for a film.  It's not like a band who presumably have a history of released music and therefore a certain level of quality can be assumed by its fans.

As it stands, it sounds like he hasn't even really written it yet (says he'll write it "according to who's cast") and the idea itself doesn't sound like it's been too well thought-out.

[Tiny Poster]

Reputation? Only a major scandal or series of violent crimes could really affect Penn and/or Teller's reputation at this point, what with them still packing them in in Vegas and having the time to fuck about writing serious books on magic or rehearsing for Dancing With The Stars. Sabrina The Teenage Witch , Identity, canine discipline reality shows... he'll do what the fuck he wants.

[Noodle Lizard]

Reputation? Only a major scandal or series of violent crimes could really affect Penn and/or Teller's reputation at this point, what with them still packing them in in Vegas and having the time to fuck about writing serious books on magic or rehearsing for Dancing With The Stars. Sabrina The Teenage Witch , Identity, canine discipline reality shows... he'll do what the fuck he wants.

I meant more his reputation as a kind of cult figure (i.e. all the atheist stuff, the podcast etc.)  He occasionally mentions his name in the same breath as Bob Dylan and Tiny Tim remember.

But yes, all valid points.

[Petey Pate]

...he'll do what the fuck he wants.

http://youtu.be/14q_1NlhE9I?t=2m14s

[Pepotamo1985]

Essentially, he's funding it by taking pre-orders – I don't see an issue myself.

Yeah, me neither. Surely it's up to people to decide whether they want to put their own money in, is it not?

As someone who has said they endorse libertarian economics on more than one occasion, Noodle, surely you shouldn't have a problem with this? Penn has set out a detailed description of what he wants to achieve and how he intends to achieve it, and asked for funding. Economic agents, based on this information, make individual decisions as to whether they want to contribute.

I guess you could make the argument that he should be putting up the money himself, or even that if he truly believed in the project he'd invest his own money and is extending the sphere of liability to people much poorer than himself, but still – very much up to people whether they want to participate and whack some tender down.

[Famous Mortimer]

Essentially, he's funding it by taking pre-orders – I don't see an issue myself.

I think this method sort of makes sense for people who want to guarantee a level of income from a film and know they've got the fans for it, but it just feels to me like it's not what crowd-sourcing should really be for. I appreciate this is a bit vague. Re: their excessive flag-waving, this was 7 or 8 years ago, so things may have changed since then.

Re: P&T and Bullshit!, I think gun control is a pretty important thing for me, and for them to be so far the other side of that feels bad (it's my main problem, besides the endless repetition, with "Mythbusters"). More so than a normal thing I might disagree with them on.

[Noodle Lizard]

Yeah, me neither. Surely it's up to people to decide whether they want to put their own money in, is it not?

Of course it is, I've never said otherwise.  I just think it's shitty of wealthy narcissists with innumerable feet in the door to hog these services and detract from those who have no other recourse to get their projects made, which is surely who the service was primarily intended for.

As someone who has said they endorse libertarian economics on more than one occasion, Noodle, surely you shouldn't have a problem with this? Penn has set out a detailed description of what he wants to achieve and how he intends to achieve it, and asked for funding. Economic agents, based on this information, make individual decisions as to whether they want to contribute.

I don't recall ever saying I endorse libertarian economics.  Social politics maybe.  But yes, covered that above.

I guess you could make the argument that he should be putting up the money himself, or even that if he truly believed in the project he'd invest his own money and is extending the sphere of liability to people much poorer than himself, but still – very much up to people whether they want to participate and whack some tender down.

Covered that above.

[samadriel]

If I'd told them about a tearful Teller leaving a screening of Atlas Shrugged telling the other patrons that this was the society he wanted to fight for, it might have pushed them over the edge.

Wait wait wait... really?  LOLZ.

[syntaxerror]

This article explains the problem with wealthy people exploiting crowdsourcing as a means of finance. It is missing the point  to say "oh but its their own money, they can do what they like with it" - of course people can do what they like with their own money, that's obvious, obviously.

[Famous Mortimer]

Wait wait wait... really?  LOLZ.

Apparently so. An article about them around the time it came out printed the story, I recall[nb]I have been wrong before, but I'm pretty sure about this[/nb].

[DrunkCountry]

From the founders of Kickstarter regarding 'names' utilising Kickstarter:

Last week, "The Newest Hottest Spike Lee Joint" reached its funding goal thanks to more than 5,000 backers. While filmmakers like Steven Soderbergh cheered Spike Lee's project, outlets like CNBC and Bloomberg accused him of abusing Kickstarter and taking money from other creators. As we've shown before here and here, arguments like these are not grounded in fact. Kickstarter is not a zero-sum game where projects compete for pledges. All projects benefit from the network effect of a growing Kickstarter ecosystem.
Artists like Spike Lee don't hurt other projects. They help them!

Spike Lee brought three decades of fans to Kickstarter when he launched his project. He introduced many of them to this new way of funding creative works, and to the thousands of other projects that are funding on Kickstarter. Of Spike's backers, 47% had never backed a Kickstarter project before.

The Veronica Mars and Zach Braff film projects were similarly criticized for hurting other projects, but in reality were a windfall for creators. Those projects brought thousands of new people to Kickstarter who have since pledged more than $1 million to 6,000 other projects (film projects have received most of those pledges).

In the past 90 days alone, more than $21 million has been pledged to filmmakers on Kickstarter not named Rob Thomas, Zach Braff, or Spike Lee. Even without counting these projects, it's been the biggest three months for film ever on Kickstarter!

Almost five million people have backed a project on Kickstarter, and more than a million have backed two or more projects. These repeat backers are responsible for 59% of the total money pledged to Kickstarter projects — a whopping $444 million. On average, 2,130 people a day have become new repeat backers this year. This is huge! Future creators will benefit from more and more people using Kickstarter.
Kickstarter projects are not charity.

Others have accused creators of asking for a handout by using Kickstarter. This is silly. Every project offers a range of rewards to backers in exchange for their pledges. Spike's backers get online screenings, tickets to the premiere, and access to the creative process of one of the most important voices in independent film. Just because an artist funds the creation of their work upfront rather than waiting until later to sell it doesn't somehow make it charity.

The people launching and backing Kickstarter projects are participating in a new way of funding. In Spike's case, an alternative to film's traditional investment model. Backers are supporting Spike not to buy into the potential profits of the film, but because they connect with his body of work, they think the rewards he's offering are great, and they want to be a part of bringing this film to life. This isn't charity. It's a direct exchange between an artist and a willing audience, similar to the model Mozart and others used to fund works centuries ago.
All creators should be allowed to invite the public to be a part of their work.

Kickstarter is a place where creators share their work directly with the public, and audiences show their support for the projects they love. The results are amazing: more creative work by a greater diversity of creators than ever before. This isn't just a different way of doing things, it's a better way — for creators and audiences alike.

So, now you know.

[Noodle Lizard]

They would say that, it's where they're making most of their money from.  Yeah?  Yeah.

[Noodle Lizard]

Apparently so. An article about them around the time it came out printed the story, I recall[nb]I have been wrong before, but I'm pretty sure about this[/nb].

I think I remember Penn saying he didn't like the movie.  Haven't heard Teller say anything about it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

They're Ayn Rand fans, although they did want to do a 'Bullshit' episode about her and other libertarian/objectivist philosophies but weren't allowed by Showtime, who thought it was too niche.

[Bored of Canada]

I think it's just sour grapes when it comes to people's bitterness towards celebrities using crowdfunding. I remember I joined in on the bitterness with Zach Braff's thing before I realised, who gives a shit? Don't donate to it and don't watch the film. I'm sure the kind of people who want to donate to it will be happy with the final product, and if not, well, kickstarters not a pre-ordering system. It's more akin to an investment. And sometimes investments fuck up and you don't get what you thought you were going to.

If it does turn out to be shit, you can be content that you picked it and didn't join in on the hype.

Despite his "money", I don't think he has any obligation to fund his project with his own money if he can get investors interested. What's the flippin' problem? It really doesn't effect you or anyone but the people interested and the creators.

[Bored of Canada]

I find Penn pretty insufferable and all but fuck. I get a little tired of the immediate bitterness that comes out of CaB towards these painful celebrities. Life's hard enough without bothering yourself with the dumb shit of people who are clearly dicks. Let him do his little project. It'll probably be wank.
.

[syntaxerror]

I think you're sour grapes.

[Mary is not amused]

It's more akin to an investment. And sometimes investments fuck up and you don't get what you thought you were going to.

It's not 'investment' because that means the investors would get a share of any profits made.  The beef is that Kickstarter funders are taking on the risk and the already rich people get to keep any and all excess.

[Bored of Canada]

It's not 'investment' because that means the investors would get a share of any profits made.  The beef is that Kickstarter funders are taking on the risk and the already rich people get to keep any and all excess.

Hm. I guess that is a fair point. Yes. Sorry.

Though again, I think the only real solution is to speak with your wallet and not pledge. The people who do know what they're getting into and are happy with their purchase. And Penn gets richer. Sure, he profits whilst others don't but they. still get a product that they paid for. Don't donate to the project and if everyone does so, he won't meet get the money. Otherwise it literally doesn't effect us.

[syntaxerror]

Kickstarter funders are taking on the risk

At least they usually get something worthwhile out of it

[Ignatius_S]

re: investment - there were strict controls in investing in this way, namely it was illegal.

...Something like KickStarter is simply a way to pre-order or donate money to people with an idea you like. In the US, if someone tried getting investment in return a share of the pie, it would contravene the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

However, the – crazy name, crazy act - Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act (JOBS) Act passed in the US earlier relaxes a lot of the old restrictions. We can all be venture capitalists now...