MovieChat Forums > Wish I Was Here (2014) Discussion > An Aussie dude who backed on KS and just...

An Aussie dude who backed on KS and just watched it....

posted 10 years ago by meltinzone
57 replies | jump to latest

Give it a go. So many people here on the threads hating on Zach, jealous of Zach, hating the fact he should have used his money, blah blah blah.

KickStarter is pretty straight forward. You sign up, choose your fund level and likely a reward. No *beep* the dude has money and could have used hiw own, blah blah blah.

As someone who loves film, supporting this project wasn't just about giving away money like I was pissing away dollar bills (ya'll) into a fan. I saw passion and the ability to get a unique inside look. If you compare several film projects on Kickstarter, Zach's has by far been the most including. His energy levels are ridiculously high and it's almost, at points, a mammoth effort of energy to read updates because he's such a *beep* awesome guy who genuinely wanted to include backers.

Before jumping on this project I knew jack *beep* about him, other than he was that guy from Scrubs. Before becoming a supporter I found and watched Garden State to see what 'he' was all about, enjoyed it and thought *beep* yeah, I'd love to support seeing another real movie about real *beep* being made. And that was that.

Now as for the movie, I've just had the privilege of watching it. I enjoyed the *beep* out of it. It made me laugh, a lot, though perhaps more importantly it made me cry and I'm a "dude" for *beep* sake. Not many films can bring me to shed a tear, though Wish I Was Here most certainly did.

As for the trailer putting you off, isn't that good? I watched the trailer sometime ago and only remember snippets of it, so when watching the film, it was like watching them for the first time, instead of all the jokes and sum up of the story being used in a trailer, making the film less enjoyable.

If you like movies like The Way Way Back, In The Land of Women, It's Complicated and other films that feel genuinely real with emotion and life, then you should give this a shot.

So there you go, I don't feel ripped off, I enjoyed the *beep* outta the movie, I'm not part of the cast and crew, I'm not a Zach fanboy, I'm a 'dude' from Australia. Would I back another film on KickStarter by Zach had I not enjoyed this, no. Having enjoyed this however, I wouldn't hesitate to back another film by Zach on KS in a second.

Please remember, a good film is a good film, regardless of how it was made, who made it, who stars, et al.

Hope this helps put an end to some of you trolls spewing nonsensical rubbish and answers a few questions for anyone thinking about going to see it in the theatres.

[–] goodbyeenemyairship 10 years ago

What were the perks of donating?

I would want some kind of ROI, even if it were very small, if the film were to be profitable.

I understand the business of filmmaking & like the idea of kickstarter.

I'd love it if a film were to produced with kickstarter funds & everyone who invested gets a certain percentage back (however small, depending on your investment) if the film were to be a runaway smash hit.

Imagine if you had invested $100 in a kickstarter campaign & the film ended up raking in tons of cash - if the $100 turned into, say, $1000 - this would inspire more kickstarter style investing & maybe even compel those who invested in the project to do some work on their own to promote it heavily to family/friends to see to it that a profit is made.

[–] meltinzone 10 years ago

What were the perks of donating?

It depends on what you choose. You can give a single dollar just to help something get made or you could choose to give 10K and get a "Producer" credit. Unfortunately KS doesn't really give ROI type rewards in the form of money. If it did, some of the *beep* I've backed, I'd be a luti-millionaire alreeady.

For me it's about helping someone else achieve something. With a movie, everyone benefits in the long run, although not financially, a movie is around forever and has the potential to make someone laugh, I believe this crucial to enjoying life. While other KS projects might be helping someone fund a new piece of software or a type of spatula made of space glass. I see them as helping that person achieve their, or part of their dream, though dreams are bigger, it feels more like helping them achieve that middle ground or moment in times vision.

To me it's money, even from a child I've been useless with it. If I have $500 and I go for a night out, I spend it all and don't even have enough for a cab ride home. But I know there are people who cherish every penny and would want some kind of ROI. If the whole world was like that, nothing would ever progress. So I feel OK knowing sometimes all I might get is a poster or ebook or maybe one day a meet and greet. Some cool KS projects actually have a pay it forward type thing with funds they get/profit they make.

I have my own extravagant visions and ideas, maybe one day someone will help me, though I don't count on it, I do count on giving good to the world and ever since hearing the quote "Ask yourself, what's going to make you a better ancestor?" ~John Perry Barlow
I can't help but believe helping other people by giving them a few bucks and going without coffee that day, well if their idea or invention or whatever, helps someone else or humanity on a whole, wasn't that the right decision?

[–] Blackair 10 years ago

I don't think anyone was expecting a monetary return on their donation and of course not from KS itself, but something more akin to the Veronica Mars KS campaign. Where they gave out perks starting at like T-shirts, digital downloads of the film, to crazier things for large donations like Kristin Bell doing voicemail message for you or a one line part in the movie.

[–] meltinzone 10 years ago

Yeah these were exactly the kind of perks for WIWH, depending on the donation level. I missed the bandwagon on Veronica Mars so I can't really compare the price for the reward, but all of those things were definitely available, if not more so ;)

[–] dwbatterson 10 years ago

Good response! You put it all in a nutshell. Either people get it, or they don't.

[–] meltinzone 10 years ago

Thanks :)

[–] WhenGreyjoysCry 10 years ago

No ROI? Then a waste of money. Better off giving it to the Salvation Army.

“There are no ordinary moments. There is always something going on.” – Peaceful Warrior

[–] meltinzone 10 years ago

So rather than give money to make something everyone can get something from, give it to the salvos so they can keep spreading more propaganda about religion...
People at the top of the Salvos live just as exuberantly as well known celebs.
My ROI is the human race, however *beep* up we all are, currently.

[–] gehenna-3 10 years ago

I must say you have a nice philosophy on life.

[–] michinine 10 years ago

I'd love it if a film were to produced with kickstarter funds & everyone who invested gets a certain percentage back (however small, depending on your investment) if the film were to be a runaway smash hit.

Kickstarter is crowdsourcing. You get the funds to make your project. If you don't get them, you have no source of income and thus they are not made.

What you are proposing is crowdinvesting. Thats something completely different, and needs lots and lots of regulation (even if its only 20 bucks). The SEC and other stock market governmental organizations are fleshing out the necessary steps to do that, but it will still take years until this can really work out in the free market.

One problem is for example: what happens if you make a $1000 investment and make $10.000 on it? This is relevant for your taxes. The investment project should not burdened with your compliance in these things. And then this have to work in every country your investors come from, not just the US or Europe. Tricky stuff.

Practically, crowdinvestment is not so interesting for many companies, because they want to control the content and the ownership. Thats the reason Veronica Mars was founded via "pre-ticket" sales. This allowed the studio to keep 100% of the Veronica Mars copyright and ownership.

Crowdinvesting is an interesting concept, for example for games. If you have a hit, you not only get a "free" game, but you make a decent buck with it. But what happens if the "company" can't provide? Oversold their confidence? Then lawyers get involved - and stuff will get really messy.

[–] goodbyeenemyairship 10 years ago

before crowdsourcing sites like kickstarter, was there ever any type of similar project-funding going on where people give away money to fund something & have no possibility of making any money back when the project becomes a huge success?

[–] MongoLloyd 10 years ago

before crowdsourcing sites like kickstarter, was there ever any type of similar project-funding going on where people give away money to fund something & have no possibility of making any money back when the project becomes a huge success?

Before "crowd funding," filmmakers with no juice charged up their own credit cards, got grants, or got donations from friends and family.

Crowd funding is just another facet of the "everyone's a winner" movement that's taken hold of Western culture and is sucking the competitive spirit out of all of us. Sure, there have always been fine art patrons, but then there's a huge difference between a painting that hangs in a gallery and a movie.

.

[–] goodbyeenemyairship 10 years ago

I tend to agree.

And I disagree (with the poster above who brought this up) that the income/investment/tax component makes the matter to complex to manage.

I don't necessarily dislike the idea of crowd sourcing monies for a project. But I strongly dislike the idea that I could put money towards funding a project that will make others rich (or richer) while I only get a measley signed BluRay or poster.

It would be like funding Toyota's new fully electric car, getting a free test drive, while the executives rake in millions off our (green) backs.

[–] khaleesi-drogo1 10 years ago

Absolutely agree with you. The sad fact is this movie would have happened with or without crowd funding. Zach Braff did not need your money, he just wanted it so he could make more money without risking any of his own millions. If you look at the producers list on here for WIWH you will see five executive producers listed, these are people who invested and will be getting a return on their investment if this movie makes money. They might just end up making money off of the people who donated.

I think it's wonderful that there are so many kind and generous people out there willing to donate their money to film makers, but I hope in the future that money goes to the people who really need it.

[–] michinine 10 years ago

It would be like funding Toyota's new fully electric car, getting a free test drive, while the executives rake in millions off our (green) backs.

A free market has lots of ideas. People get kicks off many things, spending their money at their own discretion.

http://idealmedia.com/blog/43405952577/8-Oddly-Successful-Kickstarter-Campaigns

The regulation thing: its irrelevant if anybody thinks that telling people "Oh you can make 1000000% on your $1000 by investing in my project" should be possible without being held accountable.

Its is real and serious in about any western country. Thats the reason crowdfunding is regulatory wise more or less a gift. If it doesn't happen its just thrown away money.

If someone spends his life savings on a crowdinvestment, the game changes rapidly to very serious business. There is lots of regulation there and you can't make any wild claim. If it would be so "easy" they wouldn't need like 30 pages of fine print for any investment stuff.

[–] goodbyeenemyairship 10 years ago

You ignored my reply question above:

"before crowdsourcing sites like kickstarter, was there ever any type of similar project-funding going on where people give away money to fund something & have no possibility of making any money back when the project becomes a huge success?"

don't bother replying to anything I write below this line unless you speak specifically to the above first - I'm genuinely interested in the answer.

sure, people can use money for toilet paper, flush it down if they want - not pertinent to my comments, but yes I agree that anyone can waste money in any fashion they so choose (& do!)

your comment that it isn't easy to have a 30 page document with legalese is ridiculous - it's incredibly easy - you create the terms initially (maybe not as simple as clicking a button, but fairly easy), draw up the document & use the same document/contract for all parties. do you think a brand new contract is created for every binding agreement? no, law firms/accountants use templates just like us commonfolks. and entertainment-specific firms already have the exact forms in heavy rotation. including tax forms. technology makes this effort just as simple, quick, easy as collecting the funds through a website.

it's not wild claims to say 'an investment of x amount will yield x% of proft' - if the project makes $0, the same % applies as it would if the project makes a billion dollars. it really is quite simple - perhaps not as simple as sitting on your hands, but then again, neither is going through traditional avenues for financing a major project.

[–] michinine 10 years ago

"before crowdsourcing sites like kickstarter, was there ever any type of similar project-funding going on where people give away money to fund something & have no possibility of making any money back when the project becomes a huge success?"

professionally? I don't think that such "companies" existed before. Lots of fresh legalese is created just for the crowdfunding stuff.

In private areas, billions are pushed around to people giving them money, for example to open an restaurant or a shop. And usually if it takes off, they might get their money back, but not much (ongoing) interest. Depends how you structure the deal in your private financial matters.

Many decide for example, that if they give the son 50g to his restaurant they get a lawyer and they do collect interest. There are many ways to do this.

As we have seen with Facebook and the Winklevoss Brothers, there are ways to do this completely wrong.

it's not wild claims to say 'an investment of x amount will yield x% of proft' - if the project makes $0, the same % applies as it would if the project makes a billion dollars.

Crowdfinancing would be nothing else then a typical fund: the difference is, that the creator of the fund will be the guy who is doing it, instead of a bank that collects the money and then takes a cut, then distributes the money.

If you tell people "I take your $50 and I create a game in two years", this can construed like "I take your $50 and i give you back 5% in two years". Either you stand by your "offer" or just not make it.

http://www.dorkly.com/post/66182/how-to-run-a-successful-videogame-kickstarter

The big difference between crowdfunding vs. financing is, that you believe this thing could be so big and the guys doing it are so professional and well regarded, that you want "a bite" of this project financially.

But where to draw the line?

Chris Roberts "Space Sim" is currently at a funding level of whopping 50mil.
Yes, thats right: 50million dollars.

https://robertsspaceindustries.com/

People pay that, because they want the game and the system to exists. If you would like a cut of this (Robert didn't offer any!) and then this is the wrong project to "invest".

[–] IfOnlyItWereTrue 10 years ago

But not so much of a difference between the patronage of writers, musicians and composers from that of painters.

Your points seem confused and make little to no sense.

Perhaps it would be a good start if you could elucidate what this 'everyone's a winner' culture is and how it relates to a lack of competition for peoples 'free' money on something like KS.

Is it the repositioning of the locus of 'competition' that upsets you or is it the idea that ROI can mean something different to financial reward?

[–] Final_Hitokiri 10 years ago

Your points seem confused and make little to no sense.

We can boil it down a bit...

Zach had an idea for a terrible movie. The studios passed on it becuase it was terrible.

Zach went to Kickstarter to get funding for his terrible movie, claiming that he did not have the funding and that if fans wanted to see his work that they'd have to help fund it, despite having the full amount to finance it himself.

The end!

[–] IfOnlyItWereTrue 10 years ago

I see so you're pissed because he didn't allow the studios to dictate what he does and you're pissed because his fans like his work so much that they're willing to pay to see it even before it's been made.

Bitter and twisted much!

[–] Final_Hitokiri 10 years ago

Never once said I was bitter, or "pissed". I simply told you the truth. It's sad that you can't accept what the truth is and have to disguise it as something else to help you sleep better.

The studios did not dictate to Zach what he could/could not make. They simply told him they would not fund his terrible project and to get funding elsewhere. And Zach did just that.

Only instead of funding it himself, even though he had the full amount AND the connections to help fund it already, he exploited kickstarter to beg others to fund his terrible project.

Again, just the truth. You can twist it around to suit your bitter fanboi self all you want, but it is the truth and always will be the truth.

[–] IfOnlyItWereTrue 10 years ago

Do you have some proof that the KS 'investors' felt cheated or let down by the end result?

I'm not a fanboi, I actually disliked Scrubs, and I didn't and wouldn't have invested in this movie, nor would I pay to see it.

The simple fact though is that you are confused about the concept of 'investing' and come across as bitter that 'other' people couldn't give a toss about your opinion and happily gave their money to ZB and would probably do it again if given the chance.

That ZB could afford to pay for it himself has nothing to do with anything.

[–] Final_Hitokiri 10 years ago

Do you have some proof that the KS 'investors' felt cheated or let down by the end result?

The box office.

I'm not a fanboi

The way you deny the truth and praise Zach for his actions says otherwise.

That ZB could afford to pay for it himself has nothing to do with anything.

Yes, it does. He received a lot of criticism for using Kickstarter when he had more than enough to finance the project. The return on investment from this movie proves that he made his "fanbase" quite upset with the finished product. It has happened to Spike Lee as well. Kickstarter is not a good place for already successful film makers to beg for funding.

[–] IfOnlyItWereTrue 10 years ago

You clearly either don't understand how Kickstarter works or you have some deluded idea that it should be some sort of charity only for losers to get their ideas funded.

Kickstarter is a marketplace where the KS'er has to sell their product to get funded. However the people that provide the money are neither funders nor investors in anything like the traditional sense and are in fact really a mixed bag of; philanthropist/fans - those that provide small amounts of money for no physical return, pre-purchasers - those that buy the product or service, and a very small group of people willing to pay silly amounts of money to meet etc the Kickstarter.

ZB's Kickstarter was no different than any other. It had clearly stated aims and rewards.

The success of the project was determined solely by the production of the film. At no point is any Kickstarter required either morally or contractually to provide anything extra than that promised by the reward paid for by the 'backer'.

Your only feasible complaint here is that ZB took an unreasonable amount of those funds for his own personal use which then had a detrimental effect on the end product.

Could you provide proof then that ZB took an unreasonable amount of money from the ~$3mil raised for his own personal use?

I think you'll find that he actually ponied his own money into the project as well!!

The box office.

First off ZB's KS 'backers' didn't buy into anything other than enabling ZB to make a film and receive the stated rewards.

Secondly, of the 43,652 backers 28,652 had the stated reward of a screening. The remaining 15,341 backers paid for other rewards, if they wanted to see the film they knew they'd have to buy the DVD or a ticket.

Thirdly, the happiness or not of ZB's other fans that didn't provide any backing is irrelevant and that they couldn't even bring themselves to provide the minimum $10 means that their opinion of this film is also IRRELEVANT.

Ergo - the box office success or not of this film has nothing to do with anything.

So do you have any real evidence that the backers of this KS project felt somehow let down or robbed ... No? I didn't think so!

The way you deny the truth and praise Zach for his actions says otherwise.

I've denied no truths, just your lies. Neither have I praised ZB for anything other than his ability to sell his product and get it made. I clearly stated that I wouldn't pay to watch this film and that I could take or leave Scrubs.

He received a lot of criticism for using Kickstarter when he had more than enough to finance the project.

I'm sure than many people that didn't understand how KS works or felt jealous of his success did, I say ****em as their opinions are worthless.

Kickstarter is NOT a funding of last resort for losers. It's NOT for people who have already lost everything chasing an idea that nobody wants. Kickstarter is a meeting place between inventors/artists and potential buyers so that ideas can be turned into reality.

Why should anyone not use KS just because they could feasibly fund it themselves? Intelligent people, and I would hope that any inventor or artists I'd want to back would be intelligent, go for the cheapest and safest funding route and Kickstarter with it's hoards of pre-purchasers seems to me to be an intelligent choice.

Furthermore, Kickstarter is not a charity with specific and finite resources .. just because someone spent money on ZB's project does not mean that someone else's project ended up without in fact it's quite the opposite.

So I really do not see that there is any reasonable grounds for criticising ZB's use of kickstarter. No one was forced to provide money and no one was conned.

Because it was an 'art' project some backers may have disliked the end result, this though is not in in itself grounds for criticising ZB's use of KS but a blanket criticism of all KS 'art' projects irrespective of the artists personal wealth!

Actually Forbes spells it all out much better here http://www.forbes.com/sites/suwcharmananderson/2013/05/20/zach-braff-b acklash-is-misguided-and-misinformed/

[–] Final_Hitokiri 10 years ago

I'm not going to lie, I didn't even bother to read that whole thing so for all I know you admitted that Zach was a doofus to use kickstarter. Here's a tip, you want to come across that you know something, anything, brevity is your friend!

I will address your first line though:

You clearly either don't understand how Kickstarter works or you have some deluded idea that it should be some sort of charity only for losers to get their ideas funded.

The concept of kickstarter is so that you can get funding for your project because you haven't made it into the market yet and cannot receive the financial support. Zach had the financial support in his own bank account.

If Zach Braff put as much effort into his movie as you did in writing, he'd have had no trouble with the studio funding it, that's for sure!

[–] IfOnlyItWereTrue 10 years ago

Clearly you're a moron with limited reading skills and poor comprehension.

[–] khaleesi-drogo1 10 years ago

Clearly you're a shill hired by Zach Braff's pr team to try and help salvage his public image.

Please tell your boss: it's too late :D

[–] IfOnlyItWereTrue 10 years ago

No, but you are a sad little troll.

[–] khaleesi-drogo1 10 years ago

Nope wrong on both accounts. So your not even a fan of scrubs yet you want to waste your time defending someone for no reason? Zach Braff is still not listed as an executive producer on here, even though he is claiming to be one to the press. Whatever money he put up for this must be far less than the five other EPs listed. If you want to see a sad little troll, just go to the nearest mirror :)

[–] Final_Hitokiri 10 years ago

Don't you love how offended the ZB fanbois get when you call them out on his hack job for this movie?

Seriously, if it was a good movie the studios would have jumped at the chance to fund it. They want to make $$$ more than anyone in the film business.

[–] IfOnlyItWereTrue 10 years ago

Nothing you have said would suggest I'm wrong on either account.

My interest here was down to the thread topic not ZB or this film as such but the fact that it was related to Kickstarter.

I'm at a loss to the relevance of your embittered rant about ZB claiming to be something that IMDB doesn't have him down for ... like imdb is the arbiter of such things.

We've also already been over this, however much money ZB put into this project is irrelevant and being that this was his film and he got the money from KS, he can call himself anything he wants.

I did and unlike you I didn't see one.

[–] Final_Hitokiri 10 years ago

 Actually you are the troll.

You were presented with FACTUAL information and then went off on a rant about nonsense... and now you're starting personal attacks. Classic troll behavior.

If only it were true that you actually had something of value to contribute, but instead you have nothing, like Zach Braff and his latest movie!

[–] IfOnlyItWereTrue 10 years ago

What you mean by FACTUAL -

Absolutely agree with you. The sad fact is this movie would have happened with or without crowd funding. Zach Braff did not need your money, he just wanted it so he could make more money without risking any of his own millions. If you look at the producers list on here for WIWH you will see five executive producers listed, these are people who invested and will be getting a return on their investment if this movie makes money. They might just end up making money off of the people who donated.

I think it's wonderful that there are so many kind and generous people out there willing to donate their money to film makers, but I hope in the future that money goes to the people who really need it.

Comes across more of an embittered opinion piece, however I have extracted the two salient point.

One - you're pissed that ZB might have been able to fund his own film.

Two - you're pissed that people make money out of Kickstarter projects.

That is the sum totality of your FACTS and both of them are fundamentally irrelevant.

Your first point fails because it takes no account of ZB's liquidity. However, even if ZB did have the cash lying around there's no reason that he should have to use it. KS isn't a charity, it's there to provide the funds so that you don't have to use your own!

Your second point just highlights the fact that you don't understand what the kickstarter platform is all about. Every single Kickstarter project could have led to the people involved becoming multi millionaires while the funders ONLY ever end up with the stated reward ... which is kind of the point of it.

Oh yes, your last point about people that really need it ... we're talking about film making here. No one really needs to make a film, it's WANT ... and as you say in a later post, if any of them were any good the studios would have bankrolled them. ;)

As for trolling ... You started off with unfounded personal attacks on ZB, you're ranting about complete nonsense and you have nothing of value to contribute ... mainly, I might add, because you're simply wrong and don't understand anything about what you're trying to talking about ... I guess your hatred of ZB is clouding your mental faculties.

[–] Final_Hitokiri 10 years ago

As for trolling ... You started off with unfounded personal attacks on ZB, you're ranting about complete nonsense and you have nothing of value to contribute.

Nope, I stated FACTUAL information about Zach Braff not receiving funding from the studios and how he abused Kickstarter to get his horrible film made, which failed to turn a decent profit the way his previous one did.

You on the other hand, let's scroll up here, wrote:
"Clearly you're a moron with limited reading skills and poor comprehension."

Let's compare the too, one is a direct insult and the other is a critique about the method that an actor used to finance a failed movie.

Clearly you're a troll disguising herself as a plant for Zach's PR team. You're also making up "facts" to support your nonsense. You've claimed twice now that I hate Zach Braff and nowhere once did I state that.

Zach made a bad movie and a bad PR decision, the audience didn't like it. You failed. CASE CLOSED!

[–] IfOnlyItWereTrue 10 years ago

No you didn't.

You disguised your judgemental opinions as facts ... which you've just done again.

That ZB didn't receive funding from the studios is irrelevant and means nothing as we already know that he didn't need them.

None of the rules of Kickstarter were broken or bent, quite the opposite in fact.

So all you have is one fact that means nothing without your subjective judgmental opinion - typical trollish behaviour.

Then you quote out of context ... fact of the matter is that I only pointed out that truth after it became patently clear that you are indeed a moron with limited comprehension skills ... truth hurts, deal with it!

Facts - Zach made a movie. Zach didn't lose any money on the deal and all his backers got what they paid for. That's exactly how KS is designed to work. CASE CLOSED!

[–] Final_Hitokiri 10 years ago

No you didn't.

Oh, so Zach Braff did not use kickstarter to fund this movie? The studios must have approved him the full funding without the need of kickstarter then...

You are the worst Zach Braff PR plant in history.

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Final_Hitokiri 10 years ago

That's cute. You couldn't handle the truth and have resorted to childish name-calling as your only defense left.

Sad, sad little PR plant you are. Go home to your parents’ basement and kiss your Zach Braff poster goodnight.

[–] gehenna-3 10 years ago

Dude, give it up. It's obvious that you don't have the mental capacity to a) understand his arguments or b) refute them.

[–] Final_Hitokiri 10 years ago

There's nothing to refute. It's fact that Zach Braff begged for money on kickstarter, rather than bankroll the entire film himself, to fund his project that the studios refused to back.

The film performed terribly compared to his last indy project. The kickstarter scam did not help him any.

[–] MongoLloyd 10 years ago

... feel genuinely real with emotion and life...

Too bad a handful of anonymous d!psh!ts on IMDb don't determine the ultimate success of a movie.

Have fun propping up Braff for the entirety of his filmmaking career.

.

[–] meltinzone 10 years ago

Very constructive MongoLloyd... smh
Perhaps you don't relate to these films because you haven't experienced anything unfortunate in life. Or maybe your sense of humor is due for an oil change, who knows.

Instead of assuming I'm a *beep* how about you suggest a counter film (or two) that you find to be

genuinely real with emotion and life

?
Or if you have seen the movie and didn't feel like it had real life depth, further explain your useful opinion....

[–] ShyLivesMatter 10 years ago

Really liked your post as well as your review (its the first review that was shown when I clicked on the movie page just now before coming here to the board - cool, must have been fate lol). Awesome that you pledged :-)

I really want to see this. Really gotten into indie films the last 2-3 years. Including Garden State (though I'm not a big TV guy, so I've only seen a few episodes of Scrubs). Which I thought was just ok. Dude's life didn't seem that bad. As someone who wouldn't know how to go about scoring drugs if his life depended on it (apparently I'm the only one, if these movies are to be believed), I wish I had the kind of life where I could stumble a$$ bacwards into situations like that party he was at where there's drugs and casual sex with hot chicks...sign me up for that life. Might get overwhelming if I did it every day, but at least for one night lol

But yeah, Garden State did have a lot going for it, too. Nothing inherently wrong with quirk or trying to find yourself. Not all of us were born with a clear sense of the path we should take in life. It can be a lifelong process...and I'm living proof.

I've really dealt with some struggles in life the last few years, adulthood hasn't exactly been a walk in the park, makes my youth seem like a cakewalk and at the time I thought that was no picnic either (don't we all? lol). Been trying to "find myself" as well. Or at least find my place in the world, since I like to think I do have a pretty defined sense of self. Where I can succeed and be appreciated for who I am as a unique individual (though I know its not cool to say that on imdb) instead of trying to conform and being like just another of the a$$holes in life. Plus trying to learn to be ok with myself and my "quirks" (yes, I'm quirky, most people are if they're honest, sorry). People aren't perfect. Though it often feels we're expected to be as "grown-ups" (read The Little Prince or The Catcher in the Rye for my thoughts on that). So I really relate to the plot description.

So people can hate on these movies all they want for being "pretentious", "hipster", "precious", "twee", "white people problems" or call the main characters "unlikeable", and use big words like "tripe" to show they're serious, film school educated movie buffs or whatever, but its all BS. To me, these movies are as real and honest as it gets. Real people, "quirks", emotions, and situations. I'm living them. So maybe I shouldn't be so sensitive about it, but I take that sh!t personally. Criticize these movies and characters and you might as well criticize me.

Its like everyone tries to be some kind of harda$$ or bada$$ Social Darwinist online for some reason. Everyone gets uncomfortable by any kind of awkwardness, emotion, or vulnerability. Never understood that about my fellow humans lol I guess I might as well be an alien. Still feel like one sometimes. I thought that crap was supposed to magically go away when I left high school, so what the hell? :-/ lol I'm like the least violent guy ever, but sometimes I kinda feel they should all be shaken or punched in the face. Its like, who are they trying to impress? :giveup: Why so serious? Seems a bit pretentious to me, if we're going to throw around that word. Maybe they're all Aspies (no offense) or sociopaths and just trying to be "normal" and fit in. I guess this post will make them uncomfortable, so...yay? :-)

Well...like you said, maybe the haters of these type of movies just haven't experienced that many difficulties in life yet, so they can't relate. Maybe their lives more closely resemble James Bond movies or mafia movies or heist movies or hood movies or dance movies (lol), so they prefer/relate to those types of stories and characters. I know I wouldn't have appreciated these movies as much either when I was a kid and life was more simple, with less demanded of you.

Was more into the Hollywood big budget, blockbuster action stuff, because that's what I was raised on. And because I'm a dude and that's what guys are supposed to like. Guess my sense of self wasn't as defined back then. Though don't get me wrong, I still like some of that stuff. It can be fun (before anyone accuses me of being pretentious lol). Though I think its also ok for peoples' tastes to change (or they just get exposed to more diverse things) as they age.

Anyway, basically, I guess its just: You either get these movies or you don't. Its either your thing or its not. But don't assume something is pretentious just because it doesn't perfectly sync up with your vision of reality. Try a little empathy for others' points of view. Just my .02 and sorry for the novel :-)

Though all that said about relating to and appreciating movies like this, if I see this one (looks like it won't be showing near my hometown for awhile, just found out - damn) and it sucks, I take it all back lol

"That's the theme of my movies: The victory of the battered idealist in a cynical world."

[–] meltinzone 10 years ago

Really liked your post as well as your review

Thanks :)

Where I can succeed and be appreciated for who I am as a unique individual. People aren't perfect. Though it often feels we're expected to be as "grown-ups"

Throughout reading your "novel" lol, there were a few times I thought man, this dude will really like this movie. Don't think that though, just watch it without any expectations, all movies can be enjoyed a hell of a lot more if they're watched like this ;)

these movies are as real and honest as it gets. Real people, "quirks", emotions, and situations. I'm living them.

I think people who 'get' these hidden gems have all, at some point (if they're still not), been through some kind lof life rollercoaster, no matter how small.

I guess I might as well be an alien. Still feel like one sometimes. I thought that crap was supposed to magically go away when I left high school

maybe the haters of these type of movies just haven't experienced that many difficulties in life yet, so they can't relate. Maybe their lives more closely resemble James Bond movies or mafia movies or heist movies or hood movies or dance movies (lol), so they prefer/relate to those types of stories and characters. I know I wouldn't have appreciated these movies as much either when I was a kid and life was more simple, with less demanded of you.

Hahaha, yeah man, I know, there was another film Braff was in, pretty sure it was http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0458364/ I watched sometime ago in a similar light. There was a few things you said that made me want to share Robert Anton Wilson with you, reality tunnels, life, et al. Should check him out, sadly it's the closed minded ones who need this type of internal thought more yet they wouldn't give it the chance. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kCIqFAdI6eI
He helped me figure out some 'stuff' ;)

its also ok for peoples' tastes to change (or they just get exposed to more diverse things) as they age.

100%

You either get these movies or you don't. Its either your thing or its not.

Think WIWH will be right up your alley :)

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] meltinzone 10 years ago

No one has a reason for being here. Life is not about making a mark. It's just dull and mostly one hassle after another. Everyone willing and able to be honest with themselves sees that.

Man, you sound like you need to talk to someone or get some help with that whole Debbie the Downer thing you've got going on.

Most of us just get used to it. Others are like Braff and never really progress beyond 17 so they do things like film themselves screaming at a hole in order to deal with the disappointment they wouldn't feel in the first place if they weren't naive enough to think that everything is just magically better once you have the freedom to choose for yourself why and how you are bored, unhappy, and constantly inconvenienced.

So, you're partly right. "Most" people are not well known celebrities who have their own films and enjoy sharing their visions with others on a similar wave length/vibe.
However when you say 'others don't progress beyond 17', isn't that in itself a little naive? Plus, I take it you don't currently have the luxury of having enough money to never need to worry about food or electricity that month, so to tell us that 'everything' is in fact not that much better 'once we have the freedom to choose', well I don't see how that makes any sense, at all. Quite a few celebs and psychologist sorts have talked about how that stress goes into other areas. So while in fact everything may be stressing you, you have the luxury of stress instead of the stress of food or electricity that month.

Plus the whole, "others don't progress beyond 17" doesn't sit right with me. Most people wish they could go back to being 17 again, as that was an age filled with emotion and all kinds of awesome. Haven't there even been movies made directly on this scenario, yep! So either
- you agree this film is real in regard to emotion but think you're better than it
- you never had the 17 year old enjoyment life gives so you just don't relate
- you wish you could be 17 and as you aren't you just jealous you can't 'scream into a hole' and have people relate to you.
I'm not sure which category you fall into, but you sure do seem completely out of the whole vibe this movie puts across. Maybe you've tried for 40 years to make a name for yourself and nothing's happened, so you're a little synical, who knows...

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] redeem147 10 years ago

I liked the pitch, and I never watched Scrubs. As an aging fangirl, there was a ton of stuff in the film that resonated with me. I contributed less than the price of my ticket, but I got production updates all through the process, which were very interesting. No regrets, just glad I could help.

[–] Hollywoodshack 10 years ago

Do us a favor. Finance no more surfin films. I disliked Soul Surfer and Chasing Mavericks intensely. I also don't like the parking lots closed at beaches to film a location scene.

[–] SoylentGreenScreenPodcast 10 years ago

Its interesting that Australia has some of the highest rates of movie piracy and yet they are happy to support kick starter campaigns. Gotta love those little Aussie battlers.

[–] djdavig 10 years ago

Aussie dude you are freakin awesome. What a great thread! I'm well on in years and have lived through more than I can remember but I did feel 17 again watching this film, both times! My Father is also dying now but similar to Gabe he is not afraid..

Can I donate retroactively Zach? Seriously, I would just like to get all the cool stuff the lucky few who got in on it enjoyed. I've contributed to other films on KS but missed this one somehow and it's KILLING me!

roughly..."They don't have any trophies on the mantle. They don't even have a mantle, but they are wonderful people with huge sensitive hearts." - Kate Hudson as Sarah Bloom who contrary to one poster is actually the heartbeat of the film

The writing says it all. Great genre busting work of art...unless you are beyond jaded.

[–] saxonwulf1066 10 years ago

I am also an Aussie Who backed the Project. I din't have much cash So I only kicked in enough to see the behind the scenes stuff. I watched this film grow from my computer as Zack rolled out video after video giving a detailed look at what goes into making a film.

And with all of that you'd think I'd know what to expect from the film. Like watching a films that gives to much away with it's many trailers. No the case. This film was deeper, darker and more mature then Garden state (his previous film, of which I am a fan). MELT I will admit I fought back tears more then once, and in the end I also shed a few tears.

Anyway I'm Glad I backed it. I'm Glad it was made. Boo to those who criticized using Kickstarter to make it (NOwhere on Kickstarter does it say it's only for people who couldn't find funding elsewhere- I looked. He had every right to use KS, and clearly enough people agreed with him). And I totally enjoyed it.

[–] meltinzone 10 years ago

Awesome! Another Aussie or human being who gets it :) Glad Wish I Was Here brought you as much enjoyment as it bought me :)

[–] Final_Hitokiri 10 years ago

You my friend understand the value of sacrifice!

While you're struggling enough to only be able to donate a few dollars, Zack is struggling in his fabulous mansion... and was completely unwilling to fund the film himself.

[–] saxonwulf1066 10 years ago

No he was unwilling. I checked his bank accounts and he was down to his last sent. He had nothing but the short on his back and he used that to secure Donald Faison for the film.

[–] khaleesi-drogo1 10 years ago

Hmmmm... Seems his last cent was a coin worth $22 million:

http://www.pajiba.com/trade_news/new-rule-if-you-have-10-million-in-th e-bank-you-cannot-ask-me-to-fund-your-movie-zach-braff.php

http://www.celebritynetworth.com/richest-celebrities/actors/zach-braff -net-worth/

[–] Final_Hitokiri 10 years ago

So he could have funded the entire $6 million and still had $16 million spending money?

Guess it wouldn't have been an issue to get his film made then!