Crowdfunding News: The Problem With Slut-Shaming the Veronica Mars Filmmakers



On March 18th, 2014 Scott Tobias wrote a scathing attack on the new crowdfunded Veronica Mars movie:

“[T]he Veronica Mars movie is a dead thing that fans have summoned back into existence, and to the tune of $5.7 million, which so reduces the risk on Warner Bros.’ end that Thomas likely didn’t have to take a single executive note. This sounds like a stirring triumph of democracy in action, with marshmallows liberating Thomas to go off and pursue the movie he wanted to make. But, in fact, what has actually happened is that fans have replaced studio bosses as the people for whom Thomas was making the “movie.” And for all the insider pleasures that result, it also fucks this Veronica Mars up badly.”

Ouch.

And it isn't just Veronica Mars. Mr. Tobias has his sights set on a bigger target. The crux of Mr. Tobias’ criticism is apparently that crowdfunding threatens to cheapen the artistry of filmmaking in general because (horrors!) the crowdfunded filmmaker might pay attention to what the audience wants. As Mr. Tobias primly observes:

“The audience gets what it wants, but not what it needs.”

Apparently, (according to Mr. Tobias) crowdfunding promises to undermine the proper role for the audience in 21st century motion pictures. 

Yup. Instead of passively receiving what gatekeepers think they need, audiences might get what they want…

And indulging the audience is (according to Mr. Tobias) a bad thing.

Instead of listening to the audience, more discerning minds (like the cultured marvel atop Mr. Tobias’ shoulders?) should determine what the rabble needs.

The imperious and condescending tone of Mr. Tobias’ screed rubbed me the wrong way.

(Questions: In Mr. Tobias’ world, who decides the right kind of rubbing? If people like it, will rubbing be allowed at all?)

What gives Mr. Tobias the right to to slut-shame the Veronica Mars filmmakers? 

I must have been absent when they passed out the memo explaining that the good kind of movie-making involved resisting what the audience wanted.

Apparently, according to Mr. Tobias, giving the audience what they want is destructive and shameful. 

Popular wants are to be resisted, ignored and mocked. 

By appealing to fans (and not doing enough for non-fans after the first two minutes) Mr. Tobias asserts that VM crossed an invisible boundary and lost credibility. 

According to Mr. Tobias, even if the VM filmmakers were coerced (sure you SAY you didn't want to make a core-audience-pleasing film...), they should be ashamed of what they’ve done. 

It was cheap and easy – and not the kind of filmmaking that good folks engage in. 

Really?

Filmmakers should be ashamed of what the audience (that paid for the film) likes?

Really?

Filmmakers who avail themselves of online financing should be stigmatized for that decision?

Maybe I'm overly sensitive, but to me it sure sounds like Mr. Tobias is trying to protect Old World standards in ways that are reminiscent of the patriarchal nonsense designed to keep women 'in their place.' 

Some New World filmmakers are refusing to operate within the socially constructed roles and Mr. Tobias is there to shame them and make sure they don't gain traction and disrupt the status quo. 

Forgive me, but, from my perspective, it's not the VM filmmakers who are fucking things up...

No comments:

Randy Finch's Film Blog:

Thoughts from a film producer about making and distributing films.