As discussed here when the VM kickstarter succeeded, there was a very loyal fanbase to the series and there hadn't been a new show or movie in years (since 2007). There was a ton of latent demand for a product.
If I were doing this analysis, I'd try to separate established brands from new concepts. Bell's project to a great extent was driven by the brand and Braff's project leveraged Garden State. Since Spike Lee's project was entirely driven by his name, I'd look at his with a different lens
The best part of this article is the quote "Judging a trend from 3 data points isn’t the wisest thing to do"
That's the whole point: Spike Lee's past films should outweigh Braff's effort with Garden State when it comes to convincing people about their respective ability to make good films, but it didn't.
> I was about to sign a typical financing deal in order to get the money to make "Wish I Was Here," my follow up to “Garden State.” It would have involved making a lot of sacrifices I think would have ultimately hurt the film.
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1869987317/wish-i-was-he...
Spike Lee isn't pitching the latest project as a continuation of Malcolm X
The fuck kind of logic is this? When somebody defends their company, you know something must be wrong? That's some astute analysis there.
Judging a trend from 3 data points isn’t the wisest thing to do, and this descending slope may only be coincidental.
And yet that's what you lead with, huh.
Just because it's a big direct revenue source, that doesn't mean Kickstarter can't pull the plug on something. They recently banned hardware projects that just showed simulations without an actual product built yet. They're playing the long game and don't want to hurt the trust the community has in the platform -- so they're not in it for a quick buck at any chance, and they reject a lot of projects that don't meet their somewhat strict guidelines.
That being said, where do you draw the line on 'celebrity'? At some point, if hypothetically they banned celebrity projects, who determines the level of celebrity? It's so ambiguous to the point where it doesn't make sense to address it. I think the celebrity stories are a non-issue and the press always wants "controversy" to talk about even if it's drummed up by them.
Which brings me to your second point. It's true that the celebrity status is extremely tough to define and even tougher to measure in order to apply fair rules for everyone. But if there's a need for it, that is: if the existence of some projects start being detrimental to others, then I trust Kickstarter will work on it, crunch some data to figure out a way to prevent that from happening while remaining fair to project creators. Maybe by blocking projects a-posteriori, as they already did in the past.
Veronica Mars fans are legion, there is even a slight overlap with Joss Whedon (of Buffy, etc fame) as he had a very rare bit-part in one episode. Braff is known for somewhat quirky stuff too, Garden State was offbeat. Spike Lee is very mainstream hollywood nowadays, working with a-list actors and directing some very profitable movies.
So from the perspective that good-quality quirkiness generates fan enthusiasm it makes sense that these three particular projects would draw interest and dollars in the proportions that they did.
