The good news is that the fans saved Veronica Mars. For six years, a film project based on the cult-favorite detective series languished in development hell, until its fans voted with their wallets in an unprecedented tidal wave of support. The now legendary Kickstarter campaign netted it $3 million in two days and pulled the series out of dry dock.
The bad news, however, is that it was the fans who saved Veronica Mars. In a time when superfan influence already drives much of our cultural conversation, that influence, thanks to Mars, is about to get even bigger. And that is not a good thing for our culture.
The core dilemma rolling its way down the runway is that the fans’ agenda is not at all the same as the general public’s. When the non-affiliated public sees a new film or TV show — even if they are seeing the eighth installment of a franchise — they are open to a realm of diverse possibilities. A project can take them in any possible direction; its success or failure is determined by whether the piece ultimately entertains them — or on a more highbrow plane, provided them with new and meaningful insights into the human condition. And while some element of familiarity may be required, ultimately if the project doesn’t tell its story in a way that is at least slightly new and unpredictable, audiences lose interest.
Fandom concerns itself with none of those hifalutin concerns — or only as a secondary interest. The fan aesthetic is not about being taken to a new place, or challenged to consider a different aspect of the human experience. Fan culture is about referencing pre-approved characters and situations; fan-driven films, such as many of our current superhero epics, often feel much more like a pep rally than storytelling, where hometown heroes are simply marched across the stage for applause.
It is not, I think, something that fans themselves would contest to suggest the fan culture is not exactly the paragon of emotional maturity. The streets of Comic-Con are paved each year with grown men in their forties and fifties who refer to themselves as “fanboys.” The projects to which these fanboys — and their affiliated legions (Twihards, One Ringers, etc.) — attach themselves tend to be those with which they formed close bonds in their formative years and have clung onto ever since as a refuge from the cruel, scary world. The appearance of Iron Man or Twilight’s Bella on the screen acts as a Pavlovian trigger, like a bite of mom’s tuna casserole that takes them back to a safe, warm corner of their memory.
What superfans look for is not something unpredictable, but a project to demonstrate its fidelity to the original text. And that is all well and good. There’s nothing wrong with people finding a bit of shelter amidst the chaos of civilization. There are those of us, however, who don’t associate Iron Man with a time before the world got big and scary but still want to enjoy a movie. Fans are not seeking a broader experience but a replication of their original experience built on an ever-bigger scale.
In a normal entertainment universe, one would see a healthy balance between the poles, with some films targeted to the general public and some targeted to the fans. Even within films, it has been the job of filmmakers to find that balance. Since Star Trek returned to the big screen in 1979, filmmakers have sought to placate the rabid Trekkie hordes ready to take to the streets at the first misplaced setting on a photon torpedo while finding ways to amuse the larger general public, searching for entertainment in an increasingly crowded marketplace.
In the best of circumstances, the fans are but a small percentage of the total audience for almost any work. The 57,000 people who have contributed to date to the Mars Kickstarter account for about 2% of the 2.5 million who watched the show in its final season on the air. It was never more than a sliver of a Trek film’s audience that donned fake ears for a Star Trek convention. But this sliver of people have become the shock troops of the modern blockbuster age, drumming up the enthusiasm that fuels a marketing campaign while enforcing fidelity to the original texts.
Recently, however, the balance has shifted. Thanks to the niche-fication of the culture and the airwaves, power has moved hugely into the domain of the fans. The number of people it takes to make a show a hit or become a hot-button cause célèbre is now minuscule compared with what it took to break through in the past. The audience for the perpetually discussed HBO’s Girls has hovered around the 1 million mark since its debut — numbers that would have been considered catastrophic a few years ago. But because those viewers are so ardent and noisy about their affections, Girls’ future is assured on the network, which depends much more on word of mouth to guarantee its future than mere ratings. While the films of the Marvel universe ultimately seek vast audiences, the multiyear campaigns building up to each release — with their rollouts of casting news, villain names, posters, costumes, etc. — are effectively slow-motion Shiatsu massages of fanboy pressure points played out over the course of years.
In the crowded media universe, a film project needs something to break through the clutter, to build the drumbeat, and the ardent support of a “built-in fan base” is the tool that many look to. For a would-be film or TV show, it is not an audience they can afford to alienate.
And now, thanks to the Mars Kickstarter, fans not only hold the key to the hype, but the keys to the purse strings as well. For projects long suffering in development, the means to tap directly into fans’ wallets is the answer to an auteur’s prayers. But now that this alternate means of funding is out of the bag, ever lingering before filmmakers’ eyes, how much greater will the temptation be to play to the fans rather than the general public? (The fact that unlike with every other funding source known to mankind, they can raise this money without giving up an iota of equity doesn’t hurt either — although that may change soon.)
On another level, the rise of the fans is just an extreme symbol of our “like” culture, where people are constantly spurred on to declare their allegiance and list their favorites. On Twitter, the medium demands that individuals come out with all the exclamation points they can muster for (or against) whatever has passed through them. The result is a pass/fail culture, where nuance and moderation are drowned out, where the search for meaning in a work becomes secondary to cataloging its articles of cool. For the artist, pressing the buttons that will lead the audience to press buttons becomes all-important.
To see where this leads, one has to look no further than politics, where officeholders playing hard to their bases (that is: superfans) have made the idea of reaching out to the broader public impossible. If we cannot find a way to put the fans back in their cages, a 1,000-year cultural version of the debt-ceiling debate might well be our future.
HOT ON
- himitsu thinks The Case Against Fans is Fail
- Liz H. The Case Against Fans
-
- Adrienne M. thinks The Case Against Fans is Win
- davescheidt thinks The Case Against Fans is Fail
-
davescheidt 2 months agoFirst off this comes off as pretty condescending and snobby. “Fandom” is such a huge, immeasurable group of people and in no way are all involved, pathetic basement dwelling “super fans”. It’s such an easy thing to throw words around and to point fingers and to bring people down and easily dismissing them. Though again it’s impossibly ignorant to bunch people into this huge group and assume every single person wants the same exact thing. We live in an age in which we have an almost direct channel to the people who create the things we love, especially with comic books, and literature and music and film and being able to directly support projects that normally wouldn’t have been made, since it would have been up to someone at a record label or a publisher or traditional means to give the all clear on and put out. This is a bad thing? I understand the Veronica Mars thing is something that is definitely changing the landscape of crowd-sourcing as it’s still being put together by a Hollywood source, but they asked the fans if they wanted it and people chose to give their money to help make something they love a reality again. Radiohead did it with In Rainbows and more recently Louis CK did it with his latest special. We love to support the things we listen to and read and watch, especially knowing 100% that we are helping out the artists who created them. This is the future, get used to it, man.
-
- timl30 The Case Against Fans
- maryw23 The Case Against Fans
- christophers26 The Case Against Fans
- hungryhobbyist thinks The Case Against Fans is Win
-
Laura K. 2 months agoBuzzfeed needs some real editors stat. I am one of the people who contributed to the Veronica Mars kickstarter. For my $50, I expect nothing more than this movie getting made. I don’t demand or expect Veronica and Logan to get together. Maybe some of the younger, more juvenile contributors donated with the expectation that their paltry little monies gave them a voice in the final product, but I harbor no such delusions. Also, your derisive, sweeping generalizations of fandoms are very psych 101. I am a casual participant in many fandoms and none of them due to childhood warm fuzzies.
-
- drcynic thinks The Case Against Fans is Fail & a Poor Decision
-
- TLMurray The Case Against Fans
-
- ravenp thinks The Case Against Fans is Fail
-
jmatthew 2 months agoThe underlying premise of this article is nonsensical - you somehow analogize the resuscitation of a failed television show (Veronica Mars) via Kickstarter to the “fanboy” (your label) interests in properties such as Iron Man and Lord of the Rings. Forgive me sir, but this is akin to suggest that dwarves and Jedis both hail from the Federation (yes, geek humor, you started it).
Lumping Veronica Mars, a TV series with three seasons on broadcast television (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veronica_mars) together with a character such as Iron Man, who has a 50 year history (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_man), into the same “fanboy” category simply doesn’t make sense. Fictional characters (and the worlds they inhabit) that have existed, and maintained popularity, over decades can’t rightfully be compared to the beings populating relatively new popular entertainment. This isn’t meant as a criticism of Veronica Mars, by the way - she just hasn’t “leveled up” to Nancy Drew quite yet.
That said, why shouldn’t fans who are invested in a “franchise” (for lack of a better term) have the opportunity to continue to experience entertainment in a fictional universe they’ve come to enjoy? Execution is everything, and fanboys have appreciated quite diverse takes on their beloved characters (see the 1960’s Batman - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Batman_%28TV_series%29 - and compare with Christopher Nolan’s Dark Knight Trilogy - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Dark_Knight_trilogy#Christopher_Nolan_series_-_The_Dark_Knight_Trilogy, both of which are generally loved).
To suggest that our culture is somehow demeaned (e.g., your comment that “In a time when superfan influence already drives much of our cultural conversation, that influence, thanks to Mars, is about to get even bigger. And that is not a good thing for our culture.”) by individuals who have passion for a particular franchise are somehow inhibiting the creativity of content creators is simply not true. Your proposition that “[F]an culture is about referencing pre-approved characters and situations; fan-driven films, such as many or our current superhero epics, often feel much more like a pep rally than storytelling, where hometown heroes are simply marched across the stage for applause” belittles the work of people like Joss Whedon, Christopher Nolan, and Matthew Vaughn.
What’s worse, you state that “[W]hen the non-affiliated public sees a new film or TV show - even if they are seeing the eighth installment of a franchise - they are open to a realm of diverse possibilities. A project can take them in any possible direction; its success or failure is determined by whether the piece ultimately entertains them - or on a more highbrow plane, provided them with new and meaningful insights into the human condition.” I’m not sure what highbrow insights I should be divining from the Fast and the Furious series, or the collection of Wild Things features (don’t get me wrong, the original Wild Things holds a special place in my heart, and my DVD collection), or what makes them somehow culturally superior to works based on popular stories from other mediums.
At the end of the day, mass audiences tend to want a new twist on something familiar (for starters, check out http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hero_with_a_Thousand_Faces) - and that’s not a bad thing. Taking a familiar milieu and incorporating contemporary worldviews is a time honored tradition. Let’s agree that, at the end of the day, the execution of the story in whatever medium is what matters, and not whether it’s based on material that may or may not have previously been the inspiration for trading cards. This is the balancing act that truly talented individuals accomplish - taking a timeless human experience and making it relatable to the audience of their age. -
- sylph thinks The Case Against Fans is Fail
- Christina O. thinks The Case Against Fans is Fail
- jessey thinks The Case Against Fans is Fail
-
Maricela Gonzalez 2 months agoI wholeheartedly disagree with this. As an ardent participant in multiple fandoms, fandom culture to me anyway is about community and sharing/enjoying a mutual interest with like minded individuals no different than sport fans or collectors of antiques or what not. Fandom culture’s influence on mass pop culture is but a product of the technological advances of the Internet that makes those voices, which were always there, merely louder to studios. Does that mean that they follow exactly what “fans” want? No because all fans want different things and the studios interpret that in a way that won’t satisfy everyone. The studios response to fandom culture is hit-or-miss but I argue that fanboys and fangirls are most receptive and interested in the innovative and unanticipated interpretations of their favorite cultural products. Take the Star Trek reboot, which has been embraced by both fans and the masses alike. In my experience, it’s all about quality. Respecting the original film/book/series doesn’t mean regurgitating the same stuff as the original. If the new thing is created with hard work, passion, and love, then it will be embraced by fans. Period.
-
- magster3 thinks The Case Against Fans is Fail
- marclimon The Case Against Fans
-
- MarRob The Case Against Fans
-
FlickMontana 2 months agoI think there’s a kernel of a point there but it gets lost. Fanservice will rarely make for compelling art but those same fans responsible for bringing it out are the same people who crap all over it. The result being five reboots of four comic franchises in less than a decade. Thought this Spiderman or Superman or Batman sucked? Well don’t worry. We’ll get another crack at the origin story in 3-7 years. *sigh*
-
-
CameronHodge 2 months agoFor the most part I couldn’t disagree more with this piece. When executives who follow this train of thought take existing properties and re-tool them to what they think will appeal to the “General Audience” the results are often something no one at all wants so see. I dont really see fanboys getting too unruly about anything other than the properties they love being utterly butchered, not in any real consequential numbers at least.
-
- Shani O. Hilton The Case Against Fans
-
Retro Nouveau 2 months agoUh, there never was a “safe, warm corner” of my memory. Pretty crappy from day one, and when I was eating tuna casserole in my formative years, life was even worse than it is now. It’s not about going back, it’s about getting out of the real world without eating a bullet. Please don’t deny me or judge me for these temporary escapes.
-
- Jack Shepherd thinks The Case Against Fans is Win









Special Reactions
Your Reaction?
GET STARTED