They just posted on the movie's facebook page today saying they have a big announcement in the next week. I'm thinking that's likely the premiere tour.
Did you listen to the ChooseFI podcast he did (https://www.choosefi.com/062-manifest-destiny-of-fi-travis-shakespeare/)? He's definitely making less than he would have staying where he was in the industry...
Edited to add: It's interesting the book came off that way to you. I get that impression from a lot of things in the FI community (e.g., Frugalwoods, every travel credit card funded blog ever), and it leaves a bad taste in my mouth, but I didn't get that feeling from his podcast interview.
Wife and I read the book. I'd give it a meh. The authors haven't attained financial independence, which for me means they don't really have much to offer on this subject. The book feels like an entrepreneur who just learned about "FIRE" trying to make some money selling the book and now a movie. I have no issue with that, but it's not for me.
Did you listen to the ChooseFI podcast he did (https://www.choosefi.com/062-manifest-destiny-of-fi-travis-shakespeare/)? He's definitely making less than he would have staying where he was in the industry...
Edited to add: It's interesting the book came off that way to you. I get that impression from a lot of things in the FI community (e.g., Frugalwoods, every travel credit card funded blog ever), and it leaves a bad taste in my mouth, but I didn't get that feeling from his podcast interview.
I hope it's good.... I'm thinking it will help my wife connect with the fire movement/mindset on a more emotional level. She's on board with it but I don't think she gets why I want it so badly.
Wife and I read the book. I'd give it a meh. The authors haven't attained financial independence, which for me means they don't really have much to offer on this subject. The book feels like an entrepreneur who just learned about "FIRE" trying to make some money selling the book and now a movie. I have no issue with that, but it's not for me.Did you listen to the ChooseFI podcast he did (https://www.choosefi.com/062-manifest-destiny-of-fi-travis-shakespeare/)? He's definitely making less than he would have staying where he was in the industry...
Edited to add: It's interesting the book came off that way to you. I get that impression from a lot of things in the FI community (e.g., Frugalwoods, every travel credit card funded blog ever), and it leaves a bad taste in my mouth, but I didn't get that feeling from his podcast interview.
The podcast you linked is an interview with the film's director. He's not at all new to the FIRE movement (4+ years) and is, at a minimum, LeanFI. It was an excellent interview; he is very well spoken.
The book is by the film's "star" who, as HBFIRE noted, was new to the whole FIRE concept when he and his wife set out to make this film.
The movie is supposedly a mix of their adventure and interviews with some people (big names and small) in the movement. I haven't read the book, and likely won't, but will watch the film when it is available.
Are they not going to release it online? Strange that its taking so long to reach us all..
Wife and I read the book. I'd give it a meh. The authors haven't attained financial independence, which for me means they don't really have much to offer on this subject. The book feels like an entrepreneur who just learned about "FIRE" trying to make some money selling the book and now a movie. I have no issue with that, but it's not for me.I'll be a little meaner and say the book was terrible. Poorly written and content was weak. Seemed to be constantly failing at frugality, taking advantage of handouts, and just generally not practicing FIRE concepts. The MMM foreward lured me in.
It doesn't strike you as fair that you aassume he is rich? That doesn't make much sense.
It doesn't strike you as fair that you aassume he is rich? That doesn't make much sense.
I mean maybe I am being unfair on him...it sounds like he already had plenty of capital behind him, so is the success of FIRE for him going to strike a chord with the average person?
Wife and I read the book. I'd give it a meh. The authors haven't attained financial independence, which for me means they don't really have much to offer on this subject. The book feels like an entrepreneur who just learned about "FIRE" trying to make some money selling the book and now a movie. I have no issue with that, but it's not for me.
I wasn't able to make it to the screening here in Chicago, has anyone seen the movie at this point? Hopefully they release it to everyone sometime soon.
I agree! Obviously it must have cost $350m to make because all movies have the exact same cost.
(To suggest this movie was made as a tax write-off means you don't know how movies or taxes work.)
I'm sure it's because of national enmity and not because international copyrights are a hard thing for an indie producer to navigate
I'm sure it's because of national enmity and not because international copyrights are a hard thing for an indie producer to navigate
I'm sure it's because of national enmity and not because international copyrights are a hard thing for an indie producer to navigate
I prefer to think that they hate Canadians, so get out of here with your logic!
Someone in the Vancouver ChooseFI group tried to organize a screening here, and was told they can't because it's only being screened in the US right now. So for the time being, it seems to be "fuck Canadians". So that's kind of shitty.
Someone in the Vancouver ChooseFI group tried to organize a screening here, and was told they can't because it's only being screened in the US right now. So for the time being, it seems to be "fuck Canadians". So that's kind of shitty.
@Zikoris I've been thinking about trying to get it screened at the Pickford in Bellingham. it would be the perfect venue... do you think your group would be interested in traveling south to view the film?
Someone in the Vancouver ChooseFI group tried to organize a screening here, and was told they can't because it's only being screened in the US right now. So for the time being, it seems to be "fuck Canadians". So that's kind of shitty.
@Zikoris I've been thinking about trying to get it screened at the Pickford in Bellingham. it would be the perfect venue... do you think your group would be interested in traveling south to view the film?
The logistics would probably not work out too well since it would likely be on a weekday and most of us are unfortunately not retired yet - and I, for one, have completely tapped out my time off work with my vacations so far this year. A lot of us also don't drive, though carpooling might work?
One thing that puzzles me is why so many of the FIRE articles/media concentrate on the frugality side of FIRE, when the optimisation/income boosting side of FIRE (side hustles, entrepreneurship, tax mitigation, investing, getting a promotion) is just as important. It's really unbalanced.
The South Florida showing is this Monday and is sold out!
One thing that puzzles me is why so many of the FIRE articles/media concentrate on the frugality side of FIRE, when the optimisation/income boosting side of FIRE (side hustles, entrepreneurship, tax mitigation, investing, getting a promotion) is just as important. It's really unbalanced.
One thing that puzzles me is why so many of the FIRE articles/media concentrate on the frugality side of FIRE, when the optimisation/income boosting side of FIRE (side hustles, entrepreneurship, tax mitigation, investing, getting a promotion) is just as important. It's really unbalanced.
One thing that puzzles me is why so many of the FIRE articles/media concentrate on the frugality side of FIRE, when the optimisation/income boosting side of FIRE (side hustles, entrepreneurship, tax mitigation, investing, getting a promotion) is just as important. It's really unbalanced.
Well, the obvious answer would seem to be that increasing income is so HIGHLY dependent on the individual's specific circumstances, skills, disposition, ability level, etc, such that it would be pretty useless to people not in that situation. Think about it. An accountant talking about a good career trajectory to maximize earnings in that specific field is useless to anyone who isn't either already an accountant or looking to become one, and a FIRE piece focusing on how to become a better accountant would just come across as bizarre and barely even related to FIRE. There are just too many different career paths for that sort of focus to be at all widely applicable, whereas theoretically anyone can be make their own lunch and stop buying crap they can't afford and don't need.
FIRE media does seem to frequently include investing or side hustle discussion, so it's not like income talk is entirely absent.
One thing that puzzles me is why so many of the FIRE articles/media concentrate on the frugality side of FIRE, when the optimisation/income boosting side of FIRE (side hustles, entrepreneurship, tax mitigation, investing, getting a promotion) is just as important. It's really unbalanced.
Well, the obvious answer would seem to be that increasing income is so HIGHLY dependent on the individual's specific circumstances, skills, disposition, ability level, etc, such that it would be pretty useless to people not in that situation. Think about it. An accountant talking about a good career trajectory to maximize earnings in that specific field is useless to anyone who isn't either already an accountant or looking to become one, and a FIRE piece focusing on how to become a better accountant would just come across as bizarre and barely even related to FIRE. There are just too many different career paths for that sort of focus to be at all widely applicable, whereas theoretically anyone can be make their own lunch and stop buying crap they can't afford and don't need.
FIRE media does seem to frequently include investing or side hustle discussion, so it's not like income talk is entirely absent.
Yes, but the fact that coupon cutting/emphasis on frugality is the most universally applicable method of increasing your savings rate doesn't mean that it should be the only, or even the main, component of FIRE depictions in "outside" media - yet it invariably is. Sure, an accountant is only applicable to other professionals. But if you are going to interview a handful of people, maybe 1 or 2 could be professionals with a side hustle, or someone who can talk about investments and trust funds and tax mitigation or side hustles or an own business. The lack of emphasis on this threatens to distort the view of the broader community.
One thing that puzzles me is why so many of the FIRE articles/media concentrate on the frugality side of FIRE, when the optimisation/income boosting side of FIRE (side hustles, entrepreneurship, tax mitigation, investing, getting a promotion) is just as important. It's really unbalanced.
Well, the obvious answer would seem to be that increasing income is so HIGHLY dependent on the individual's specific circumstances, skills, disposition, ability level, etc, such that it would be pretty useless to people not in that situation. Think about it. An accountant talking about a good career trajectory to maximize earnings in that specific field is useless to anyone who isn't either already an accountant or looking to become one, and a FIRE piece focusing on how to become a better accountant would just come across as bizarre and barely even related to FIRE. There are just too many different career paths for that sort of focus to be at all widely applicable, whereas theoretically anyone can be make their own lunch and stop buying crap they can't afford and don't need.
FIRE media does seem to frequently include investing or side hustle discussion, so it's not like income talk is entirely absent.
Yes, but the fact that coupon cutting/emphasis on frugality is the most universally applicable method of increasing your savings rate doesn't mean that it should be the only, or even the main, component of FIRE depictions in "outside" media - yet it invariably is. Sure, an accountant is only applicable to other professionals. But if you are going to interview a handful of people, maybe 1 or 2 could be professionals with a side hustle, or someone who can talk about investments and trust funds and tax mitigation or side hustles or an own business. The lack of emphasis on this threatens to distort the view of the broader community.
One thing that puzzles me is why so many of the FIRE articles/media concentrate on the frugality side of FIRE, when the optimisation/income boosting side of FIRE (side hustles, entrepreneurship, tax mitigation, investing, getting a promotion) is just as important. It's really unbalanced.
Re: the documentary
I haven't seen it, but I did just read an article about FIRE that was critical about the lifestyle and heavily featured the couple who made the documentary.
They talked all about how frugality was too hard and "unrealistic" and how they are now happy saving a more reasonable 10% of their income and actually enjoying their lives.
If that's the outcome then their documentary should be called "Doing FIRE Wrong: a user's guide to fucking up frugality".
Re: the documentary
I haven't seen it, but I did just read an article about FIRE that was critical about the lifestyle and heavily featured the couple who made the documentary.
They talked all about how frugality was too hard and "unrealistic" and how they are now happy saving a more reasonable 10% of their income and actually enjoying their lives.
If that's the outcome then their documentary should be called "Doing FIRE Wrong: a user's guide to fucking up frugality".
Re: the documentary
I haven't seen it, but I did just read an article about FIRE that was critical about the lifestyle and heavily featured the couple who made the documentary.
They talked all about how frugality was too hard and "unrealistic" and how they are now happy saving a more reasonable 10% of their income and actually enjoying their lives.
If that's the outcome then their documentary should be called "Doing FIRE Wrong: a user's guide to fucking up frugality".
So Scott and Taylor have left the movement? That is too bad. Would you mind sharing the article? My google skills have failed me.
So Scott and Taylor have left the movement? That is too bad. Would you mind sharing the article? My google skills have failed me.
I can't find it either, but it wasn't some obscure publication, it was a pretty mainstream online news source if I recall.
I was pretty surprised when I read it. It really threw the movement under the bus by describing higher savings rates as unrealistic and unable to sustain happiness.
10% is extremely low, and the article made it sound like they have absolutely no interest in even trying to save more than that.
That could have been the article writers, and not so much what they actually said, but it was pretty ridiculous.
One thing that puzzles me is why so many of the FIRE articles/media concentrate on the frugality side of FIRE, when the optimisation/income boosting side of FIRE (side hustles, entrepreneurship, tax mitigation, investing, getting a promotion) is just as important. It's really unbalanced.
I honestly don't see this, especially since one of the main outside criticisms of the FIRE community is that it seems to be overrepresented by high income people.
MMM is by far the best known public figure of FIRE and he doesn't talk about cutting coupons. He just emphasizes that it's the savings rate that matters.
I really, really don't see this over emphasis on small expense cutting over increasing income that you do, unless we're talking about the ERE crowd, but they're a particular brand of FI folk, and clearly distinguished as such.
As I've said before, the tips and tricks for frugality tend to be shared more because they are universal to all of us, but personal career trajectories are more specified.
Income is also irrelevant until someone has their spending under control. So the spending side really is the first priority, and it takes time and experimentation to get that ideal spending level right so that it's not too hedonistic but also not too restrictive.
Even though there is actually a HUGE emphasis here on making more money, it's not what will get press because there is a huge pressure in society to make more money, so it's not really all that relevant. Every Tom, Dick, and Harry is out there wanting to make more money, but they're also spending it all.
The message of "spend less and be happier" is what gets the focus because it's the message that's radically different. Any idiot knows that if they make more money, they will have more money. Meanwhile it's shocking to people that they can spend less of their money and actually be happier.
That said, even with reducing wasteful spending as a main focus, an ENORMOUS number of people in the community put A LOT of focus on side hustles, career hacking, etc.
If you aren't seeing it, I really don't know what you are reading.
^ yeah, I tried finding it, but couldn't remember any particular buzz words in the article title and there are just way too many entries about them to pare down the search.
^ yeah, I tried finding it, but couldn't remember any particular buzz words in the article title and there are just way too many entries about them to pare down the search.
Are you sure the article wasn't referring to their initial savings rate before creating the film? It was 10%. I highly doubt they'd publicly admit to leaving the "movement" and reducing their savings rate back to where it was. That would greatly diminish the film and book's credibility and hence negatively impact their revenues. I think they're too business savvy for that.
I'm sure it's because of national enmity and not because international copyrights are a hard thing for an indie producer to navigate
I prefer to think that they hate Canadians, so get out of here with your logic!
^ yeah, I tried finding it, but couldn't remember any particular buzz words in the article title and there are just way too many entries about them to pare down the search.
Are you sure the article wasn't referring to their initial savings rate before creating the film? It was 10%. I highly doubt they'd publicly admit to leaving the "movement" and reducing their savings rate back to where it was. That would greatly diminish the film and book's credibility and hence negatively impact their revenues. I think they're too business savvy for that.
100% certain that it was a sub 20% savings rate, I can't be certain it was 10% and not 15%, but it was certainly their current savings rate.
Well, I finally bloody found it and I did read it wrong. It was an article discussing several different FI community members and in the part where they talk about the more "reasonable" savings rate, they're actually talking about a different couple. Correct about the content, but totally wrong about the people.
Oops, sorry guys.
They talked all about how frugality was too hard and "unrealistic" and how they are now happy saving a more reasonable 10% of their income and actually enjoying their lives.
so..... any way to see this film online yet?
They should just release it behind a paywall site or something if its money they want, whats the hold up here.
so..... any way to see this film online yet?
They should just release it behind a paywall site or something if its money they want, whats the hold up here.
There was a tweet that essentially said "soon"
I'll caveat this once again about how I'm not in the entertainment industry, but they seem to be going about this the wrong way...still.
No one who isn't already in the FIRE community is going to pay $5-10 to watch this. Why they didn't sell streaming rights to one of these services is just baffling to me. Sell it whole hog to recoup your costs, make your money off book sales, and move on. You get people watching it who wouldn't otherwise know about it.
Going this route I doubt they make back the $350k it cost them to make it.
Why they didn't sell streaming rights to one of these services is just baffling to me.
If Netflix or Amazon flooded their distribution with a bunch of low quality films their entire reputation would suffer.
If Netflix or Amazon flooded their distribution with a bunch of low quality films their entire reputation would suffer.
I had to laugh at this.
We just cancelled our Netflix subscription because the vast (>80% of the titles) are rated 5.x or lower on IMDB. Not enough to justify the odd Stranger Things or Dark.
It's not that simple. To get streaming rights to Netflix or Amazon you first have to prove that your film has legs, that is that people want to watch it. You realize how many film makers are trying to get distribution rights on the big streaming services? If Netflix or Amazon flooded their distribution with a bunch of low quality films their entire reputation would suffer. It's the same type of scenario as people trying to find a publisher for their crappy book and then have to resort to self publishing.
This statement confuses me. Not only because they have tons of terrible content, but it seems like there isn't a documentary they're afraid to stream. Seriously, go look at how many asinine documentaries they currently have.
We just cancelled our Netflix subscription because the vast (>80% of the titles) are rated 5.x or lower on IMDB. Not enough to justify the odd Stranger Things or Dark.
It's not that simple. To get streaming rights to Netflix or Amazon you first have to prove that your film has legs, that is that people want to watch it. You realize how many film makers are trying to get distribution rights on the big streaming services? If Netflix or Amazon flooded their distribution with a bunch of low quality films their entire reputation would suffer. It's the same type of scenario as people trying to find a publisher for their crappy book and then have to resort to self publishing.
This statement confuses me. Not only because they have tons of terrible content, but it seems like there isn't a documentary they're afraid to stream. Seriously, go look at how many asinine documentaries they currently have.
I don't buy this idea that they'll only air something that's proven it has legs by doing a certain amount of revenue already. I have a feeling the Playing With Fire people just don't have the connections or know-how to get theirs picked up.
Playing with FIRE is now available on a number of streaming services (Amazon, Google, Vimeo, etc.)
Finally got a chance to watch it last night, I paid $4.99 on Amazon. I must admit, I was really impressed. Extremely well produced documentary! I watched it with my wife who has always been a little confused as to what exactly the FIRE "movement" is and now she pretty well understands. When the movie ended, she said, "so what's our savings rate?". That made me beam. Check it out if you haven't already!!
Funny, the amazon listing has "Starring: Peter Adeney".
He's the first person listed and barely in the film. Seriously he's basically an extra in this film. That's some pretty deceptive marketing, though I'm not shocked at all. Cheese.
It's listing everyone in alphabetical order by last name.
It's listing everyone in alphabetical order by last name.
Got it, but it's still very misleading putting him as a star of the film. He's a supporting person at most. I think madfientist got more coverage. Hilarious the wife isn't mentioned as a "star" of the film but Adeney is.
Literally everyone who appears in the film is listed in alphabetical order
I got the film on Amazon and enjoyed it last night.
I thought the interviews with FIRE notables were delightful, and the message was well articulated. It was exciting when numbers in the millions were quoted for people visiting FIRE websites - rock on!
Unfortunately the film writers could not have picked a worse couple to illustrate the FIRE concept. Living with parents for a year? That would make me depressed too. Meanwhile, the good for nothing husband was putzing around agonizing over their decision and not earning a dime while his wife was busy working to support him and griping about how much she missed her BMW.
It would have been so much better to make the husband a journalist who decided to write an article about FIRE, then have him travel the country to interview Vicki Robin, Pete Adeney and many others as part of his job, then make the decision with his wife to move to Oregon straightaway (without the ridiculous year of homelessness thing). They could then rent a small apartment, have him get a job and bike to work every day, and then show him and his wife reveling in their new simpler life, finding lots of inventive ways to save money, while exploring the outdoors around Bend - instead of that insane trip to Hawaii which was most definitely not FIRE-worthy.
So a bit disappointing that the movie ended up as unlikely to convince anyone not already on the bandwagon, but nice to see nonetheless.
I got the film on Amazon and enjoyed it last night.
I thought the interviews with FIRE notables were delightful, and the message was well articulated. It was exciting when numbers in the millions were quoted for people visiting FIRE websites - rock on!
Unfortunately the film writers could not have picked a worse couple to illustrate the FIRE concept. Living with parents for a year? That would make me depressed too. Meanwhile, the good for nothing husband was putzing around agonizing over their decision and not earning a dime while his wife was busy working to support him and griping about how much she missed her BMW.
It would have been so much better to make the husband a journalist who decided to write an article about FIRE, then have him travel the country to interview Vicki Robin, Pete Adeney and many others as part of his job, then make the decision with his wife to move to Oregon straightaway (without the ridiculous year of homelessness thing). They could then rent a small apartment, have him get a job and bike to work every day, and then show him and his wife reveling in their new simpler life, finding lots of inventive ways to save money, while exploring the outdoors around Bend - instead of that insane trip to Hawaii which was most definitely not FIRE-worthy.
So a bit disappointing that the movie ended up as unlikely to convince anyone not already on the bandwagon, but nice to see nonetheless.
But then again, how many people would watch a film that depicted the life of a more typical mustachian? i.e. diligently saving, not making purchases, and waiting for compounding to work, all while living a relatively normal, less excessive life?
But then again, how many people would watch a film that depicted the life of a more typical mustachian? i.e. diligently saving, not making purchases, and waiting for compounding to work, all while living a relatively normal, less excessive life?
But then again, how many people would watch a film that depicted the life of a more typical mustachian? i.e. diligently saving, not making purchases, and waiting for compounding to work, all while living a relatively normal, less excessive life?
Very true.
Seeing Pete Adeney as the star of something would absolutely be more persuasive that the film would be worth watching compared to some unrecognizable no-name. From a marketing standpoint, it's huge. Those in the FI community (the main audience) recognize the name, and thats not a small number.
People who watch TV and movies like to root for underdogs. Not those who prevail because of very good odds.
Perhaps too many people here on MMM have forgotten their transition to FIRE?
I thought it was pretty good, a solid B+. I think there are WAY more people like Taylor and Scott than many of you realize, especially in HCOL areas like CA and the NY tri-state area. I don't agree with all of their choices, but the difficulties were well documented. Change is hard, sacrifice is hard, thinking you "made it" and to find out making it actually costs you the things that make you happiest is especially hard.
it can feel hard and a sacrifice until it clicks in that what you think is worth it isn't actually. Not everyone gets there right away. This is a very very small group in a big world. Not a perfect movie but it's a start! Bravo for trying.I thought it was pretty good, a solid B+. I think there are WAY more people like Taylor and Scott than many of you realize, especially in HCOL areas like CA and the NY tri-state area. I don't agree with all of their choices, but the difficulties were well documented. Change is hard, sacrifice is hard, thinking you "made it" and to find out making it actually costs you the things that make you happiest is especially hard.
Why is it all about sacrificing and hard choices? One of the axioms of FIRE is that your choices need to be smart, and that you spend money on the things that make you happy and not on the things that don't - and that people really don't need all that much to be happy. This is stated several times onscreen. It is also stated that living in Coronado made Taylor very happy, but while she liked drinking wine she didn't care about the price on the bottle. So why not have their very next step be their figuring out that they spent $2000 on groceries and then cutting it down to under $500? You can be frugal in San Diego - the message to the contrary being another thing I disliked about the film.
But no, instead they lose ~half their total income in order to save housing costs which were (per the movie) 32% of their income. For those viewers who can do math, that is basically zero benefit for a major (unnecessary) sacrifice. It was maddening how it made absolutely no sense. And by the way, the ability to understand simple math is also an essential requirement for FIRE. In this regard, the movie was pretty schizophrenic.
I thought it was pretty good, a solid B+. I think there are WAY more people like Taylor and Scott than many of you realize, especially in HCOL areas like CA and the NY tri-state area. I don't agree with all of their choices, but the difficulties were well documented. Change is hard, sacrifice is hard, thinking you "made it" and to find out making it actually costs you the things that make you happiest is especially hard. Perhaps too many people here on MMM have forgotten their transition to FIRE?
I thought it was pretty good, a solid B+. I think there are WAY more people like Taylor and Scott than many of you realize, especially in HCOL areas like CA and the NY tri-state area. I don't agree with all of their choices, but the difficulties were well documented. Change is hard, sacrifice is hard, thinking you "made it" and to find out making it actually costs you the things that make you happiest is especially hard. Perhaps too many people here on MMM have forgotten their transition to FIRE?
With regards to their HCOL quality of life, I think the movie made a good point of framing the problem as "we have two high incomes, the big beach house, all the toys and vacations - but no endgame." Starting a family also brought that particular problem to the forefront. If the sequence of events in the film are to be believed (and I think some of them were staged or reenacted for effect), they were doing almost nothing towards retirement.
EV2020 you're promoting boring FIRE. These bloggers are more exciting and energized FIRE. I'd never fit in at Fincon. My face is too ugly and my story too blah. Your young adults could be better served with exposure to the Fincon crowd. I doubt there can be much harm.I did go to a FinCon with my son, so it's kinda funny that you mentioned that! It's not easy to connect with kids, even my own kids, but I don't think it's boring FIRE to focus on the possibilities of FI. There was a whole lotta' hustle and entrepreneurship at FinCon - but also a lot of scammy stuff. For instance, a YouTuber was giving a primer on how to run his ads for a paid course in front of trending FIRE videos. For like $5 per impression, he could steal the eyeballs and convert enough to his $100 course to make it worthwhile.
EV2020 you're promoting boring FIRE. These bloggers are more exciting and energized FIRE. I'd never fit in at Fincon. My face is too ugly and my story too blah. Your young adults could be better served with exposure to the Fincon crowd. I doubt there can be much harm.I did go to a FinCon with my son, so it's kinda funny that you mentioned that! It's not easy to connect with kids, even my own kids, but I don't think it's boring FIRE to focus on the possibilities of FI. There was a whole lotta' hustle and entrepreneurship at FinCon - but also a lot of scammy stuff. For instance, a YouTuber was giving a primer on how to run his ads for a paid course in front of trending FIRE videos. For like $5 per impression, he could steal the eyeballs and convert enough to his $100 course to make it worthwhile.
Also Bateaux, from your posts on the 'and beyond' thread, your life does not sound blah at all!
I thought it was pretty good, a solid B+. I think there are WAY more people like Taylor and Scott than many of you realize, especially in HCOL areas like CA and the NY tri-state area. I don't agree with all of their choices, but the difficulties were well documented. Change is hard, sacrifice is hard, thinking you "made it" and to find out making it actually costs you the things that make you happiest is especially hard. Perhaps too many people here on MMM have forgotten their transition to FIRE?
With regards to their HCOL quality of life, I think the movie made a good point of framing the problem as "we have two high incomes, the big beach house, all the toys and vacations - but no endgame." Starting a family also brought that particular problem to the forefront. If the sequence of events in the film are to be believed (and I think some of them were staged or reenacted for effect), they were doing almost nothing towards retirement.
I haven't seen it yet, am marginally interested, but this comment makes me worry that this was a 'cash in' on the popularity of the FIRE movement. I had planned to watch it with my children since this format would help spur conversation without talking about our own personal situation or force any ideas on them. But I'm getting less enthusiastic about it hearing that the premise is two high incomes that manage to reduce a luxurious & spendy life to pave a path to ER. My children are already pretty level-headed around living within their means and appreciating the value of a dollar, so this all sound like watching the movie might be a step in the wrong direction. I am also not convinced that ER is a goal that should be held up as the ultimate goal / achievement to strive for, I prefer the idea of striving for FI.
My transition to FIRE was becoming more comfortable with investing in the stock market. We're spending just as much now as we were before finding the FIRE movement because we were already reasonably frugal.
We’re always on the lookout for innovators who can provide new ideas, tips, and strategies to help you make sense of the today’s digital world and achieve your best financial future. To that end, we are excited to support Playing with FIRE — the first documentary about the financial independence movement. This documentary captures the truths and dispels the myths of what it feels like to embrace FIRE and follows one family’s journey to acquire the one thing that money can’t buy: a simpler — and happier — life.
Seeing Pete Adeney as the star of something would absolutely be more persuasive that the film would be worth watching compared to some unrecognizable no-name. From a marketing standpoint, it's huge. Those in the FI community (the main audience) recognize the name, and thats not a small number.
"So Mr. Adeny, what did you do before you FIREd?"
"My wife and I were both software engineers, with a household salary of $140,000 a ye..."
*click* (non-FI viewer changes channel)
People who watch TV and movies like to root for underdogs. Not those who prevail because of very good odds.
Also interesting that @arebelspy was in the movie, he is a celebrity now.
Really hated the video. They seem like spoiled people who came up with a hair brained scheme that isn't working for them, but they won't admit it to themselves. Mooching on parents to save money is disgraceful. Putting a child through this is BS.
There are some people that capture this movement perfectly, like the teacher couple at the MMM camp that talked about side-hustles, making FIRE on $30K incomes, etc. They seemed like the kind of people that a $50K BMW would never be a temptation, even if they made $300K a year.
There are some people that capture this movement perfectly, like the teacher couple at the MMM camp that talked about side-hustles, making FIRE on $30K incomes, etc. They seemed like the kind of people that a $50K BMW would never be a temptation, even if they made $300K a year.
Also interesting that @arebelspy was in the movie, he is a celebrity now.
I watched the movie months ago with my local Choose FI group at the time, one of whom was in that scene with him. I immediately saw ARS in the circle and pointed him out. Nobody else in the room knew what/who I was talking about. I couldn't believe that nobody else in my ChooseFI group had been on these forums.
Answer this: if your target audience doesn't spend a lot of money, how do you sell to them?
Their answer was pack with fire "celebrities". MMM. MadFIentist. Kristy millennial Revo. Paula Pant. Jim Collins.
People love their celebrities. In this crowd though it isn't the Kardashians, it's the bloggers they've been reading a lot years. So pack with them, get them to endorse and recommend it, and see sales.
Really hated the video. They seem like spoiled people who came up with a hair brained scheme that isn't working for them, but they won't admit it to themselves. Mooching on parents to save money is disgraceful. Putting a child through this is BS. The wife is not on board and will probably take off once she seems some cash she can take in divorce.
Answer this: if your target audience doesn't spend a lot of money, how do you sell to them?
Because the hype around FIRE will fade, and so too will this forgettable documentary, because it chose not to pivot, to lean into its few honest moments and transform itself into a much more interesting *and timeless* story.
Just my not-so-humble opinion. Also not a popular MMM viewpoint, I know.
*shrug*
Answer this: if your target audience doesn't spend a lot of money, how do you sell to them?
I kind of wonder this about the FIRE ecosystem in general. How does a movement that’s ostensibly anti consumerist generate hundreds of thousands, maybe millions in affiliate marketing sales?
I am extremely impressed with your ability to see the good in the film. You’re right, maybe some people like Scott and Taylor will see it and have their lives changed for the better.
My relentlessly cynical brain has thoughts I can’t let go of though. I think the director and producers (including Scott) cleverly identified a subculture that has lots of people with lots of disposable income generating lots of affiliate sales and used this film as entree into that subculture.
Also interesting that @arebelspy was in the movie, he is a celebrity now.
I watched the movie months ago with my local Choose FI group at the time, one of whom was in that scene with him. I immediately saw ARS in the circle and pointed him out. Nobody else in the room knew what/who I was talking about. I couldn't believe that nobody else in my ChooseFI group had been on these forums.
I'm always suprised at the people in the ChooseFI groups haven't even heard of or listened to the ChooseFI podcast, never mind know anything about MMM.
Did they fund that Hawaii vacation with movie funds they raised? For people who are supposed to be in accumulation blowing dough like that is absurd.
They keep saying FIRE is such a great thing, it better be for all the anguish they are putting themselves through. If I was going by that movie I would give FIRE a hard pass.
They keep saying FIRE is such a great thing, it better be for all the anguish they are putting themselves through. If I was going by that movie I would give FIRE a hard pass.
They keep saying FIRE is such a great thing, it better be for all the anguish they are putting themselves through. If I was going by that movie I would give FIRE a hard pass.
I know, right? They totally missed the point. You're supposed to kick ass and do all the fun stuff now, then after you retire just ramp it up even more. Suffering is for suckers.
This is something of a tangent, but I think media platforms need a word for documentaries that are first and foremost, commercial entertainment products.
It doesn't make sense that something like "Playing with Fire" or "Buy this Juicer, It'll Change Your Life" should be listed in the same section with Ken Burns and PBS Frontline.
I guess making a movie about two intelligent people who shack up, consciously decide to take control of their finances, optimise their taxes and bills, cut out extravagant spending and steadily increase income while doing nothing particularly notable would not be a good seller.
This is why so much popular FIRE media has to make up some sort of fake sacrifice, like extreme lifestyle change or deprivation, to try to beat down the fire movement. In reality how many of us feel like we are sacrificing anything, other than the undisciplined life?
I have the sneaking suspicion that the mysterious work-from-home business that Scott was setting up was the business of selling this documentary to suckers like me. xD
I guess making a movie about two intelligent people who shack up, consciously decide to take control of their finances, optimise their taxes and bills, cut out extravagant spending and steadily increase income while doing nothing particularly notable would not be a good seller.
I guess making a movie about two intelligent people who shack up, consciously decide to take control of their finances, optimise their taxes and bills, cut out extravagant spending and steadily increase income while doing nothing particularly notable would not be a good seller.
It strikes me far more as though he discovered FIRE, thought "holy shit, that's a GREAT subject for a movie!" and needed to quit his job and live with his parents in order to be able to work on it.
I think the hyper focus on retiring as young as possible may fade, but actual core values of being more financially literate, and being less financially wasteful are here to stay.
-Not depending on a secure career to last well into senior years.
-Not leveraging yourself up to your eyeballs with a full and dangerous dependence on cash flow.
-Realizing that a lot of people who display "wealth" are actually in debt.
-The rising inequality in wealth distribution.
-Mininalism.
-Caring about the environment.
-Being concerned about things like the viability of Social Security.
-Being concerned about things like long term healthcare.
-Etc, etc
These aren't trends, these are solid forces of social change and it's not just the FI community. FI community is just a small enclave of a bigger, massive trend, which is the steady rejection of the "American Dream", consumerist ethos where more is more and bigger is better.
This community didn't start anything. It's a response to something much, much bigger.
I guess making a movie about two intelligent people who shack up, consciously decide to take control of their finances, optimise their taxes and bills, cut out extravagant spending and steadily increase income while doing nothing particularly notable would not be a good seller.
They keep saying FIRE is such a great thing, it better be for all the anguish they are putting themselves through. If I was going by that movie I would give FIRE a hard pass.
They keep saying FIRE is such a great thing, it better be for all the anguish they are putting themselves through. If I was going by that movie I would give FIRE a hard pass.
I know, right? They totally missed the point. You're supposed to kick ass and do all the fun stuff now, then after you retire just ramp it up even more. Suffering is for suckers.
Totally agree. The entire point of the % savings to # of years til FIRE equation is that you have almost the same standard of living in retirement as you did while working towards retirement. I can talk to til the cows come home on whether or not that's a good assumption, but it's the assumption the formula makes.
If you make your life difficult and painful just to save for retirement faster, then you're dooming yourself to a difficult and painful retirement. One for reason why their quest for financial independence as portrayed in the documentary felt very inauthentic.
The problem with "Playing with FIRE" is the film makers decided there needed to be tension otherwise it wouldn't be interesting. Tension can make things interesting (that's why "House Hunters" exists)
I guess making a movie about two intelligent people who shack up, consciously decide to take control of their finances, optimise their taxes and bills, cut out extravagant spending and steadily increase income while doing nothing particularly notable would not be a good seller.
I guess making a movie about two intelligent people who shack up, consciously decide to take control of their finances, optimise their taxes and bills, cut out extravagant spending and steadily increase income while doing nothing particularly notable would not be a good seller.
DH and I have had a pretty intensely dramatic FI adventure along the way with huge challenges and major lifestyle changes, but not once have we felt deprived or had an ounce of conflict about taking this path.
I'm sure there are plenty of compelling stories out there with tons of struggles that don't amount to angst over not driving luxury cars.
snip...
The great part though, is that it can be super fun and not miserable at all to work towards FIRE! We sure enjoyed it, and I sometimes miss the challenge, and the spreadsheets (https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/post-fire/i-miss-the-math/).
-JL Collins is one of the most soothing people, I could listen to him talk about index funds all day and just feel reassured about life
Quote-JL Collins is one of the most soothing people, I could listen to him talk about index funds all day and just feel reassured about life
He recorded a video a few months ago when the market was having one of its fits in which he's walking you through a meditation session. I'm dead fucking serious.
The TED talk-like thing that MMM did at the end of the movie is a great video to watch in its entirety. It gives a great breakdown of how most of us feel about FIRE and why he does what he does. IMHO it would have been far more meaningful to the movie audience than the actual movie.
Quote-JL Collins is one of the most soothing people, I could listen to him talk about index funds all day and just feel reassured about life
He recorded a video a few months ago when the market was having one of its fits in which he's walking you through a meditation session. I'm dead fucking serious.
The TED talk-like thing that MMM did at the end of the movie is a great video to watch in its entirety. It gives a great breakdown of how most of us feel about FIRE and why he does what he does. IMHO it would have been far more meaningful to the movie audience than the actual movie.
Amazing.
Quote-JL Collins is one of the most soothing people, I could listen to him talk about index funds all day and just feel reassured about life
He recorded a video a few months ago when the market was having one of its fits in which he's walking you through a meditation session. I'm dead fucking serious.
The TED talk-like thing that MMM did at the end of the movie is a great video to watch in its entirety. It gives a great breakdown of how most of us feel about FIRE and why he does what he does. IMHO it would have been far more meaningful to the movie audience than the actual movie.
Amazing.
For your listening pleasure.
https://youtu.be/OOGU94eL07E (https://youtu.be/OOGU94eL07E)
This is something of a tangent, but I think media platforms need a word for documentaries that are first and foremost, commercial entertainment products.
It doesn't make sense that something like "Playing with Fire" or "Buy this Juicer, It'll Change Your Life" should be listed in the same section with Ken Burns and PBS Frontline.
Also the first half hour being about how they live with their parents and don't pay rent was pretty distracting. Every time the topic came up we looked at each other and rolled our eyes. Someone should really tell them:
You don't have to pay for transportation if someone else pays for it!
You don't have to pay for food if someone else pays for it!
You don't have to pay for vacations if someone else pays for it!
QuoteThe TED talk-like thing that MMM did at the end of the movie is a great video to watch in its entirety. It gives a great breakdown of how most of us feel about FIRE and why he does what he does. IMHO it would have been far more meaningful to the movie audience than the actual movie.
It definitely would have been more practical and useful.
It was a talk at the World Domination Summit.
This is something of a tangent, but I think media platforms need a word for documentaries that are first and foremost, commercial entertainment products.
It doesn't make sense that something like "Playing with Fire" or "Buy this Juicer, It'll Change Your Life" should be listed in the same section with Ken Burns and PBS Frontline.
Documercial?
I second (third, fourth?) that a "typical" FIRE story wouldn't make for a compelling documentary. Nobody wants to hear about how I got a good job, bought a used car, got a good deal on my house, and take cool vacations with the help of credit card churning.I'm intrigued, tell me more.
I second (third, fourth?) that a "typical" FIRE story wouldn't make for a compelling documentary. Nobody wants to hear about how I got a good job, bought a used car, got a good deal on my house, and take cool vacations with the help of credit card churning.
I second (third, fourth?) that a "typical" FIRE story wouldn't make for a compelling documentary. Nobody wants to hear about how I got a good job, bought a used car, got a good deal on my house, and take cool vacations with the help of credit card churning.I'm intrigued, tell me more.
I second (third, fourth?) that a "typical" FIRE story wouldn't make for a compelling documentary. Nobody wants to hear about how I got a good job, bought a used car, got a good deal on my house, and take cool vacations with the help of credit card churning.
I don't agree.
If there's an audience for the blogs, forums, podcasts, and books, then there's a market for a movie/tv show.
There have already been multiple tv shows about people tackling debt. You could absolutely do a dpocumentary/docuseries about people who reject the level of lifestyle they could afford in favour of financial independence. How they socialize, their life hacks, what their friends and family think, what the hell they do with their time once retired, etc, etc.
Documentaries/docuseries looking into the day to day life of people who live just a bit off the beaten track are often hugely popular.
I just watched a series called "Couples Therapy", it's literally just watching normal people in couples therapy, and it's fucking transfixing.
I second (third, fourth?) that a "typical" FIRE story wouldn't make for a compelling documentary. Nobody wants to hear about how I got a good job, bought a used car, got a good deal on my house, and take cool vacations with the help of credit card churning.
I second (third, fourth?) that a "typical" FIRE story wouldn't make for a compelling documentary. Nobody wants to hear about how I got a good job, bought a used car, got a good deal on my house, and take cool vacations with the help of credit card churning.
I hear the 5/24 rule animation part rocks!
I guess if your FIRE habits involved something cool like recycled water, solar panels, biking to work and all that jazz, it might be relatable and interesting.I second (third, fourth?) that a "typical" FIRE story wouldn't make for a compelling documentary. Nobody wants to hear about how I got a good job, bought a used car, got a good deal on my house, and take cool vacations with the help of credit card churning.
I don't agree.
If there's an audience for the blogs, forums, podcasts, and books, then there's a market for a movie/tv show.
There have already been multiple tv shows about people tackling debt. You could absolutely do a dpocumentary/docuseries about people who reject the level of lifestyle they could afford in favour of financial independence. How they socialize, their life hacks, what their friends and family think, what the hell they do with their time once retired, etc, etc.
Documentaries/docuseries looking into the day to day life of people who live just a bit off the beaten track are often hugely popular.
I just watched a series called "Couples Therapy", it's literally just watching normal people in couples therapy, and it's fucking transfixing.
I guess if your FIRE habits involved something cool like recycled water, solar panels, biking to work and all that jazz, it might be relatable and interesting.I second (third, fourth?) that a "typical" FIRE story wouldn't make for a compelling documentary. Nobody wants to hear about how I got a good job, bought a used car, got a good deal on my house, and take cool vacations with the help of credit card churning.
I don't agree.
If there's an audience for the blogs, forums, podcasts, and books, then there's a market for a movie/tv show.
There have already been multiple tv shows about people tackling debt. You could absolutely do a dpocumentary/docuseries about people who reject the level of lifestyle they could afford in favour of financial independence. How they socialize, their life hacks, what their friends and family think, what the hell they do with their time once retired, etc, etc.
Documentaries/docuseries looking into the day to day life of people who live just a bit off the beaten track are often hugely popular.
I just watched a series called "Couples Therapy", it's literally just watching normal people in couples therapy, and it's fucking transfixing.
If your FIRE habits mainly involve spreadsheets, tax mitigation, steady investing and credit card churning then it might be harder to market. There's only so many ways to sexy that up.
Things that are frugal and sexy:They touch on this in the documentary in some places... take the kid to the park, batch cook breakfast, enjoy the company of your friends somewhere other than a restaurant (i.e. beach, etc.), play Ticket To Ride (!)
- Cooking delicious meals
- Building deck chairs
- Hosting parties (e.g. board games)
- Visiting the park
To reword this, take the misconceptions people have and turn them upside down. Investing is a few steps at first, and a lot less later. Almost as easy as creating a Facebook account, link up your bank account and then you just click here and type in a number, and you're buying mutual funds, which you can promptly forget about for the next ten years. Changing your oil... it can be hard and messy, but the documentary can just show you rolling under your car, twisting an oil filter wrench and letting the oil drain. Maybe you need "normal" people who don't know how to do these things, and you show them learning and see how they react after they've accomplished something they thought was a black box they could never learn.
Thanks everyone for the kind words about my small appearance.
I seriously just wish more "regular folks" would just get their sh*t a little bit together and practice some form of financial independence. Even a little bit. I just get so spiritually tired of seeing people tortured by this system that we worship like a golden calf. Honestly, I just heard about this "American Factory" documentary and I don't even think I can watch. Hurts too much. My Dad went on strike at the chemical company he worked at when I was a kid. Full on picket line in the winter burning barrel fire to keep warm the whole 9 yards. The result, they all had to work on Christmas to make up for lost productivity during the strike. He could have used a little FU money. Ok, my internet rant is done now. Vicki and Joe are/were a godsend. FI is a tough love road but it's better than getting beat down by money which is a tough sh*t road.
I agree with this comment so much. I used to work in the service department of a large brokerage firm and it hurt my heart to hear the stories of people calling in to start retirement savings in their 50's. I always just hoped that they were lying and didn't want to disclose their other assets to me. I've also had people calling in and saying they were retiring, but it turns out they had no plan and nowhere near enough assets. They just decided they were going to retire because they wanted to retire, or they hit a certain age or whatever. (My own mother in law did this as well.) It was draining to take those calls day after day.
Are there any more FIRE documentaries in the works???
This one was okay, but I would like to see one that covers people from all different financial situations and at various stages in their journey. Not everyone can relate to the despair of needing to downgrade from a BMW to a Honda, etc.
Are there any more FIRE documentaries in the works???
This one was okay, but I would like to see one that covers people from all different financial situations and at various stages in their journey. Not everyone can relate to the despair of needing to downgrade from a BMW to a Honda, etc.
Co-signed. It seems like they so missed the potential of this topic. There are a number of fascinating journeys to FIRE that could be explored, but the focus was on the wife reluctantly being deprived of her BMW isn't one of them.
IMO, the real power and message of FIRE is you give up stuff you don't much care about (like driving a BMW instead of a Honda), and in exchange you get things you truly want and make you happy. Like traveling where ever you want, or staying home to raise your kids.
"Playing with FIRE" was framed in terms of deprivation. I think that is exactly the wrong way to think about it.
Are there any more FIRE documentaries in the works???
This one was okay, but I would like to see one that covers people from all different financial situations and at various stages in their journey. Not everyone can relate to the despair of needing to downgrade from a BMW to a Honda, etc.
Co-signed. It seems like they so missed the potential of this topic. There are a number of fascinating journeys to FIRE that could be explored, but the focus was on the wife reluctantly being deprived of her BMW isn't one of them.
IMO, the real power and message of FIRE is you give up stuff you don't much care about (like driving a BMW instead of a Honda), and in exchange you get things you truly want and make you happy. Like traveling where ever you want, or staying home to raise your kids.
"Playing with FIRE" was framed in terms of deprivation. I think that is exactly the wrong way to think about it.
Even if you are status seeking, and let's face it many of us are, there can be a lot of status in FIRE. Imagine responding, when asked about why you don't drive a BMW: "I only buy things that my rent/dividends pay for. I've never opened my wallet in the last 10 years." Now that would be great.
FIRE isn't just about sacrifice! It can be just as "luxurious" as a clown car. Just requires a change of thinking.
Even if you are status seeking, and let's face it many of us are, there can be a lot of status in FIRE. Imagine responding, when asked about why you don't drive a BMW: "I only buy things that my rent/dividends pay for. I've never opened my wallet in the last 10 years." Now that would be great.
FIRE isn't just about sacrifice! It can be just as "luxurious" as a clown car. Just requires a change of thinking.
-The Mad Fientist is a very handsome man.
-The Mad Fientist is a very handsome man.
Lol that kind of jumped out at me, too. I guess I had a, well, different, image of him in my mind after only listening to him on his podcast, so when I saw the name on the screen I had to rewind it, like, wait, why is this guy doing a podcast instead of a YouTube channel?
Sadly, once FIREd, it doesn't seem to go like that. The number one response I get when asked why I don't work or why I dont have XYZ things is "I could never live like that! You know if you went back to work you could have all that stuff."
-The Mad Fientist is a very handsome man.
Lol that kind of jumped out at me, too. I guess I had a, well, different, image of him in my mind after only listening to him on his podcast, so when I saw the name on the screen I had to rewind it, like, wait, why is this guy doing a podcast instead of a YouTube channel?
Agree! Yes, I don't know why, but his voice doesn't sound like how he looks!! Lol
But then everyone who has FIREd is attractive ;-).
But then everyone who has FIREd is attractive ;-).At least the ones who choose to go on camera!
-The Mad Fientist is a very handsome man.
Lol that kind of jumped out at me, too. I guess I had a, well, different, image of him in my mind after only listening to him on his podcast, so when I saw the name on the screen I had to rewind it, like, wait, why is this guy doing a podcast instead of a YouTube channel?
Agree! Yes, I don't know why, but his voice doesn't sound like how he looks!! Lol
Even if you are status seeking, and let's face it many of us are, there can be a lot of status in FIRE. Imagine responding, when asked about why you don't drive a BMW: "I only buy things that my rent/dividends pay for. I've never opened my wallet in the last 10 years." Now that would be great.Sadly, once FIREd, it doesn't seem to go like that. The number one response I get when asked why I don't work or why I dont have XYZ things is "I could never live like that! You know if you went back to work you could have all that stuff."
FIRE isn't just about sacrifice! It can be just as "luxurious" as a clown car. Just requires a change of thinking.
There is just is no recognition that by not driving a Beemer etc I'm able to not have to work. They would (do) consider me poor because I don't have all the status symbols of my fancy area of SoCal. Talking about living off investment income from money you saved while working doesn't work either. They still see it as not enough to fund the lifestyle they want and therefore see no value in quitting a job in order to live like a middle class person when you could keep working years longer to fund an upscale life.
Maybe that was part of the reason they decided to relocate. SD is probably not as status/income focused as LA, but probably moreso than Bend or other more northerly places (like Seattle) where people tend to value the ability to get up to the mountains/out to the ocean more than material possessions. YMOYL was born here, after all. And with all our tech wealth, early retirement is not such a foreign concept to many people. Especially if you are using it to get out to the trails, etc. midweek. EVerybody knows how great THAT is!
I like the documentary, for me it was a nice little story about one couples attempt to sort out their financial future. Everyone has their own path to financial literacy, and I suspect there is an audience for stories like this one, just like there is an audience for people who are thinking about buying their first house and find out that renting and traveling is a legitimate option. I think there’s lots of room in our culture for stories of downsizing life to save money and lower consumption.
Having said that - I was quite concerned by some aspects of the story. The husband seemed to convince his wife, who clearly loves him very much, that FIRE will give them the ‘life they always wanted, particularly more time with their daughter’. She clearly liked their spendy life and so it seems she bares the whole cost of a very hard lifestyle change - she looses privacy, her nice things, her home, her circle of friends. But she’s the one who also has to spend 9-5 in a ‘home’ office all day while he gets to enjoy a passion project. He is a very lucky man to have someone so understanding - and she still doesn’t get more time with her daughter.
It takes too long to reach FI to make this much sacrifice if it’s not done evenly as a whole family. I. Think you need to enjoy the journey and find the compromise everyone is happy with, otherwise you are wasting too much life with a focus on saving money at all costs.
This film really highlights the importance of communication, a fundamental element to any healthy relationship. Scott and Taylor didn’t seem to be on the same page at first regarding their financial future. It seemed that Scott brought this idea of FIRE to Taylor and had to convince her it would be a good idea. It took her awhile to get on board.