Post by: Zola. on September 17, 2018, 04:59:36 AM
Post by: grantmeaname on March 24, 2019, 01:16:35 PM
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.
I'm very excited for this doc. I'm surprised we haven't heard more about it on the forums.
Post by: DadJokes on March 25, 2019, 07:07:21 AM
Post by: tipster350 on March 25, 2019, 07:39:13 AM
Post by: grantmeaname on March 25, 2019, 05:19:54 PM
Post by: HBFIRE on March 25, 2019, 05:37:23 PM
Post by: grantmeaname on March 25, 2019, 06:22:22 PM
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.
Post by: HBFIRE on March 25, 2019, 07:00:32 PM
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.
No, I have not listened to it. Just giving my impression of the book. For me, I just prefer reading stuff from people who have already accomplished what they are writing about. Don't get me wrong, I can enjoy a good journal/autobiography, but it would be nice to read it after it's complete. This book would have been much better if it was written after they hit FI.
Post by: Cherry Lane on March 25, 2019, 09:26:27 PM
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.
Post by: Daisy on March 25, 2019, 09:50:35 PM
@Le Poisson
@elaine amj
Post by: fattest_foot on April 15, 2019, 02:29:05 PM
From what I can tell there was a private viewing with MMM, and Kickstarters have been able to watch, but they haven't mentioned distribution for anyone else at all.
If it's an issue that there will only be film festival releases until they find a distributor, let us know!
Post by: grantmeaname on April 15, 2019, 06:50:07 PM
Post by: Zola. on April 16, 2019, 05:26:29 AM
Post by: asauer on April 16, 2019, 05:57:54 AM
Post by: Dee18 on April 16, 2019, 05:23:18 PM
Post by: Zola. on April 18, 2019, 08:10:42 AM
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.
Thats what I am hoping for too...
Post by: HBFIRE on April 18, 2019, 04:10:45 PM
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.
Just listened to the podcast, really excellent. Looking forward to the film even if the book was disappointing.
Post by: HBFIRE on April 19, 2019, 10:29:24 AM
Post by: Zola. on April 25, 2019, 03:38:00 AM
Post by: fattest_foot on April 25, 2019, 08:56:58 AM
Are they not going to release it online? Strange that its taking so long to reach us all..
Yeah, this seems like a strange decision in 2019. Doing limited releases in theaters doesn't seem like it will reach anyone outside of the FIRE community.
I figured they'd try to get it on something like Netflix, Hulu, or Amazon as soon as possible. But maybe those platforms won't pay them enough until there's some kind of "hype" surrounding it from film festivals or something. I think of something like that Minimalism documentary where tons of people were exposed to the concept via Netflix.
Post by: grantmeaname on May 02, 2019, 01:00:50 PM
Post by: boognish on May 02, 2019, 08:00:26 PM
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.
Post by: Zola. on May 03, 2019, 04:19:56 AM
Maybe unfair, but it doesn't strike me as him being an average joe...
Post by: grantmeaname on May 03, 2019, 04:51:30 AM
Post by: mathlete on May 03, 2019, 08:13:07 AM
Post by: Zola. on May 03, 2019, 09:14:56 AM
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?
Post by: DadJokes on May 03, 2019, 10:39:50 AM
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?
I'm sure has just as much potential as MMM (a high earning software engineer) had. It's no coincidence that the people who've had the most success in the retire early arena are those who had high income careers. Your ability to retire early is directly related to what you make vs what you spend. Naturally, making more provides the opportunity to retire earlier.
Just because someone makes more money than us doesn't mean we can't learn from them.
Post by: grantmeaname on May 03, 2019, 04:18:31 PM
Post by: HBFIRE on May 10, 2019, 04:32:03 PM
Post by: A Fella from Stella on June 26, 2019, 09:01:41 PM
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 didn't care for the ChooseFI interview about it, and that was when I thought everything they did was so great.
Post by: HBFIRE on June 26, 2019, 10:51:25 PM
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.
Had to miss the premier, but headed to see it on Monday in Long Beach
Post by: jim555 on June 26, 2019, 11:08:29 PM
Post by: grantmeaname on June 27, 2019, 04:48:45 AM
(To suggest this movie was made as a tax write-off means you don't know how movies or taxes work.)
Post by: A Fella from Stella on June 27, 2019, 08:30:03 AM
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.)
How dare you, sir! Obviously anyone on this site knows everything about everything. I mean, shit, we have Abe Froman, The Sausage King of Chicago here (not on this thread yet, but here on the site). I imagine you'd refuse him a table at your restaurant simply because he's young and dashing.*
*Ferris Bueller ref in case I'm leaving you hanging here.
Post by: MoneyTree on June 27, 2019, 10:23:06 AM
Post by: bbates728 on June 27, 2019, 03:29:26 PM
The movie by itself wasn't really what I would want from a documentary tbh. I don't feel like there was much direction or thesis of the documentary as a whole. It didn't do a particularly good job of explaining the mechanics of FIRE (probably a good thing as finance can be dry af), it didn't work through the whys very much outside of their own particular reason (time with the most adorable little girl ever), it didn't go through the spreading of FIRE through the culture, or anything else really.
That being said, I loved it. I am incredibly biased as I am sure we all are but it was great to hear from so many members of the community and to see someone else's journey through their first year with the movement. Additionally, there was a surprising amount of negative in the film which took me off guard. Doesn't put the best foot forward but it was also refreshing that it wasn't just a cult recruitment video.
Ultimately, it felt more like a video diary of their path through their first year interspersed with the pillars of the FIRE community talking about the basics of what FIRE is. They talked about how they hoped this would be the calling card of FIRE and I don't think it quite achieved that but it definitely made my heart swell seeing this on the big screen.
Post by: DadJokes on June 27, 2019, 03:33:30 PM
But they were struggling to get to the ticket threshold, and it'll at least be an excuse to get out of the house.
Post by: LDoon on June 27, 2019, 03:38:49 PM
My hope is that for people searching for more, this film can provide the needed intro and motivation to read up on the FIRE movement. My comparison is Rich Dad, Poor Dad (book motivates but need to read actual investing books for information). The film won't get to that level, but I think it is a good step in the right direction.
Post by: martyconlonontherun on June 27, 2019, 05:18:43 PM
Post by: AlwaysBeenASaver on June 30, 2019, 09:33:12 AM
Post by: DadJokes on July 01, 2019, 09:01:45 AM
I liked that it was geared toward families. That allowed my wife to connect with it - it also got her a bit more interested in our finances. She had no idea that we are already saving >55% of our income.
I found it hilarious what sort of housing they could buy in Oregon for $300k. Our house is a McMansion in comparison for the same price here in TN. If they could have worked from home and lived anywhere, they really should have expanded their search a bit.
Post by: mtnrider on July 01, 2019, 10:39:10 AM
Post by: Zikoris on July 01, 2019, 12:17:43 PM
Post by: grantmeaname on July 01, 2019, 01:16:47 PM
Post by: SwordGuy on July 01, 2019, 02:29:38 PM
I'm sure it's because of national enmity and not because international copyrights are a hard thing for an indie producer to navigate
Frankly, I'm impressed with the number of screens they've been able to get in the US. They're clearly working hard and smart at it.
I'll wager it's just the extra hurdle of national boundaries and limited human time to understand how to do it the right way.
Post by: DadJokes on July 01, 2019, 02:33:52 PM
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!
Post by: jim555 on July 01, 2019, 06:06:52 PM
Post by: BTDretire on July 01, 2019, 08:01:59 PM
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!
My experience with Canadians is when I drove from upper Michigan to Maine by way of Canada. I had made a wrong turn and ended up in a neighborhood, several kids started yelling, "Go to McDonolds, Go to McDonalds", I can only assume they saw my license plate and McDonald's is what they knew about the states. (46 years ago)
Oh, that and the yearly invasion we get in the fall here in Florida.
When I had my business I served a lot of Canadian customers.
Other than that, I have noted grantmeaname is so good at sarcasm, sometimes, I have to read it twice. :-)
Post by: HBFIRE on July 01, 2019, 10:34:22 PM
The film would be much more compelling if the main characters were close to FI or had achieved it. As it is, they just got started so it feels really empty in terms of taking them seriously. It would be like watching someone do a documentary on how to lose weight, but is still extremely overweight and is on week 2 of the journey. They had some well known "famous" FI people in the film, but they got very little coverage -- mostly just sound bites. From what I read, the author insisted he be the star of the film and its focus, that was the main requirement to do the film in collaboration with the director -- again, the cynic in me sees this as self brand building. They had access to a lot of well known people in the community but didn't give them the depth they should have gotten to give the film more credibility.
Since the author wanted to be the focus, he should have done a proper documentary on their background -- what exposed him to FIRE, a better time line, more in depth discussion of their previous lifestyle versus their lifestyle now, more coverage of their challenges (which the book really gets into), and hard core numbers -- there was nothing in this film about their income/expense numbers which is a huge downside imo.
Imagine if this film focused just on the story of Joe and Allison. It would have been much more compelling and interesting following the story of 2 people who have gone through the entire process. A real case study.
Ideally, this would be a 10 year film following two people from the start to finish. But this would require patience and dedication instead of going for the quick money.
It's too bad, this thing had some potential.
Post by: HPstache on July 01, 2019, 11:11:52 PM
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?
Post by: Zikoris on July 01, 2019, 11:22:12 PM
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?
Post by: HPstache on July 01, 2019, 11:24:15 PM
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?
Ok, well it was just a thought. I don't think I could round up the minimum number of viewers to make it happen by myself. Maybe I'll just have to wait until it's on Netflix!
Post by: MarciaB on July 02, 2019, 09:06:16 AM
Sadly, I agree with HBFIRE who gave it a C+. I really wanted to like it more! And there are charming and funny moments in it, especially with Taylor (the wife of the main couple).
All in all though, if I were new to the idea of Fire I would be confused. Because it seemed like Fire was all about quitting your job. And apparently you have to move from a community you love, sell your car and move in with your parents to do that? Why couldn't they have started with swapping the expensive leased car for a used one, and slashing their $2000/month food bill? Maybe downsize their house...?? This made no sense to me, and if I were a newbie I would run screaming from this thinking it was just for outliers.
And why move...to Bend, Oregon?? It's a (wonderful) trendy up and coming community with housing prices rising as fast as those in Portland! The median home price (according to Zillow, so take it for what it's worth) is $379,900. If your one breadwinner has a work-from-home job...wouldn't you pick somewhere with a lower cost of living?
The documentary had lots of small moments with bloggers from the Fire community including Tanja Hester. She would have been the perfect person to speak to the idea that Fire isn't just about quitting your job (her book Work Optional talks in depth about Fire being about financial freedom and having unlimited choices - work if you want and don't if you don't). But nope, her 15 seconds weren't about this. MMM/Pete talked about happiness, but it sort of seemed like they steered you to the idea that being frugal was his idea of happiness.
I don't know. It seemed almost like a disservice somehow. I'd be interested in hearing the opinions of other viewers - maybe I missed the point?
Post by: Daniel on July 02, 2019, 09:21:31 AM
To respond to a criticism has been brought up a few times, the movie definitely didn't go deep into the math of FIRE, but I do feel like it had one math concept to get across and that it did a good job with that: the more you save, the earlier you won't need to work any more. It seemed like all the "mathy" parts of the movie were driving home that point, from the conversation with the Mad Fientist at the beginning to the constant updates on their savings rate. This seems inline with the way many are introduced to this community, through "The Shocking Simple Math behind Early Retirement." I thought it was a good choice, and the only thing that could have made it slightly clearer is by going directly from decisions they made (live with parents, buy the house by the road) to savings rate to years to FI.
I personally enjoyed the deeper look into the emotional side of things, it felt like reading a good journal on this very forum. It is primarily a story about a family making big changes and second a look into the FIRE movement.
I also laughed when they ended up in Bend. I'm sure living in SoCal previously they just associated Bend with retirement since many people around here move there (or at least to that part of the country) when they retire...
Post by: Zikoris on July 04, 2019, 11:33:04 AM
- "Step one, track my spending to the penny. Holy shit, I'm spending a fortune on eating out, time to start meal planning and figuring out how to grocery shop and cook properly."
- "Hey, what if I got rid of television and replaced it with other things? Holy shit, my quality of life just improved a ton, I'm discovering all these new hiking trails, meeting new friends, and getting in shape, this is awesome".
- "Wow, I made a bunch of small changes that not only didn't cause any suffering, they improved my life and happiness substantially, and also got my savings rate up over 50% almost effortlessly. Now that my finances are automated, I can just kick back and focus on enjoying life for 10 years while my money compounds, and wake up one day with enough money to never need to work again."
As far as I'm concerned, if anything about this process is hard, you're doing it wrong.
Post by: Daisy on July 06, 2019, 07:10:26 PM
Post by: fattest_foot on August 27, 2019, 04:19:02 PM
Except it was only limited screenings, essentially for people who live near a major metropolitan area.
I'm not sure if anyone has any insider information, but is this thing ever going to get a broad release? Or should I just write it off as a documentary that only reaches 10,000 or so people?
Post by: solon on August 27, 2019, 04:23:08 PM
Post by: Bloop Bloop on August 27, 2019, 04:27:15 PM
Post by: SwordGuy on August 27, 2019, 05:22:02 PM
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.
Because if you spend everything you make there's nothing left over to invest?
I know that's pretty darn obvious and self-evident -- but then again -- a whole lot of Americans can't seem to figure it out.
Post by: EngagedToFIRE on August 27, 2019, 05:29:18 PM
The South Florida showing is this Monday and is sold out!
Shoot!!! I totally missed this. There is another screening Sept 9th in Miami, too bad I'm out of town
Post by: HBFIRE on August 27, 2019, 06:22:15 PM
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.
Agreed, I actually think the income side of it is the fastest way to move the needle with a ton of opportunity.
Post by: Zikoris on August 27, 2019, 08:34:55 PM
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.
Post by: Bloop Bloop on August 27, 2019, 10:28:21 PM
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.
Post by: Zikoris on August 27, 2019, 11:27:45 PM
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.
I think you're greatly overestimating the availability of FIRE people a) exist in any one area and b) are willing to go public and talk about this stuff - I really don't think journalists have enough options to pick and choose for the perfect mix of life choices, especially if they're trying to stay relatively local. You pretty much have to read lots of different FIRE pieces to get a more rounded view. And of course, the vast majority of people's eyes glaze over reading about investments, trust funds, and tax mitigation - people like reading about actual interesting lifestyle stuff. Nobody wants to watch a person poking around at a spreadsheet.
Post by: DadJokes on August 28, 2019, 05:45:52 AM
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.
The FIRE movement isn't aimed at low income people. It's aimed at middle class spendypants who already make a decent amount of money. If you want to increase income, there are other places to look.
Even then, there are plenty of people in the community who talk about ways to increase income. Alan Donegan has been on a lot of different podcasts talking about starting your own business. Paula Pant frequently talks about investing in real estate.
Post by: Metalcat on August 28, 2019, 05:59:45 AM
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.
Post by: Metalcat on August 28, 2019, 06:05:23 AM
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".
Post by: fattest_foot on August 28, 2019, 08:23:29 AM
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".
That's pretty disappointing. And one of the things I was disappointed to hear about with the documentary. It sounded from people who saw it that they focused on a couple who just discovered the FIRE movement and were in the very early stages (first year or so?).
Seems like it would've been more worthwhile to focus on a couple who were in the final few years. You know, people who it "worked" for already.
It also bothered me because it seemed like in the trailer it was more about interviewing the "gurus" of the movement and presenting everything, but that the reality was that was a very small portion and the couple was the bulk of the movie.
Post by: bbates728 on August 28, 2019, 08:37:29 AM
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.
Post by: Metalcat on August 28, 2019, 08:50:54 AM
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.
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.
Post by: mschaus on August 28, 2019, 10:50:08 AM
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.
This is really interesting, would be great to find the article. I tried for 5 mins and couldn’t – that’s 3 of us so far, so who knows if it was taken down or something.
I read the book, which is a quick way to get their story since the movie isn’t widely available. The early parts had a lot of cringe-worthy misconceptions, which I chalked up to them learning (but I felt bad for the average person who drops the book 1/4 of the way through). Unfortunately, by the end of the book they hadn’t corrected some of those unfortunate misconceptions (such as that renting is throwing money away).
They ended up stretching their finances to buy a nicer house than they had planned in a beautiful town (Bend), which is fine and dandy. But all along the attitude wasn’t really “yeah let’s do what’s necessary to accomplish our goals”, it was more like “Are you sure? Me neither. I can’t believe I’m being deprived of a BMW”. So I wouldn’t be shocked if they completed their book and documentary projects and went back business as usual.
Post by: Metalcat on August 28, 2019, 11:00:53 AM
Post by: Bloop Bloop on August 28, 2019, 05:54:58 PM
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.
I was referring to the documentary, and to recent media such as The Guardian article (which interviewed a whole bunch of people heavily tilted towards the frugality side of the spectrum).
These forums have a good balance between earning more and spending less. If anything they might tilt towards the former. But outside articles and media heavily tilt towards the latter. It misrepresents the community to say that frugality is the only, or even the defining, feature. Because, as we know, FIRE isn't about frugality. It's about conscious and well-directed spending and earning.
Post by: HBFIRE on August 28, 2019, 06:39:02 PM
^ 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.
Post by: Metalcat on August 28, 2019, 07:07:50 PM
^ 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.
Post by: BTDretire on August 28, 2019, 07:21:06 PM
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!
Ya, and they should stop running around Fl. with their left turn signal on.
Oh, and stop putting all the condiments on the table into your purse too.
And another thing, don't come to Florida buy your microwave and toaster and bike, stay for 3 months and then return your used stuff to Walmart or Lowes.
But no problem with Canada or Canadians, I'm sure they would love to show in Canada, except for the logistical problems.
All in fun :-).
Post by: thriftyc on September 02, 2019, 03:05:38 PM
They should post the film on youtube, I'll watch it!
Post by: grantmeaname on September 02, 2019, 05:55:54 PM
Post by: G-dog on September 02, 2019, 06:38:04 PM
^ 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.
I hope someone can find the article. I searched for it and learned .... I know the guy’s family! Small world.
Post by: reeshau on September 03, 2019, 02:43:50 AM
Post by: Metalcat on September 03, 2019, 05:55:20 PM
Oops, sorry guys.
Post by: bbates728 on September 04, 2019, 11:58:00 AM
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.
Ahh that is good to hear. Thanks Malkynn for doing the sleuthing!
Post by: slappy on September 05, 2019, 09:36:20 AM
Post by: Greenback Reproduction Specialist on September 08, 2019, 09:07:51 PM
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.
Its not easy, thats for sure, it takes a big "WHY". For us it was a lot of sacrifice, and so far TOTALLY worth it.
Disclaimer:
I have not seen the movie, I'm not sure I will want to watch it.... Things like these that become a weird trendy thing of the year make me sick to watch... I would like my secret cult like group here to stay below the radar ; ).... Lol if we are not careful we might have a documentary in the future about the dark side of the secret society of MMM, members that quietly lurk in the shadows and tug on the string of power to control the masses!
On the other hand, for the sake of our country and fellow neighbors I would hope some of the frugal/saver/spend less than you make characteristics rub off on people. Its not good to have a culture that has a low savings rate.... Its a good thing Americans in general have great work ethic.
Post by: Zola. on October 25, 2019, 07:32:22 AM
They should just release it behind a paywall site or something if its money they want, whats the hold up here.
Post by: jim555 on October 25, 2019, 08:02:03 AM
Post by: HPstache on October 25, 2019, 08:08:20 AM
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"
Post by: slappy on October 25, 2019, 09:06:18 AM
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'm hoping for next month, so I can use it as christmas gifts. :)
Post by: RetiredAt63 on October 25, 2019, 09:46:34 AM
Post by: grantmeaname on November 15, 2019, 11:09:02 AM
Post by: fattest_foot on November 15, 2019, 11:59:17 AM
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.
Post by: Chris @ Saturday Financial on November 15, 2019, 12:20:33 PM
"What's up Kickstarter family?! We've missed you, but luckily time has flown by due to our insane schedule. We've been on the road since May, supporting this film at screenings all over the world.
To date, we've sold over 10,000 theater tickets and played the film in over 100 theaters. Amazing.
I am SO excited to officially inform you, the movie is ready for its digital debut. No, we didn't recently release a John Cena firefighter family comedy. But perhaps we will gross over $12 million because quality is always rewarded fairly... right?!
You can find links to iTunes and Vimeo below, and it will be appearing in the Amazon and Google Play marketplaces as soon as the internets say so. We will send you links to those as well once we have them. (Quick Side Note: iTunes is automatically aggregating a Rotten Tomatoes review from John Cena's garbage family comedy. We've asked them to fix this snafu, which may take a few days. Bastards.)
The film will be available for pre-sale now through November 18th and will be available for immediate rental and purchase on Tuesday, November 19th on both platforms. We are less sure about Amazon and Google Play, but are told they should populate by the 19th as well.
The sales we can muster over the next few weeks will directly affect these platforms’ willingness to promote the film and will influence the potential Netflix deal we've been aiming for, giving us a major shot to launch FIRE into the mainstream consciousness.
We hope this will garner attention for our collective cast and the movement as a whole, and solidify FIRE’s place in the zeitgeist. Also, to reiterate, our goal is to cover our costs with this film, and then immediately try to get as many eyeballs on this as we can, regardless of profits. We believe we have a solid strategy in place to do so.
In the spirit of FIRE itself, we have opted initially to cut out the middleman and go direct-to-consumer. And as an independent project, this will be what eventually breaks through the noise and gets us the attention of the middleman (a.k.a. Netflix). To give you context, we’ve spent $325k to make this film. We netted roughly $90 from you wonderful humans, and $20k on the theater tour after 5 months of work and toil. This digital launch is our best chance of breaking even, as we cannot guarantee a streaming deal (which would likely be around $100k for 2 years, if all goes to plan). iTunes takes a 30% cut, with Google Play and Amazon coming in around the same. Vimeo takes 10%, but the audience potential is much smaller. We also have two price points, with rental costs at $4.99 and download-to-own coming in at $9.99. We wanted to keep the movie price lower than most new films as a gesture to our fellow frugalists and frugalistas. With all the variables, it’s hard to nail down an exact number, but we figure we will need to sell roughly 50-60,000 copies of the film in order to break even.
We hope you will consider helping us promote this film. Rising tides lift all boats. Pre-order sales can help us get on Apple’s radar, heading into our release on the 19th. We have been very careful to ask for favors because we knew this would be the biggest ask we would make. So here is how you can help.
1. If you've seen the film already and enjoyed it, please consider leaving a review on Rotten Tomatoes! This will encourage others to consider a rental or purchase, and differentiate ourselves from John Cena's film... have we entered a different dimension?! https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/playing_with_fire_the_documentary
Also, if you haven't already, a review on our book would be much appreciated. https://www.amazon.com/dp/1608685802/ref=cm_sw_em_r_mt_dp_U_BADZDbXWNH9BN
2. Consider buying a copy or two to share with friends and family. We want Apple to know that this is worth promoting!
3. Promote to your social channels and let folks know this project and this movement is worth supporting!
When I found this whole world of FI, my life was completely transformed. I'm sure many of you felt the same way. I believe in this movement because of you. We took on this filmmaking challenge because want to see the world be a more mindful, less wasteful place. I believe the collective effort we’ve all put into this film can help make a dent. Let’s see how far we can take this thing.
- Scott"
Post by: DadJokes on November 15, 2019, 12:21:50 PM
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.
From my understanding, they've been been trying to sell streaming rights to Netflix for months.
Post by: HBFIRE on November 15, 2019, 01:50:15 PM
Why they didn't sell streaming rights to one of these services is just baffling to me.
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.
Post by: EndlessJourney on November 15, 2019, 02:02:07 PM
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.
Post by: Chris @ Saturday Financial on November 15, 2019, 02:07:18 PM
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.
True. We recently canceled Netflix as well, and the decision was especially easy since we have Amazon Prime. We can always resubscribe to Netflix for one month a year when they release the latest season of Stranger Things. :)
Post by: fattest_foot on November 15, 2019, 02:29:50 PM
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.
Post by: HBFIRE on November 15, 2019, 02:37:09 PM
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.
Somewhat true, there is only so much great content so they have to allow some questionable content in just have to have a big enough library. It's a careful balance of library size and quality, difficult balance. If they allowed every indy movie in, it would completely dilute the library to a very low quality standard. In any case, Netflix/Amazon don't just allow any film to be distributed, it has to prove first that it can get some traction which is what this PWF documentary was attempting to do. Whether or not you buy into it that's how it works.
Post by: HBFIRE on November 15, 2019, 02:43:50 PM
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.
Yes this is precisely why Netflix has to put so much money into content. Their quality has been dropping due to losing many licensing deals (Disney the latest big hit). Amazingly it could even be much worse if they were to just allow any film in. Very competitive space right now which is great for the consumer.
Post by: DadJokes on November 18, 2019, 07:49:59 AM
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.
I love the documentaries they air. Watching a documentary about space is a great way to go to sleep. I could definitely use more space & nature documentaries.
However, I did just watch one about gene editing, and it was pretty bad.
Post by: HPstache on November 20, 2019, 08:34:04 AM
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!!
Post by: solon on November 20, 2019, 10:05:02 AM
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!!
+1
We watched it last night, too. Sparked a good conversation.
Post by: Zikoris on November 20, 2019, 10:14:42 AM
Post by: solon on November 21, 2019, 03:30:39 PM
Post by: grantmeaname on November 21, 2019, 05:08:41 PM
Post by: RWTL on November 21, 2019, 05:29:52 PM
Post by: HBFIRE on November 22, 2019, 12:53:20 PM
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.
Post by: DadJokes on November 22, 2019, 01:01:43 PM
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.
Post by: HBFIRE on November 22, 2019, 01:03:41 PM
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. The actual stars of the film are listed as "supporting actors", while the extras are listed as stars. That's some interesting marketing finagling!
Post by: DadJokes on November 22, 2019, 01:18:04 PM
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.
I suspect that has nothing to do with the creators of the film trying to be sneaky. Literally everyone who appears in the film is listed in alphabetical order on imdb, with no special preference given to anyone, including Scott & Taylor Rieckens. I would venture a guess that Amazon is doing the same thing.
I'm sure that people who are familiar with the name "Pete Adeney" are already aware of the film, and that his inclusion isn't going to impact whether or not they watch it. For the audience they are trying to reach, I doubt very many have any idea who Pete is.
Post by: HBFIRE on November 22, 2019, 01:23:31 PM
Literally everyone who appears in the film is listed in alphabetical order
My point is the three people mentioned as the "stars "of the film aren't the stars but rather have very minor roles in the film, but they ARE recognizable names. The actual stars are put in the supporting section. That's deceptive. Let's face it, they want brand name recognition. That's why the stoned minimalist dudes were in there though they had nothing constructive to offer. MMM barely makes an appearance and is the first person listed under the "stars" of the film. The real stars of the film are buried in the supporting cast section as their names aren't recognizable.
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.
Post by: freya on November 22, 2019, 01:23:51 PM
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.
Post by: RWTL on November 22, 2019, 04:03:08 PM
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.
The guy (Scott) in the couple was the filmmaker and producer. I liked the movie. Was it perfect - No, but I think it did a good job of explaining the basics of the FIRE movement in a way that many people could identify with.
My wife, who doesn't geek out on FI like I do, watched intently and talked about it for days after.
I agree with many previous posts that a better movie for me would have featured MMM and others with the couple as a minor segment.
Post by: lostformars on November 22, 2019, 09:28:53 PM
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 was also a little disappointed. More importantly, I wouldn't feel comfortable recommending this documentary to someone not already familiar with FIRE. I knew going in that the main story was about the the guy making the documentary. I didn't have a problem with their story. I just wish they explained why they were making their decisions. The way their story is told I could see someone coming away with the impression that in order to do this FIRE thing you have to strip your expenses to zero and then build back up to your acceptable level. Or, that you have to make extreme sacrifices that you are not comfortable with and learn to live with it.
I wish they would have explained that when they discovered FIRE they (he) wanted to dive in the deep end, up root and take a year to travel around and interview the leaders of the movement(s) and figure out what works for them.
Post by: MoneyTree on November 22, 2019, 11:00:40 PM
When people pursue FIRE, they don't generally quit their job at the beginning of the journey. Nor would they uproot and move without a solid plan for where they would end up.
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?
Post by: RWTL on November 23, 2019, 02:04:05 AM
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.
Post by: Travis on November 23, 2019, 04:30:43 AM
I want to like this film and recommend it to others because it's pretty much the only one of its kind, but if I could take all the interviews with the bloggers and writers like Vicki, Jim, Pete, Kristy, Brad, and Brandon and splice them with Pete's on-stage discussion at the end (I've seen the full clip and it's awesome) I'd show that to someone instead.
Post by: freya on November 23, 2019, 08:51:13 AM
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?
I think they could have pulled that off if they wanted to. The message should have been that reducing expenses, building a cash cushion, and living within your means is actually a more pleasant and less stressful way to go about life than living paycheck to paycheck. It was fine to hear a bit about Taylor's ambivalent feelings about trading in the BMW for financial security, but not to the extent that it was portrayed. It could instead have been (for example) a discussion about, hey I have two possible jobs, one of them pays a little less but I can bike to work and we could only have one car, which will save us the $400 car payment, insurance and gas. Then show him biking to work and learning to enjoy it and figure out how to deal with weather etc.
Instead, the impression you get is that in order to achieve FI you have to suffer pain, social isolation, and deprivation for a good 10 years before you get the reward at the end of the rainbow. Not exactly an inducement for someone new to the concept.
Post by: Zikoris on November 23, 2019, 10:58:58 AM
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.
I think a lot of it would depend on how interesting the people were. We do videos or other pieces sometimes that are quite popular, likely because we're quite... colourful? Literally colourful - we cart sacks of flour and rice around in a neon pink cat stroller. I think a person could certainly make an interesting film out of following people like us, or MMM, or the millennial revolution couple, or other people who live pretty interesting, unique lives. But it would be a stretch to make it engaging if the people were more "normal".
Post by: EndlessJourney on November 23, 2019, 11:08:42 AM
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.
Post by: Bateaux on November 23, 2019, 07:04:56 PM
Post by: HBFIRE on November 23, 2019, 11:04:15 PM
People who watch TV and movies like to root for underdogs. Not those who prevail because of very good odds.
By this logic the couple chosen for this flick was a terrible choice, about as bad as you can get.
Post by: dmmms on November 24, 2019, 05:44:53 AM
Post by: RWD on November 24, 2019, 07:50:35 AM
Perhaps too many people here on MMM have forgotten their transition to FIRE?
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.
Post by: freya on November 24, 2019, 12:31:00 PM
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.
Post by: Bateaux on November 24, 2019, 02:54:39 PM
Post by: dmmms on November 24, 2019, 05:52:40 PM
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.
Post by: Travis on November 24, 2019, 07:11:20 PM
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.
Post by: EscapeVelocity2020 on November 24, 2019, 08:11:53 PM
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.
Post by: Bateaux on November 24, 2019, 08:39:13 PM
Post by: EscapeVelocity2020 on November 24, 2019, 09:00:19 PM
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!
Post by: Bateaux on November 24, 2019, 09:24:36 PM
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!
In the age of Amazon Prime, Amway must be taking a huge hit. There must be a new space for pyramid schemes and sales gimmicks. I really like a lot of the YouTube and podcasters. I don't give them money, but if they profit from my views/downloads more power to them.
Post by: Travis on November 24, 2019, 10:09:00 PM
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.
Please give it a fair shake and form your own opinion. Don't interpret my remark as "they faked it," but rather "we had this conversation last year, now let's do it again in front of the camera." I don't doubt they had real conversations about their life wishes or created brokerage accounts with Vanguard, I just don't think they had them live for the first time with the camera rolling.
Post by: fattest_foot on November 25, 2019, 09:20:15 AM
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.
Same here. Our transition wasn't really a "transition" as much as realizing that as we started making more money, where to save it. We've kept essentially the same standard of living from before we discovered FIRE, but the difference is that we've had several raises since and that money has accelerated our journey.
Post by: reeshau on December 07, 2019, 04:36:20 AM
Quote
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.
Post by: kpd905 on December 07, 2019, 09:35:15 AM
It seems like that could have maybe let them stay where their family and friends were in Coronado, instead of uprooting their lives. Not knowing the numbers though, maybe this wouldn't have gotten them quite to their 50% savings rate.
Also interesting that @arebelspy was in the movie, he is a celebrity now.
Post by: Bloop Bloop on December 07, 2019, 05:56:33 PM
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.
I think you're right - FIRE media has to make it look like FIRE is for underdogs in order to get traction. The truth of it (that FIRE relies mostly on discipline, the ability to delay gratification, and the ability to sort out what you want (and therefore are happy to spend on) and what you don't really want) would suggest that FIRE is not for average people at all - it's for intelligent and/or motivated and/or very diligent people. In 21st century terms, FIRE is a movement for the "privileged", though that doesn't necessarily include financial privilege. 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?
Post by: Travis on December 07, 2019, 06:02:01 PM
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.
Post by: C-man23 on December 08, 2019, 04:36:35 AM
Password is "FIRE"
If the link didn't work. It is https: //vimeo.com/374814086 with the space between the ":" and "/" removed
Was able to watch it this morning...thought it was very cringey. I felt like it was difficult to even get through it.
Like several others have already said, I didn't understand a lot of the decisions they made and felt they were haphazard.
I was tempted to rent it to watch, but glad it was free. Would have been bummed to pay for it.
Happy that I was able to see it to join in the discussion, but would not recommend it to my friends.
Post by: jim555 on December 08, 2019, 09:47:28 AM
Post by: mathlete on December 08, 2019, 09:47:39 AM
The film's biggest problem was that Scott and Taylor weren't relatable or sympathetic. The movie relies heavily on their narrative so they needed that to work, and it didn't. I'm sure they're smart and lovely people, but the documentary didn't portray them as super compelling. Taylor was portrayed as being very uncomfortable with having left her life behind for almost the whole movie, so I don't buy that she was just all on board and 100% happy in the last ten minutes. Of course I only saw what the documentary showed me, but that's not my fault.
The whole time, I was internally screaming, "Go back to San Diego and just ditch the luxury cars and the boat club membership ya crazies!!"
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
My usual gripes about FIRE being oversold to a wide audience;
If you've got so much money that you can't help but live in Coronado with two luxury cars and a $2,000/month food budget, have rich friends who need you to house sit for them in Hawaii, and still save nearly 3X the national average, then FIRE is the movement for you! - I'm actually pretty pleased with this. Scott and Taylor are a great example of who FIRE is good for. But them being so high income flies in the face of the "rah rah, FIRE for everyone" FINCON section of the film. Lastly, I cringed that they repeated the "MMM lives on $30K" trope. Technically true, but it only works if you've prepaid your living expenses by buying a house in cash. I'm sure I could find an arrangement to pre-pay my food expenses in perpetuity too, but it would't make much sense for me to mark my food budget as zero if I did that though.
Misc commentary;
-Showing footage of millennials that filmed maybe in 2015 with old-timey vignetting was overly saccharine.
-At one point, Scott is walking in the woods talking to what looks like an iPhone camera. Digital image stabilization and color correction was going nuts in this scene. I can't believe they left it in the movie!
-The Mad Fientist is a very handsome man.
Post by: mathlete on December 08, 2019, 09:56:04 AM
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.
I don't care that they mooched off their parents. And I'm sure the child is happy and well cared for.
But the "isn't working for them, but they won't admit it" rings true. I'm gonna go out on a limb and say that these people don't have the purest of intentions. Maybe they really did hear about FIRE on Tim Ferris. Maybe they did think that the FIRE community and lifestyle could benefit them. But I believe the choices they make in the movie are largely a performance for the camera.
If you have a $2K food budget and two luxury cars and a boat slip, the obvious place to start cutting is there. But performatively moving in with your parents allows for you to have a "dark night of the soul" which is good from a film-making perspective.
Post by: EndlessJourney on December 08, 2019, 04:45:36 PM
The best documentaries are honest, or at least successfully convey a truth that is evident to the viewer without having to spell it out. And the truth that is missing from this documentary is that FIRE is not for everyone.
The best documentaries are not afraid to change their thesis midway through filming.
Documentaries like Seeking Asian Female (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt2320029/) started out as an expose about male order brides from China. It pivoted midway when
Spoiler: show
Another good documentary is Mistaken for Strangers (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt2737310/), which started out as a biography of a music band, while following them on tour. It was filmed by the lead singer's brother, and it also pivoted
Spoiler: show
In Playing With Fire, the wife is the most compelling character. She's 3-dimensional and has very real doubts and valid concerns about the FIRE movement. Honest feelings. Misgivings that are painfully and obviously papered over in the last 10 minutes ("One Year Later") when the hurried final interview rushes to unconvincingly confirm the original thesis: "Yes, I love FIRE. It is so great. It has changed my life. I love my new life so very, very much." Closing shot of happy couple walking off hand-in-hand into the distance, credits rolling.
I don't know this couple personally. All my opinions are formed from what is shown on the screen. To me, there doesn't seem to be one honest moment in that final interview. Mainly because of the lack of any footage of the final 12 months, showing that painful growth from doubt to acceptance.
There were so many moments in the documentary that they could have chosen to pivot, to reveal a perhaps unpopular truth (at least within the FIRE community) that sometimes, for some people, the path most taken is also the one that sparks the most joy.
There are so many people that love their career and their present life's trajectory. The big house, the fancy car, the status of a well-paying job that are rewards on that fulfilling road that they also enjoy traveling with good company. Nowhere is this more evident than on Mr Money Mustache forums, where there are so many accounts of those who have trouble staying on that path of delayed gratification, of grim and bitter austerity, mortgaging their present opportunity for contentedness on the off-chance that maybe a future without mandatory work will bring even greater joy.
Maybe, it might.
But maybe, perhaps staying in The Matrix, that swallowing the Blue Pill Transactional Immediacy of "enjoying the fruits of your hard work now", is actually the correct choice for a lot of people.
The husband could have turned the movie completely around in the forest when he revealed his concerns about wanting to make his wife happy. That could have been the pivoting moment. It could have elevated a very hollow and unconvincing documentary about the FI movement into a riveting and heartwarming story about thoughtfulness and self-sacrifice, of love and dedication within a marriage. When a man places his wife's wants and needs above making a narrative fit the thesis of his documentary so they can capitalize on a fad.
Because FIRE is fad. Just like the Atkins Diet, or Cabbage Patch Dolls. 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.
But the film maker and his wife do not fit that mold. They're two people in a boat rowing in two different directions (to use a metaphor of one the FIRE gurus).
So make a documentary about that.
Because *THAT'S* more interesting and honest than a capture-the-zeitgeist, I-want-to-fit-in-too, of-the-moment throwaway program that tries too hard to force a narrative from footage that begs a completely different thesis.
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*
Post by: terran on December 08, 2019, 05:05:45 PM
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.
Interesting and well said critique. I largely agree (now that you've said it).
Just FYI, if I'm thinking of the right scene "the teacher couple" is our very own @arebelspy and his wife.
Post by: arebelspy on December 08, 2019, 05:07:58 PM
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.
Post by: slappy on December 08, 2019, 05:12:56 PM
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.
Post by: arebelspy on December 08, 2019, 05:14:48 PM
There were a number of not believable things, issues with the narrative, and glossed over (Scott's money making plan being this documentary was a big one that bothered me--Taylor supporting him for a year as he moved her around, etc.). Her sudden switch at the end was not well developed.
Having briefly met them at Camp Mustache two years ago, I think they're perfectly nice people.
But I don't think that documentary tells the best story of FIRE.
I also don't believe it was meant to.
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.
The premise is flawed from the beginning. If, of course, your goal is to introduce people to FIRE. I don't know that that was the goal though.
I'm skeptical Scott and Taylor will last a decade on the FIRE path. But I do wish the best to them.
And I'm glad they (and Travis, the director) did it. The more the FIRE word is spread, the better.
And I think this will do more to get the word out than it will turn people off, so I still view it as a net positive, even if I personally wasn't a fan and agree with the above criticisms.
Post by: HBFIRE on December 08, 2019, 05:33:33 PM
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.
Well said, this was very obvious to me as well.
Post by: ixtap on December 08, 2019, 06:10:06 PM
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.
This was my impression from their original calls for funding. Well, not about the wife, but the general impression.
Post by: jim555 on December 08, 2019, 08:26:28 PM
Post by: mathlete on December 08, 2019, 09:31:38 PM
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.
In a broader, more societal sense, it’s hard for me not to see this film as reinforcing the cult of Protestant work ethic by using the outstanding results of rich young people who buckle down and make the right choices.
Sometimes, I wish I could turn my brain off. But in totality, it’s served me very well in my 30 years, so better with the bitter I suppose.
Post by: undercover on December 09, 2019, 12:18:46 AM
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*
Interesting. I think society is just getting started with “FIRE”. I see it pop up more and more often now. In general, retirement is something that will be forced upon nearly everyone due to automation. If technology keeps progressing, eventually there will be no jobs and therefore you will be born FIRE. Sure, FIRE as it is exists now will be an antiquated way of looking at it, but we’re really just getting started.
This community is like a weird self-selecting subculture that has emerged because people started recognizing it was possible because it wasn’t even possible not that long ago. Society and technology still depends on people to spend and advance in order for it to be able to become mainstream though, so that’s why I am in total agreement that there are many people who straight up shouldn’t FIRE and won’t because they are fine and enjoy their lives of working and spending. Nothing wrong with that either, IMO. And then for a lot of people, FIRE is just another checkmark on the list of an over-achiever’s goals and then they will move onto something else. You don’t need 25x yearly expenses in the bank to feel financially secure, you can feel the same on many multiples less than that.
Post by: undercover on December 09, 2019, 12:34:50 AM
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.
I don’t think there’s anything wrong with monetizing the amount of time you spend curating valuable information. In general I haven’t seen any marketing that promotes consumerism. Credit cards are the most profitable for blogs (other than ads in general) but readers presumably know how to use them properly. Ads are already all over the internet though so if you’re not synthesizing the information being presented and/or you don’t already have ad-blocker then that’s mostly on the reader. In the case of this site, all of MMM’s affiliate links are neatly organized on their own page pretty much isolated from the blog but they’re also useful tools someone looking to save or make money might be interested in anyway.
If anything though, in the case of the film, asking a specific/set amount for it is a more “pure” transaction than maybe accepting product placement deals.
I can’t say whether the doc itself is valuable or not though because I know I have absolutely nothing to gain by watching it, but I think they are probably filling a market need that didn’t exist before. People are consuming more video than blogs these days, mostly YouTube, so I respect the fact that they at least tried to make something more “official” and well-produced in order to reach more people who aren’t really willing to read 100 blog posts even if the idea is intriguing. It’s really difficult for people here to judge it as if they’re someone who is looking at it with fresh eyes on the subject matter.
I did watch the first five minutes and I’m not sure if it was the best way to introduce the film, but it also wasn’t bad. I liked how they had MadFientist immediately talk about how “you might like what you’re doing now but you will be a different person in ten years and even if you don’t care about retiring early, you need to plan for contingencies”. It gives people a reason to think about saving even if they don’t care about why exactly they’re saving.
Post by: Travis on December 09, 2019, 05:01:08 AM
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.
I used to participate in the main Facebook group daily until I had enough of the noob posts of "how do I get rich?" from posters who clearly hadn't listened to a single podcast. There's a difference between answering the same beginner questions over and over, and beginners who completely miss the point. It's on this point I somewhat agree with and worry about the "fad" of what we're doing. ChooseFI blew up over the last year or two in readership/membership, but I wouldn't go as far to say to say they're all believers or followers. This movie has been one of their claims to fame for the last year that they won't stop talking about, but as we've discussed here it may not be a very good representation of FIRE if folks draw the wrong conclusions.
Post by: Metalcat on December 09, 2019, 05:41:03 AM
-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.
Post by: chasesfish on December 09, 2019, 05:42:18 AM
- I was thrilled to see all of the FIRE celebrities adding to the film. I think there are hours and hours of additional interview footage I *hope* they release on Youtube and make a little money.
- This ultimately reinforced the fact that personal finance is personal. Everyone must find what is right for them. Personally I would have whacked the luxury car and started side hustling instead of moving away from the community I lived in. However, that is what *I* would do. What they chose to do is their choice. The pursuit of happiness...its been the American way since 1776
Post by: slappy on December 09, 2019, 07:26:33 AM
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.
No that was some sort of house sitting gig I think. I don't remember the specifics, but it wasn't really a vacation.
Post by: slow hand slow plan on December 09, 2019, 11:10:12 AM
Post by: Metalcat on December 09, 2019, 12:19:29 PM
Not a lot of people who discover FIRE jump to quitting their jobs and moving in with their parents. I mean, I get that they did that to jumpstart their savings for buying a house, but it's practically the opposite approach of typical FIRE folks who start with cutting the low hanging fruit, not giving up an income.
Also, one partner being the driving force, while being the one to quit their job, also being the one whose parents they move in with, well, that seems a bit extreme. It certainly seems like a lot to push a spouse into all at once, especially when she's not even okay with the idea of driving an economy car.
It's just all so much at once, and none of it representative of typical FIRE community behaviour, which is why it seems so haphazard.
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.
Knowing a lot of hard working spouses of creative types, her distress and frustration make a lot more sense in that context than just in terms of making money-saving decisions.
It also adds up more that she's happy in the end, because the spouses of creatives are often a million times happier when the project is done and the craziness is settled.
I mean, it's obvious that a huge part of the whole thing is that they're making a movie, which is an enormous undertaking and a significant stress and risk, and yet, that part seems to be kind of glossed over/completely obfuscated so far.
All in all, it makes the whole thing come off as kind of strange unless you mentally add the elephant-in-the-room context of "he quit his job to make a movie" every time they talk about how it's going.
At least that's my interpretation so far. I'll see how I feel at the end.
Post by: jim555 on December 09, 2019, 12:23:54 PM
Post by: ixtap on December 09, 2019, 12:34:31 PM
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.
Ha, ha! Now I am almost considering watching...
Post by: Zikoris on December 09, 2019, 12:44:21 PM
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.
Post by: mathlete on December 09, 2019, 12:50:44 PM
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.
Post by: mathlete on December 09, 2019, 12:52:40 PM
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.
Post by: ixtap on December 09, 2019, 12:56:03 PM
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.
+1
Post by: Bloop Bloop on December 09, 2019, 01:03:09 PM
Post by: ixtap on December 09, 2019, 01:07:37 PM
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 our problem. Our only struggle on the journey has been convincing family that we are fine and will continue to be fine.
Post by: John Galt incarnate! on December 09, 2019, 01:12:15 PM
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?
Months ago, Ric Edelman used the word "penury" when speaking of FIRE on his Saturday show.
Edelman peddles advice about "how to manage your money for every stage of life."
Post by: des999 on December 09, 2019, 01:26:07 PM
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
this was my exact thought after I paid money to watch this.
Post by: mathlete on December 09, 2019, 01:30:50 PM
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'm sure they're perfectly smart. But I don't think the documentary did them any favors on this front :)
Edited to add: I think I misunderstood.
Post by: Metalcat on December 09, 2019, 01:40:56 PM
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.
Post by: BTDretire on December 09, 2019, 01:42:29 PM
it just didn't show a lot of the daily how to, that we get from the group here. I was interested in Taylor's true angst over the change she made. In the end, the journey is years, so we never got to see the light at the end of the tunnel, no fruition, no Rocky moment, even though we saw many already retired.
Truth is, when we hit FI, it was not much of a Rocky moment, one day your $1,000 from FI and the next day you are FI, but the $1,000 really didn't make any difference, it was the journey.
To me, anything that can motivate people to save is good. Even if they only save $100,000 and then quit saving, having $100,000 in the bank to most people would be life changing.
Another funny thing, 1/2 the population would see you with $1,000,000 and say you are rich, and having earned and saved $1,000,000, you think huh, I can spend $40,000 a year, you're spending $60,000, and you think I'm rich.
I realize at $40,000 you don't need to work, so you do have that. :-)
Post by: slappy on December 09, 2019, 02:14:57 PM
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 thought I've heard him say that this is pretty much exactly what happened. He started the movie pretty quickly after he heard about the FIRE movement, from what I understand.
Post by: honeybbq on December 09, 2019, 03:41:13 PM
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.
These are basically my fiscal tenets for my life, not necessarily retiring earlier. It's nice to see them all articulated in one place.
I watched it (for free) today. I enjoyed the wife's experiences. As a mom with a career- I get that pang and desire to be with your babies but also wanting to have a career and do good things. It's challenging. I did get the impression (correctly or not so much) that the husband was just dragging his family around and it seemed random and contrived. And their little breakdown over bad weather in Kauai was particularly annoying. They lost nothing other than having to stay home and play board games for awhile, and yet they were "trapped." Ugh.
I did enjoy where they bought a 2005 (although I thought it was a 2006) Honda CRV, because that's what I drive. :D
Post by: sui generis on December 09, 2019, 06:08:15 PM
That said, really glad I didn't pay for it. And I'm not sure I would recommend my non-FIRE friends and family pay for it, notwithstanding how hopeful I might be about the slippery slope it could create for them as I describe above.
Post by: undercover on December 09, 2019, 06:42:25 PM
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.
High income anyway...although intelligence does play a role to get to the high income.
If your income is high enough, and you’re not an extravagant spender, it really doesn’t matter what you do, you’re gonna (more than likely) arrive at FI(RE) automatically.
So is FIRE really only for high income people? To an extent, I’d say yes, but lower income peeps would definitely benefit way more from the principles. That’s a tough sell though when it requires far more sacrifice. If you were already working hard and sacrificing, you’d have a high income most likely. That’s why I think FIRE is a pretty self-selecting group. People already looking to do better with their money end up finding resources like this, not the other way around. So, to that end, the “documentary” (I agree it’s not really) is probably not going to influence anyone’s mind that wasn’t already curious. You really need to make the money first IMO before you worry about what to do with it.
Post by: Telecaster on December 09, 2019, 09:31:01 PM
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.
Ha!
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) but documentary story telling can be interesting too. The basic math behind FIRE is dry as dust. But the philosophy is interesting and not common in today's society. That's the part they should have drilled down on. They touched a little bit on it in the film, like the Mad Fientist saying giving up your BMW will give you five years of your life and MMM saying you have no choice but to do good. So who are these people are able to check out of the rat race at age 30? What makes them tick? That's the real story here. I thought @arebelspy 's story would have been much more interesting than Taylor lamenting the loss of her BMW. I mean, the choice is you can spend all day with your kids for the rest of your life, or you can have a BMW. Which is the richer life? That's worth a deep dive, IMO. I thought the film makers really ducted the interesting parts, and instead went for the "tension."
Post by: arebelspy on December 09, 2019, 09:39:04 PM
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.
Well said.
And that's one of the main (ignorant) criticisms of FIRE.
"I don't want to live miserably poor now so I can live miserable and poor forever!"
...totally missing the point.
But yes, you should not "deprive" yourself on your FIRE journey. Build a sustainable life you're happy with.
Post by: fattest_foot on December 09, 2019, 09:40:41 PM
Overall, I thought the message was decent. And I'll also throw in my support that @arebelspy 's portion was a highlight, mostly because it's probably the only time where people who aren't making astronomical incomes give a testimonial (it also helps that I've followed his story from pre-retirement).
I wish they'd have spent a little more time with some of the "guru's" like JL Collins and MMM, but overall I think it's probably "enough" to get people interested.
Post by: arebelspy on December 09, 2019, 09:44:38 PM
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)
Yep.
This is very true:
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.
A movie about the typically FIREee who saves for a decade and quits makes for an interesting cocktail story, if it's brand new to you, but a 2 hour movie? They need the tension.
Unfortunately it does make pursing FIRE look miserable.
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/).
Post by: MonkeyJenga on December 09, 2019, 11:07:41 PM
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.
I've got a dramatic story too. Thankfully, nobody's been filming that drama, so I have plausible deniability.
Post by: EscapeVelocity2020 on December 09, 2019, 11:20:35 PM
Probably not Hollywood material. Sure, there was a dotcom bubble in there which was a heady up and down to the networth, and I had an overseas assignment to the Philippines which was cool. I think I'll always have a soft spot in my heart for Filipinos - they are really great people that are treated really poorly many places. But GF and I got hitched, continued to work hard and stash until kids, then she could be a SAHP with ER already locked in for me. We would be lean-FI, but I was willing to work and switched jobs and, although this is where the movie would fade out with us being successful FIRE, that is actually when the story got much more interesting...
So yeah, most of the 'work' toward FI is not glamorous, but the stuff at ER and the FI beyond is way more interesting. Not sure how you turn that in to an 'aspirational FIRE' movie.
Post by: DadJokes on December 10, 2019, 05:15:25 AM
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/).
They will have to pry my spreadsheets from my cold, dead hands.
Post by: Metalcat on December 10, 2019, 05:24:45 AM
-It was better than I expected based on the responses here. My expectations were extremely low, so that helped.
-I think more time should have been spent on what their lifestyle looks like now that they're settled. Their struggles were largely due to massive life upheaval, especially for Taylor.
She had so much angst about all the sacrifices and it feeling meaningless when she still wasn't getting to spend more time with her daughter, but now she's still working full time, I presume, so it's not like she's happy now because she reached FI, she's happy because she's living a good life on the way to FI.
The misery wasn't so much from the reduced spending, but from the total chaos they voluntarily threw themselves into.
-It would have been nice to compare their current lifestyle to their past lifestyle and express how it's really the same quality of life, if not better, at a much lower cost, and they really didn't lose anything by cutting back.
-As critical I have been of them telling a really unorthodox version of pursuing FIRE, I do think there's A LOT of value in seeing a case where people are willing to just pick up and move from an HCOL location. Feeling geographically pinned down is a very real thing, so the more I watched, the more I actually liked that that kind of move was made.
-I STILL think they should have openly talked about making the movie itself and why they chose to lose an entire income.
Them not being able to afford their "dream home" is a lot more profound a relationship issue when one partner has given up an income to work on a passion project that may never make any money. This would have fit in really well in his reflection in the woods scene.
I just can't wrap my head around this not being a core part of their conversations along the way and a lot of the emotional weight on Taylor, which I think does her a real disservice, IMO.
In my marriage, I'm the one who has given up 80-90% of my income and I may choose to give it all up and pursue a passion project instead that may or may not end up profitable. We're not FIREd yet, so I can very much relate. The key difference is my spouse has been pushing me to do this for years.
Whenever we talk about our future it's always about two realities, one where I don't make much money and one where I make substantial amounts. So the phrase "depending on what happens with my income" precedes almost every thought about our future, and the two outcomes are wildly different.
How this part is just completely left out just baffles me. Like, how do they not even address it? I get keeping the filmmaking out of a film, but in this case it leaves a giant, awkward, screaming void in the discourse.
Dropping an entire income is a HUGE deal for FIRE folks. DH only convinced me to do it because he's specifically NOT aiming for early retirement and wants his full pension.
If he was dying to retire, there's no way I would voluntarily take on projects that might not break even.
-Beyond driving a very nice Honda SUV, buying a nice house is a lower cost area backing onto a noisy street, and making breakfast burritos, there was actually very very little about cutting expenses.
-To that point, there were also virtually no numbers beyond previous food spending, savings percentages and costs of houses. I respect this choice to not distract with numbers, but I really wanted to understand if he had income contributing to that final savings rate number.
-Wow, Pete is way more telegenic than he is photogenic, but the content shown for him were odd choices, imo, with a whole focus on the "cult" thing, but little explanation.
-Actually, it was a weird stylistic choice to not give any context to most of the "experts" other than their retirement ages. I don't read any of those blogs, so I only know or know of these people vaguely, so even I was like "wait, what's this person's story?", paused, and googled them to refresh my memory as to what their particular brand is.
-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
-@arebelspy is definitely a highlight, not just because of being a really relatable story, but because he emanates that calm confidence of someone living really autonomously. It's that intangible and difficult to describe thing that people working towards FIRE are hoping for.
-Overall, better than I expected.
It's more a story of dealing with total life upheaval, but there's some decent personal reflection about spending in the process. I think Gen Pop would actually relate to a lot of it pretty well.
I think FIRE community people will mostly be left confused because he purposefully avoids talking about making the film or what his ambitions are, which gives us virtually no context to frame his decisions.
I think he made his wife a sacrificial lamb for the sake of drama...I'm curious how intentional that was.
Post by: Travis on December 10, 2019, 05:58:11 AM
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.
Post by: Metalcat on December 10, 2019, 06:02:21 AM
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.
Post by: Travis on December 10, 2019, 06:07:16 AM
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)
Post by: Metalcat on December 10, 2019, 06:19:58 AM
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)
Absolutely brilliant.
Post by: neo von retorch on December 10, 2019, 06:49:41 AM
As others have said, her story was the highlight, and she was relatable. My spouse turned and asked what our savings rate was when it came up initially (JD Roth) and she was nodding along to a lot of the commentary on what it feels like to break out of the cattle lanes of mainstream life and judgement and start making your own choices.
Post by: Davnasty on December 10, 2019, 07:18:31 AM
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?
Post by: neo von retorch on December 10, 2019, 07:25:32 AM
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!
Post by: fattest_foot on December 10, 2019, 07:31:49 AM
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!
I mean, my major criticism (and several people have discussed it already) is just that they went about it in such a crazy, anti-FIRE movement way. Instead of cutting down to one car (or one luxury car and one beater), or downsizing their house, or cutting their $3000 a month food budget, they...decided to quit one of their jobs and move all over the country?
I think one (maybe several?) of the experts they interviewed even said, "This isn't about depriving yourself." But that's the route they went.
That's the part that annoys me. We were able to laugh at the absurdity of it, but it really gives a false narrative about what the whole thing is about. It's the same reason clickbait articles about FIRE piss me off. They make it sound like you have to be a miser to pursue FI.
Post by: arebelspy on December 10, 2019, 07:55:51 AM
I don't remember what I said, but I'm glad I didn't put my foot too far in my mouth. :)
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.
Post by: mathlete on December 10, 2019, 08:46:31 AM
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 can dig it!
Post by: mathlete on December 10, 2019, 09:01:05 AM
Post by: arebelspy on December 10, 2019, 09:19:04 AM
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.
Post by: Metalcat on December 10, 2019, 09:35:33 AM
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.
Post by: mathlete on December 10, 2019, 09:43:21 AM
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.
ROFL! I almost put in a caveat that YOU GUYS might be interested. Just not the broad, documentary viewing audience.
Post by: DadJokes on December 10, 2019, 09:49:27 AM
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 would absolutely watch a series that followed couples who were living the "unusual" FI lifestyle. There are many flavors of FI living, and I think there is a lot to explore there. It can cover people who are already FIRE'd, those late in the process, and those who are new to the concept and starting out.
I think non-FI people would be interested as well, because it can present a different side of FIRE than what they hear from the mainstream media. Instead of seeing it as deprivation, they can see that people living a FIRE lifestyle find happiness and fulfillment in many different ways.
Post by: FIFoFum on December 10, 2019, 10:59:08 AM
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!
Post by: mathlete on December 10, 2019, 12:33:32 PM
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 shudder to think of what would happen in this world. If word got out about churning via a popular documentary, I think we'd be looking at a 3/24 rule sooner of later.
Post by: Bloop Bloop on December 10, 2019, 12:45:40 PM
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.
Then there are some hacks that I wouldn't feel comfortable sharing to a large audience. There's nothing illegal or unethical about them but some financial tips are not for everyone, and are heavily jurisdiction dependent. E.g. how to maximise deductibility of vehicles. How to get banks to give you a lower rate.
I agree that it would be interesting to focus on what people do after they achieve financial independence/early retirement.
Post by: mathlete on December 10, 2019, 12:48:52 PM
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.
Agreed. This is what I had in mind when I said that few would be interested.
The typical FIRE story is a high income household living like a middle income household. Scott and Taylor could have hit FI pretty quickly just by living like middle 50% Americans. That wouldn't have been compelling though.
Post by: neo von retorch on December 10, 2019, 12:57:15 PM
- 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.
Post by: Travis on December 10, 2019, 03:51:43 PM
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.
Back when Pete was cranking out articles monthly, I was absorbing so many lessons of "holy crap, that's possible?" He carried on that tradition in his Youtube channel earlier this year with a few episodes. That kick in the pants years ago is what really got me started by breaking down the mental/financial barriers of how this all can work. The number of podcasts and Youtube channels out there show these lessons can be conveyed in a TV-like medium. I loved that the movie started out with Brandon just showing them the few changes that dramatically changed their retirement dates with a sprinkle of Vicki Robbins "your car costs this much of your working life." I was hoping for a few more "numbers" lessons like how much they saved on eating out by meal-prepping or the total lifetime cost difference between her vehicle choices.
Post by: Bateaux on December 11, 2019, 11:23:40 AM
Post by: calimom on December 11, 2019, 06:36:06 PM
The scenes, though likely scripted, part in Iowa where he's cutting wood with his dad seemed authentic. Like, how did he ever get so far from his humble roots that he was mugging for selfies in San Diego in front of his new (leased) Jeep? And OK, we get a used Honda is not as sexy as (leased) BMW. She seemed to be slowly accepting that fact, despite the fact people in Coronado might think less of her by not having a (leased) European car. I wasn't particularly fussed about them living with family to save for a house or having some free childcare. Bend, Oregon is not a terrible place to end up.
The savings rate/years to retirement calculator that popped up periodically was interesting and show the average viewer the undeniable math. I liked the interviews and the FI conference, and Vicki Robin seems like such a smart and accessible person. Great to see MMM, JD Roth, Mad Fientist, et al. And @arebelspy , you and your wife appeared lovely and friendly in the part you were in. Very likely helpful to those viewing thinking enormous salaries are the only way to FIRE. Yes, accumulating real estate is another way to create wealth. Good on you.
Post by: BTDretire on December 12, 2019, 10:24:23 AM
Thanks everyone for the kind words about my small appearance.
Have you got you IMDb page up yet, or signed up with SAG? :-)
Post by: nara on December 16, 2019, 03:32:56 PM
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.
Post by: svosavvy on December 17, 2019, 07:13:42 AM
Post by: slappy on December 17, 2019, 10:23:51 AM
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.
Post by: RWTL on December 17, 2019, 05:15:59 PM
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.
That's really depressing.
Post by: Telecaster on December 17, 2019, 06:12:06 PM
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.
Post by: Metalcat on December 18, 2019, 05:56:12 AM
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.
I've been thinking about this a bit, and it all depends on who the material is being viewed by.
I think people who already don't care about the prestige of their vehicle and don't see the value of living in ultra HCOL areas for no tangible benefits other than to feel privileged to live there, will find MMM type content on their own.
I keep thinking about all of the people who would really relate to Taylor and her process of dealing with the angst of losing the prestige of the luxury car as an outward symbol of her career success, likewise her angst about finding her "dream home" and accepting that it's not worth the cost trade off.
The more I've thought about it, the more I like that it shows the struggle of someone who isn't overly compatible with these values going through the growing pains of coming around.
It's why I wish there was more content covering her actually transitioning and not just suddenly being 100% on board.
It's valid to glibly indicate that a clown car is a huge waste of money, but it's also valid to explore that the transition away from putting value on the prestige of luxury cars can actually be very uncomfortable.
I especially appreciated seeing them struggle with not getting as excited by seeing money in the bank. That's the issue that most people struggle with, spending money makes them feel richer than having it.
They obviously made the movie for people like them, and they were absolutely rampant status-based consumers, renting in a VHCOL area, leasing luxury vehicles, spending gobs on luxury groceries and dining, etc.
I think if the film is meant to appeal to people like that, then there's a real benefit in being honest about the angst of letting go of that status-based thinking.
The more I think about it, the more I think of the many many spendy people I know who would really relate to Taylor. The people who get uncomfortable even contemplating questioning their motivations behind their spending decisions because they don't want to admit to themselves that it's all about status.
Post by: slappy on December 18, 2019, 05:56:57 AM
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.
I agree that it's the wrong way to think about it, but I also think that's what people think of FIRE. Every article I've seen focuses on the deprivation aspect. They don't say we buy things based on what we value. They just say we don't go out to eat, don't buy big houses, drive "crappy" cars, etc. So from that point, I think people need to see her journey. They need to see that she didn't want to give up the car, but that everything turned out great because the car isn't that important. In my experience, it's far too easy to dismiss FIRE because of that. Even my own husband once said "some people don't want to drive a piece of crap car." Says the guy who is driving a 2016 Honda Pilot and I drive a 2011 Outback. Not exactly luxury, but not pieces of crap either. But that's the perception of FIRE followers, in my experience.
Post by: mspym on December 18, 2019, 12:28:23 PM
Post by: thesis on December 18, 2019, 12:44:36 PM
At the same time, yeah, I was consistently confused about what the husband was doing. It was almost annoying except that it always steered the discussion away from that, kept you entertained. But I think even people without the money for BMWs can relate to not wanting to give up stuff, just maybe some of that could have been explored.
It would have been great to see some interviews of non-blogger FI folks and how FI has affected their lives. Really, it was more an introduction to the popular personalities in the FI bloggo-sphere. Meh.
Post by: Bloop Bloop on December 19, 2019, 02:46:56 AM
FIRE isn't just about sacrifice! It can be just as "luxurious" as a clown car. Just requires a change of thinking.
Post by: Metalcat on December 19, 2019, 04:27:27 AM
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.
Yes, but if I consider all of the people I know who are like this couple, I think a lot of them would experience a fair amount of angst reprogramming that thinking, especially at the beginning when despite saving a large percentage of income, the overall amount isn't particularly impressive yet.
Post by: slappy on December 19, 2019, 07:55:59 AM
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 change of thinking is the hardest part.
Post by: TVRodriguez on December 19, 2019, 07:49:50 PM
-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?
Post by: sui generis on December 19, 2019, 09:51:13 PM
-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
Post by: arebelspy on December 19, 2019, 10:23:10 PM
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."
Reminds me of the monk and the minister.
https://jlcollinsnh.com/2011/06/02/the-monk-and-the-minister/
Your response should be "you know if you didn't have all that stuff, you wouldn't have to go to work." :D
Post by: calimom on December 19, 2019, 10:35:48 PM
-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
He has a face for broadcast (or Youtube) AND a very nice voice.
Post by: arebelspy on December 20, 2019, 12:57:58 PM
But then everyone who has FIREd is attractive ;-).
The camera adds ten thousand dollars.
Post by: robartsd on December 20, 2019, 03:06:38 PM
But then everyone who has FIREd is attractive ;-).At least the ones who choose to go on camera!
I'm glad I read this thread. Doesn't sound like it would be worth renting this video to me. It might have been worth it if it were more like:
Act one: Discover FIRE! Scott and Taylor discover this idea of FIRE and cut back on their lifestyle spending (opportunities like those people have pointed out here). They have mixed feelings about the lack of status but over time they realize that it is paying off. They realize that none of their associates can even comprehend what they are doing leading to ...
Act two: Playing with FIRE! Scott has the idea of taking a deep dive into FIRE and make a documentary about it. They take the radical step of uprooting their life and start to go to the extreme in terms of depriving themselves to save as much money as they can. As they continue down this path, the stress makes them wonder if they made a mistake when they uprooted their life, but you can't just undo uprooting your entire life, so they keep moving forward. Fortunately at some point during the period of deprivation they get a break from it when friends in Hawaii invite them to house sit.
Act three: The Road to FIRE! Their period of extreme deprivation ends as they build their new life in Bend. They realize that they are now happier now than they ever were in SoCal and will be able to FIRE 10 years earlier than if they had just stayed the course at the end of act one.
Post by: freya on December 22, 2019, 06:25:47 PM
I would have definitely liked to see a starting-out phase with a Your Money or Your Life style review of where their money was going, and how they really felt about the things they were spending money on. Then show their reactions after changing their spending habits AND some idea of the amount they were suddenly able to save each month as a result. Then they could talk about taking the next step and moving to a LCOL area.
Then the "atomic option" of going nomadic for a year on their way to Bend might have seemed a bit less ridiculous.
Post by: Daisy on January 01, 2020, 10:57:47 PM
-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
Ha ha! I thought the same thing about MadFIentist's looks. And he looked polished and professional as well. So for those being introduced to FIRE for the first time with this documentary, it may help to have the face of "why are you driving such an expensive car" not look geeky. He looked like a normal guy everyone would like to be like.
Yes, I did assume MadFIentist would look...how should I say...more geeky than he actually does. I'm not sure what that says about me, but I accept the criticisms that may come my way.
#JoiningTheMadFIentistAdmirersClub
Post by: Daisy on January 01, 2020, 11:02:57 PM
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!
Well I live in Miami which is supposedly very status focused, but I have found when I tell people (especially people that know me from my past) that I am early retired, they all seem very interested in finding out more. I guess my early retirement stories include a lot of fun outdoor activities and travel, so it sounds like a life they want to lead.
Some people tell me to write a book or a blog. They think what I am preaching is new. I lead them to others' blogs which explain it all, but sadly I don't think they ever take that extra step to learn more.
Post by: slappy on January 02, 2020, 06:54:26 AM
Also, someone mentioned above about how they went over their housing budget. The book clarifies that they didn't buy the "dream house". They ended up with something only slightly over budget $400k vs $420k.
Post by: mtnrider on February 22, 2020, 07:59:57 AM
It's not a how-to FIRE documentary. I saw it as a foray into the emotions and relationship issues of FIRE. This is where films shine, and I appreciated that. (Despite being somewhere around 80% FIREd, I identified with some of those emotions and relationship issues!)
Post by: Eco_eco on February 28, 2020, 11:57:16 PM
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.
Post by: EngagedToFIRE on March 04, 2020, 08:04:01 AM
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.
I thought the film addressed this at the end. When the wife was happy with the decision. I got the same feeling during most of the film, and I thought that made it feel authentic, it's NOT easy on everyone. But then at the end, she seemed pretty darn happy with the whole thing.
Post by: Chris@TTL on June 20, 2020, 12:43:27 PM
My other half felt the same way:
Quote
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.
She also commented on the rash of changes they were making all at once - upending their lives for FIRE. She wrote a whole review on playing with fire (https://www.tictoclife.com/playing-with-fire-review/).
It turns out to be an interesting film in a sort of "reality TV" way, I think.
I don't know if there's a better way to show the topic on film... a traditional documentary looking at the numbers and process doesn't seem like it would be quite as engaging. If the goal was to capture a larger audience, maybe the reality style was the better choice. Thoughts?