If people care more that a movie gets made, then they may well be willing to pay more in order to see that it does. Maybe you think that's foolish. I think that that's a simple difference in taste. I'm not willing to pay even once to see any number of movies, but I can't say I think that the people who are are obviously all simpletons or chumps. Maybe they just like different kinds of movies from the kind that I like.

Hey, you know when you use "retarded" as an insult, when what you mean to convey is "foolish" or "dense," that kind of sucks of you. There are plenty of people who are actually mentally retarded and they don't deserve to be made the punchline for your nasty Internet insults.

Anyway, if you think the only kind of reward worth risking some money for is a financial one, then maybe you could give an argument for why people should be so narrow in their risk-taking or in the kind of rewards they value. Certainly "then your life sucks" is not that argument.

". . . Normally, you wouldn't invest in something and expect nothing in return. . . ."

This is pure question-begging. kgelner's point is that being able to watch a film that you want to watch IS "getting something in return." Specifically, what you get in return is the chance at enjoying a movie. Maybe you think that's not something rewarding; but people who pay for movie tickets already evidently disagree with you. Maybe you think it's not the kind of "something in return" that counts when fronting money a long time in advance; or maybe you think it's not the kind of "something in return" that ought to count when doing that. But then you'd have to give some argument for why that's the case; not just ignore your conversation partner's explicit statement to the contrary.