Letterboxd users have spent years reviewing films, building watchlists and explaining why a two-hour French drama changed their lives. And it seems that the time has arrived when some of them would like to buy the platform itself.
A campaign called Letterboxd4All wants users and investors to pool their money and make a bid for the film platform. Intrinsic Entertainment Collaborative, the public benefit company behind the campaign, hopes to turn Letterboxd into a community-owned business instead of allowing another large corporation to take control.
Users can invest a minimum of US$100 through WeFunder, while smaller contributions are being accepted through GoFundMe. The campaign says GoFundMe donations will be refunded if Intrinsic does not form part of the winning bid. Now I realise that collecting enough money to buy a platform reportedly worth more than US$300 million is slightly more complicated than splitting the bill after a movie. But the campaign raises a very interesting question.
If a community created much of a platform’s value, should that community not have some control over what happens to it?
Letterboxd Is More Than a Film Database
On paper, Letterboxd is a place where people record the films they watch, leave ratings and create lists. But that description underestimates what the platform has evolved into. It is a film diary, a recommendation service and occasionally a competition to see who can write the funniest one-line review before the credits finish. People use Letterboxd for many reasons. Amongst which are to discover forgotten films, follow critics, argue about ratings and keep a public record of their changing tastes. Some users write thoughtful essays. And others give a film half a star and leave behind one sentence that tells you everything you need to know. I believe both approaches have value.
And this is where the proposed sale becomes complicated. Letterboxd’s majority owner, Canadian holding company Tiny, is reportedly considering offers for its stake. Possible buyers have included Sony, A24, The New York Times, Netflix, Paramount and private equity firms. According to TheWrap the platform may sell for more than US$300 million. That is quite an increase from 2023, when Tiny bought a 60% stake in a deal that valued Letterboxd at between US$50 million and US$60 million. So what changed? Well, millions of people kept using it.
The Users Are Part of What Is Being Sold
Letterboxd reportedly had more than 29 million members by May 2026. Those members did not just create accounts. They logged films, wrote reviews, made lists and helped turn the platform into one of the most influential film communities online. A movie long forgotten can find a second life because enough people begin recommending it. A film that initially flopped can suddenly return to the conversation. Independent filmmakers can see audiences discussing their work without a massive advertising campaign behind it. So Letterboxd did not become valuable only because somebody built an app.
Its value soared because people filled that app with years of enthusiasm, criticism and jokes about films their families had never heard of. And yes, this certainly does not mean every user deserves a cheque when the company sells. That is not how ownership works, even if many of us might like a small payment for every review we have written. But it does explain why some users feel uneasy about a major company buying the platform and turning their participation into another source of data, advertising or subscriptions. Because we have seen how this story can end. A platform develops a loyal community. A company buys it, promises nothing important will change and then begins making changes almost immediately. Features disappear, advertisements multiply and something that once felt useful becomes increasingly determined to show you things you never asked for.
Would Community Ownership Actually Work?
Letterboxd4All argues that community ownership could keep the platform independent, protect user data and support independent filmmakers. Quite an appealing idea. Film fans own part of the platform, the platform remains focused on films and nobody wakes up one morning to discover that their watchlist has become an advertisement for one studio’s release schedule. But there are practical questions.
Raising enough money to compete with Sony, A24 or The New York Times will not be easy. Intrinsic says it already has support from institutional investors capable of making large contributions, but it would still need to assemble a serious bid. Community ownership also does not magically remove business problems. Letterboxd needs staff, technology, moderation and revenue. Not to mention that somebody still has to decide which features remain free, how advertising works and what happens when the community disagrees. And we know that when it comes to people they can disagree about almost anything. Ask them to choose the best Batman film and see how quickly community governance becomes a contact sport. But that does not mean that a difficult idea is a bad one.
The Campaign Is Really About Trust
A24 may appear like a natural owner because it has built a strong reputation among film fans. Sony understands movies, while The New York Times already operates subscription products and games. Any of them could invest in Letterboxd without destroying what people enjoy about it. But users do not know what a new owner would eventually want.
And the questions that could follow are: Would reviews remain independent? Is it possible for films from a parent studio to receive better placement? Would more features move behind a subscription? And what would happen to user data after the deal? I am aware that these concerns may never become real. But the fact that these concerns have been raised tells us how little trust remains between online communities and the companies that purchase them.
Letterboxd4All may not win the bidding process. Competing with corporations offering hundreds of millions of dollars is not exactly an easy opening weekend. But the campaign makes an important point. Letterboxd’s value does not only sit in its code, its brand or the number of registered accounts. It sits in the people who return after every film to record what they watched and tell somebody else whether it was worth their time.
The users helped build the community.
Now they would like the chance to stop somebody else from changing the ending.
