Anything Goes : Hollywood is losing work due to film incentives in other states. by Wendy Keeling

And has been for years. Other States want production - Los Angeles doesn't. California doesn't. Even when CA had a "Hollywood Insider" as Governor the State and Cities actively worked to keep production away. I hope Mr. Garcetti can make a difference and offer incentives to keep some production local.

I am supposed to shoot a role in LA this Oct. It will be my first shoot in the area. I have been working in the South and Midwest almost exclusively. I am grateful for the work film incentives and Indie film have provided to me both in front and behind the camera. Many opportunities have come to me here that may not have happened had I made the move to LA right away. So many of my LA friends have mostly extra roles and have not had any real opportunities to do a toothy role. It seems that the chance to stretch your wings is greater outside of an over saturated market. However, I am excited to finally get to shoot out there and hope to come out again soon. I wish you much work in the region and hope our paths cross sometime.

I'm banking on this as I'm in Atlanta with no desire to move to LA. Every time I turn around there's a new major film filming here. Now I just need to build up my recent experience and network. Thanks for posting!

You are welcome! Atlanta has a great film industry right now!

There is room for all of us. Atlanta is doing a great job bringing in "Hollywood" productions. Los Angeles is doing everything they can to keep production out. Like Marcus, I hope the new mayor will allow some production to return to Hollywood.

We are based out of Atlanta and while the incentives are nice, L.A . is a much better city overall IMO...

Even out here in Western Massachusetts Hollywood movies are being filmed (Labor Day & The Judge in Shelburne Falls) and Bollywood movies are being worked on (VFX Supervisor for Ra.One lives in and works out of Williamstown). People are discovering that we have beautiful scenery and lots of talent.

It's not just tax incentives. Part of the entrenched Hollywood royalty cannot see the change in media consumption habits. A lot of folks are fighting the wrong problem.

It also seems to be an influx of more work here in the Pacific Northwest. It's tough out here for an actor, but also hoping for more studios to film out here so I don't have to make that dreaded move to LA.

Despite the change in media consumption habits (which is distribution) the fact is product needs to be produced. And other states and countries are offering reason for the "Hollywood royalty" to leave CA. Those of you outside of CA are benefitting - which I am happy about. It's great to share the work. I think it's better for crews than for actors; at least for the "toothy" roles. Those parts are still being cast in L.A. I'm also glad that fewer people who think of L.A. as something dreaded and/or have no desire to move here are staying away. I'm a NY-LA transplant and I dislike all the "hate" coming from actors forced to be here. It's great that those of you who don't want to be in L.A. are not forced to move here to get work. So it's an issue with many sides.

The fact that LA is not able to keep filming there is great for everyone everywhere else OTHER than LA. But is also disconcerting to know that there isn't as much in LA as there used to be especially with so many individuals relocating there to look for said work. We (Washington) just wrapped up a feature film here and I believe have another one beginning to shoot shortly as well, so I welcome this 'state of emergency'.

State Incentives stole jobs from Los Angeles and brought them to your state. Your taxes have helped lower wages to all film workers especially, the carpenters and painters and truck drivers. Your taxes are used to help big corporations like Sony and GE and NewsCorp and Disney. No new products or greater revenue have been created. Taxpayers are being conned.

LA makes everything super expensive, and wonders why people go where it's cheaper.

David Japka, I believe you are under the false assumption that only non union workers work on films outside of LA. We have talented union actors and crew here in Tn and other states working on projects as well as non union. We happen to be a non union state with small film incentives which has brought projects such as Nashville to film here. We work at union rates on union projects and varied rates on others giving newcomers opportunities to work, learn, and build their resume. The tax incentives prove themselves in providing direct income to workers in the state and millions of dollars spent on hotels, food, rental equipment, and general expenses. Other state such as Georgia and Louisiana have much larger incentives so their work force, both union and not, work on a regular basis. The local businesses make money feeding, housing, and providing equipment. Many of us in other states work FULL TIME in film and television. Including myself. I hope you are able to come out an work with us someday!

Wendy, I've worked in Nashville and loved my time there. I simply loved the down home flavor everyone had. But I do wonder if the boot factory is still in Dixon or shirt and jean manufacturers are still sprinkled around the western outskirts. Myself, I resided and worked in New Jersey for 20 years before I moved to LA. I moved because that is where is the Film and TV business resides. Nashville has some of the best recording personal and musicians in the world. But what if Los Angeles gave 20% off to music producers to record here in California rather than TN? This is what the article was about. It was the same as if your mayor stood up saying country music is Nashville and we are gonna keep it HERE. Our mayor stood up and said Hollywood industries are our signature. All the incentive states can do the happy dance that some glitter has befallen your locale. It's wonderful that people have work. But it won't last. Some other region, state or country will offer a better deal and poof, the business disappears. From a business standpoint, viewership is at all time low. There has been no increase in profitable product of movie and TV. The dollar value of entertainment is dropping and in the free market, so shall the payment to labor and creatives. As our Mayor Garcetti said: It's a race to the bottom.

"A race to the bottom." I missed reading that but I like it. It conjures a beer analogy. Remember the BIG brands back in the day - Bud, Schlitz, Miller, Coors, etc. - before micro brews, craft beers and brewpubs started gaining traction? Collectively they now represent so much market share that the big brands started buying up smaller breweries with the hope of stanching the bleeding, preferring to ignore the real reason for the slide - people prefer those tasty brews and the unique panache they carry. With filmmakers around the country making films of varying genres, lengths and quality, that people like, the Hollywood paradigm is being clung to even while it is eroding, relying more and more on what they brewed in the past, using the same old recipe, while the crafted brews (films) get more and more attention. Cheers...

Here is the truth. The studio system is failing because they are putting more money in less jobs in a flooded market. Its simple economics. You spends 100M and get 180M back or you send 5M and get 20M back? (And those jobs are shoot in different states because its cheaper!) Also we can't forget about the accounting schemes they are doing. How the hell has Star Wars still not have a visible return yet?

Central, TX is still hot for film making. 'Transformers 4' was partially filmed here.

Hollywood is losing work to other states? I don't seem to have a problem finding work. Additionally, if you don't like Los Angeles - then stay away, that would mean one less person clogging the road, not knowing where they're going -- but I digress. It's not that California doesn't want productions -- it is the politicians from the other counties that don't want to be seen as cow towing to the so called "Hollywood Royalty" (which is a really stupid term BTW) California has three major industries - Agriculture, Technology and Film; and the two previous thrive on the film industry! Let's start at the top, Yes we did have a "Hollywood Insider" as our Governor but he wasn't the problem, he was good in the beginning but there were bigger problems brewing that led to the demise of film making in the state e.g. "THE GREAT RECESSION" a "LIE OF A WAR" and an "IDIOTIC PRESIDENT and CRONIES" prior to that, I would finish a job and walk right on to then next one without fail and I rarely had a day off. What killed film in California as well as every other State in the Union was "WALL STREET" and their shenanagins and a Credit freeze which lasted for two years. I know this becuase when 2010 hit that was my best year ever and it hasn't stopped since, the only difference is that I work less and make more! I also see a lot of the studios (Warner, The Lot, Paramount, Sunset Gower) bustling with productions as well as when I drive down the street around every corner there is something being shot. I don't mind the work going out to other states as peopele need to eat and live but before one bashes my State and the industry I love, please know what you are talking about becasue let's face it, regardless of where we are located, Producers (not all but most) - regardless of level will always go with the cheaper whore while leaving a good woman behind.

Very useful perspective David. And it's good to hear that you're finding plenty to do. OTOH, do you not see the malaise in the exhibition industry as beautiful movie complexes are operating with night after night when staff members nearly outnumber patrons, and the classic neighborhood cinemas are closing or turning into shoe stores? Or do you not see the relentless march of our traditional television industry toward tarpits that envelop even the most exquisite scripted properties in favor of cheaply produced freak-shows to fill the chasm of an increasing number of broadcast slots? The premise that everything is hunky-dory sounds very much to me like the things I hear from Wall Streeters who are not suffering from the downturn and who still pull in six or seven figure walkoff bonuses even after they run a business into the ground. Everything is okay for them, so what's all the fuss about? What I see is the spectacle of talented people emerging from their education and practical internships with the belief that they can't really succeed unless they pack their bags and leave their home towns to move to Hollywood. I see dozens of extraordinarily talented and promising writers, actors, directors, and crafts people who don't believe they can thrive in their own cities (places like Chicago, San Francisco, Seattle, Milwaukee, Atlanta ...). There's an opportunity here right now, and it's an opportunity available to promising (and accomplished) media creators in every community. It centers around the hunger from consumers for fresh, genuine entertainment. Freshness won't come from cold soulless adherence to spreadsheet formulas that distill all of us into statistical elements in a socio-economic equation. Genuine entertainment won't come from timid reworking of old franchises and stories that worked very well the first (maybe even the second and third) times we encountered them. As for "Hollywood Royalty," can you deny that capricious firings and a deeply tangible class heirarchy exist? (a cinematographer friend of mine was dismissed merely for referring to the manual on new camera equipment during a break, don't talk to that person, don't make eye contact, don't challenge that person's bold and uninformed assertion--they're very well connected ...) Even the most talented young people cannot expect to exercise their craft without enduring a tedious and groveling apprenticeship. Often this involves working for irrational, exploitative, and occasionally unprincipled people. I have literally dozens of talented friends who've left our market to move to LA in the hope of that "opportunity." Most of them work at Starbucks and live in hovels now, and I'm constantly having to retrain new team members for the (often marginal) opportunities that do exist. So not for nothing, but you have to realize that some of us celebrate the promise of an industry that is more geographically distributed and is increasingly driven by rational leaders who operate like this is a business, and one that rewards merit rather than birthright and social leverage. But we're not bitter or anything. :-)

"When you go off in the world and make your life, and you come back to your home town, and you find your old high-school friends driving in the same circles, doing the same things, that's what Hollywood's like. It's a little block, little town. It doesn't really grow or change." Robert Rodriguez

@Vincent: Well first considering it is way off topic -- in regards to the “beautiful movie complexes operating night after night when staff members nearly outnumber patrons,” take into consideration that a movie costs around $15 per and if they bring a date, $30 then add on popcorn, soda candy – ka-ching!!! It all racks up to about $60, so now we are up to $90 with the date. A working (if they are lucky!) teenager (average moviegoer) who makes a minimum wage of $8 an hour (here in Ca.), working less than part time because they go to school as well... The kid has to work 7.5 hours just to see some regurgitated action adventure crap. Add on to that hideous customer service and rude patrons who use cell phones during the movie or talk or have crying children all of which take away from the film going experience – who and what is actually to blame for the near vacant theater. A film should cost no more than $7 dollars to see (period!) A kid shouldn’t have to shell out more than twenty bucks with snacks to see a movie if he or she is alone. There are a couple of sayings in the retail industry and they are “VOLUME CURES ALL” and “CUSTOMER [SERVICE] IS KING” to which neither Theater’s adhere to. So I ask again, who is to blame for the mass exodus from the silver screens? Next, in regards to “the relentless march toward cheaply produced freak-shows,” well blame that on the dumbed down Middle America who consume that garbage in troves. There is a way to change what is being produced and that is by changing the idiotoid viewing habits of the Honey boo boo-Hollywood Housewives-Jersey Shore of brain dead viewers. Don’t hate on Hollywood for producing shows that the idiotoids watch en-mass! Hollywood as well as any profit bearing business goes where the money is. If everyone were watching Masterpiece Theater what do you our industry would be producing? I personally watch “Orange is the New Black”, “Sherlock Holmes”, “House of Cards” and “Downton Abbey” just to name a few. Yes, everything is hunky dory for me because I have a reputation of working hard, fast and smart. To place me in the category of Wall Street Criminals ir-regardless of my strong work ethic is well, simply just insulting. There is a reason as to why your talented, young people leave their hometowns and it is not for they can’t succeed, it is because the level of success they are seeking and that is why they go. In regards to your Cinematographer friend who lost his job for referring to the manual; well I call bull***t, because there is something missing from that story. I have seen many a camera op refer to manuals and calculators for DOF and other things. I too personally have referred to a manual many a time on how to use a certain dimmer board, learning on the job and I never once have been fired because of it. Additionally, it isn’t just the film industry that exploits how about “Bank of America Intern Death Sheds Light On Cutthroat World Of Aspiring Bankers” dated 8/26 where, “long hours were at least partly to blame,” so it isn’t just our industry that feeds on its young. There are many-many more industries aside from ours that take advantage of young hungry eager beings. I, for one have trained many aspiring G & E kids and I have no issue doing so but the moment they forget what or who brought them to the party, they are gone. I have let many good people go because of the attitude they eventually brought with them and yes, there is a hierarchy that exists here as well as every other industry out there in the big blue world. Just like in other industries, here there are also on set protocols that need to be adhered to: LEARN THEM, LOVE THEM & LIVE BY THEM and you will do very well. It is unfortunate that dozens of your talented friends come here hoping to find success only to live in hovels – with that I say we all have to pay our dues my friend. Should I expect to get work from you fresh off the boat if I come to your hometown with all my experience or do I need to start at the bottom and work my way up like you once did, earn your trust, respect and confidence. If your friends want to succeed in LA then network, make connections and don’t shit where you eat. Lastly, I too celebrate that the industry is more geographically distributed for I reiterate that it keeps the idiots who don’t know where they are going off of the 5, 101 and 405.

@Armando: Know the history before quoting the statement.

I think the problem with California, not just Los Angeles, is the middle class and businesses leaving the state which impacts every part of society, not just Hollywood. That's less money for the state and high taxes for everyone else. A majority democratic led State. Can't blame the Republicans anymore. They're an endangered species in CA. I can't even remember the exact number of California companies that moved their headquarters to Texas just in the last few years. Quite a few. The problems with California go beyond the film industry. My two pennies...

Well first David, let me apologize if my statement seemed insulting. That was not my intention. My point was that it's difficult when things are going well for us, to empathize with the plight of those who are not doing so well. As for less fortunate circumstances, I can personally point to a friend of mine who's a cinematographer with multiple Emmys who continues to find it difficult to stay fully employed given that he's been away from Town for a while and lacks current strong connections. As for the capricious firing, I'd like you to assert that you are completely unwilling to believe that a thoughtless producer might walk onto a set and dismiss someone with a flimsy a rationale as the fact that referring to the manual meant he doesn't know his job. (The exact quote was, "I don't want to see that guy here tomorrow, he doesn't know his job.") I'm not saying that this always occurs, simply pointing to it as an example of the sort of thing that has people tiptoe around their workplace, fearful of irritating the wrong person. People are dismissed on capricious grounds, or not hired because someone has a family member who wants the job, and talented people are shunned or even blacklisted because they angered someone with connections. Tell me that you don't believe these are isolated incidents. My perspective tells me that it's actually quite common. As for the travails of the exhibition industry -- it's hardly off-topic. It's a big part of the ecosystem, and the actual point of the entire endeavor. If theaters fail, what is the point of creating feature-length entertainment content? I agree with you that prices are insanely high and of course that has a lot to do with the problem. But you can't blame the exhibition operators entirely for that. Distributors blackmail them heavily and tie their hands with requirements for expensive equipment upgrades (in the name of IP right protection) and studios that focus on insanely (obscenely) expensive productions make it unlikely that anyone could reasonably offer a $7 theater ticket without simply agreeing to lose money outright on ticket sales. I personally believe that exhibition does need to reinvent itself. I agree that customer service, staging and showmanship, and a more creative approach to ancillary revenue will make a big difference. As for television entertainment - shame on you for blaming the audience. Of course there are (and have always been) many consumers who willingly sit down for the freak show -- but what I'm talking about is more what gets produced rather than what people consume. There are many hungry consumers out here, including you and me, who want more than what we're getting. Some of us are also talented creators who cannot get traction for our work because it costs to much to produce, or cannot prove that it appeals to a massively broad audience. There are many discerning viewers who are underserved by what's available when they lack the economic circumstances to subscribe to the dozen tarriffed outlets that carry the quality content. Like you, I watch BBC productions, HBO and Showtime productions, and some of the new content that's coming from Hulu, Netflix, and YouTube. But were I not able to budget the subscription fees for this content, I'd be relegated to the ad-break stained dribbles of acceptable programming offered to audience of less fortunate means. It is now possible to engage audiences smaller than the massive numbers needed to justify network programming of the past. (And frankly, there's good economic reason to do so. Advertisers actually don't need to reach 100s of millions with their firehose message, they need to meet the suitable and available audience that constitutes their actual legitimate marketplace.) So change is coming, and tax breaks are actually just a parlor trick. What will make a difference -- and employ the talented people who aspire to make their living producing entertainment media -- is a rethinking about what's needed, and what we should create in order to entertain. But what do I know. I'm just saying what I see, and that's limited by the perspective I'm able to create -- one that is blissfully not forged on a crowded LA freeway.

By the way -- this is excellent and pithy advice to live by: If your friends want to succeed in LA then network, make connections and don’t shit where you eat. Good for anyone in any walk of life I think. ---v

IMO your entire argument seems to be based on hearsay. Has this happened to you? Or is it just a “perspective”? From my experience, I can tell you I’ve lost a job because the Show Runner didn’t know me, or the DP wants to use his Gaffer or the Line Producer has to hire his Nephew but you know what, I move on and get the next job. I don’t sit there and cry about it and lick my wounds while asking why? I throw some dirt on it and continue to apply and go on more interviews. Why? Because, I am at times the guy the Show runner knows or the Gaffer the DP wants or the Son-in-law of a friend to the Line Producer. It is the nature of this and any other business – “POLITICS” “As for the travails of the exhibition industry,” it is very off topic as this stream is about how, “Hollywood is losing work due to film incentives in other states” The Hollywood ecosystem is an entire subject on its own and way off this topic. Lastly, yes I will blame the audience – the audience IS who tunes in and watches the “Freak Show” because if they didn’t put their arses into those seats let me tell you, the Carnival would figure out a better way to get viewers and if the Cirque-de-soleil down the street was getting better numbers than the “Freak Show” believe you me, the Operators of the Carnival would turn their “Freak Show” into another version of the Cirque-de-soleil! A nutritious example, if no one ate “Kraft Macaroni and Cheese” do you think KRAFT FOODS would still produce that product. SO YES, I DO BLAME THE AUDIENCE! Because that is the point; if it wasn’t consumed then it wouldn’t get produced!

@Armando: Oh, you are way off the reservation now!

Well, in a courtroom it would be hearsay. But that has little to do with whether the incident happened. One of my camera ops was present and saw this personally. The fact that it didn't happen to me or that I didn't personally see it is periphery. Further however, this is a lot of focus on one incident. My premise is much broader. That insane and capricious decisions are common. More than that, there is a culture that accepts it readily. But we agree - there is politics in most, if not all industries. This is part of how people operate. A part of the article we started with addressed the overall health of Hollywood production as much as it addressed simple tax breaks elsewhere. The "state of emergency" is about general health and a request for additional tax breaks in this state. The suitability of the suggestion would have to take into consideration not only the competitive pressures in other states, but also the likelihood that it would make a difference. With exhibition failing, and traditional broad reach networks failing (and they ARE - I've watched it and listened to professionals in both industries) the likelihood that tax breaks in CA would make a difference is questionable. Lastly, if you have a marketplace that is not actually driven by consumers -- consider the state of the USSR in the years prior to its fall -- you cannot say that it's the fault of the consumers that poor products are produced. It's like saying, "if these people would stop using the lously toilet paper we give them, then we'd stop making it." The decisions about what to make are driven largely by decisions that do not come from audience. They come from estimates about who is watching in the first place, and what can be most cheaply produced that they will watch. You and I have many times been on the losing end of the struggle to have excellent programs continue and while watching horrifically embarrassing properties continue in their place. (To be fair, there have been a few small victories, but mostly I hesitate to embrace a new program in my heart until I see that it has enough life in it to continue until the characters season in, and the story arc has a chance to thicken up enough to be good. By this time, I'm pretty sure that no one is reading except you and me. I appreciate your perspective and agree with you that politics do happen, not only in Hollywood but everywhere. I also agree that anyone should expect to pay their dues. I assert that many of my friends who have done this are completely dissatisfied and often apalled at the process and often regret it. I further assert that the entertainment industry pipeline is experiencing trauma in all of the major segments. Development, production, distribution, and delivery (exhibition and broadcast) are all in trouble.

Here's an article from today Variety. http://shar.es/zI0fZ "Countries like South Africa, Hungary, the Czech Republic and Ireland continue to be welcoming to the biz, as even more nations enter the competition." All the incentives do is move spending from place to place. Your town will gain today but lose tomorrow. Will you still do the happy dance about hating LA, when your job goes to Hungary.

David, I am certainly not doing any "Happy Dance" about LA or anyone losing work. All I am saying is that it is possible to have a career in the industry and not live in LA. I already travel to other states to work even though I am based out of Tn. Traveling to work out of country has come up for me but I haven't done it for this industry yet. The work is not always studio based and you have to be prepared to travel. I have just found some people in the industry in LA that don't understand that there are talented individuals both union and non union that work and live outside of California. They are often surprised when they find a go getting skilled crew member or a talented actor not from LA. There are many of us out there that either by choice or necessity do not live in LA.

Legislators are saying North Carolina would be better off cutting taxes across the board or giving incentives to manufacturers offering long-term jobs. “We spent $70 million on film incentives last year, and what else could we have done with that $70 million?” said Rep. Mike Hager, the GOP majority whip, told WSJ http://www.deadline.com/2013/08/north-carolina-to-end-its-procuction-inc...

I certainly understand the arguments for and against however there is proven money coming for jobs and services to the people of the state in return. We are willing to do it for car manufacturers and Walmart that can pull their business out at anytime at least this is only given to working productions that provide proven income and jobs to the state. “Iron Man 3” spent about $110 million in the state, including $19 million in wages for North Carolinians, an average of $23,000 per job. The production spent about $41 million on goods and services with more than 700 vendors, according to the Motion Picture Association of America. http://www.newsobserver.com/2013/05/01/2863585/lights-camera-and-a-69-mi...

Actually that was a pretty dizzying indictment of tax credits for filmmakers. The author postulates that the tax credits are given to companies that are formed around a single project, are gone in less than 6 months, and who spend a lot of the tax credit money to pay for things out-of-state. As a filmmaker, what I see is, 'cool, I can fund a big portion of my production with tax dollars,' but as a citizen, I have to think, 'wow, this is a happy light show that gives away tax dollars and doesn't actually bring anything solid to the state except for a few beneficiaries.' I believe the article has an intended slant, but still I have to wonder if it's a wholesome arrangement.