LA's feature film production is up.

That's good, and, according to FilmLA, it's due to the film incentives. But the same report also says TV production is down, so those incentives, if they also existed for TV, would not be the solution for runaway production. Furthermore, incentives will not deal with the current global situation, namely, ever-increasing competition across the globe, not just from Georgia and Louisiana but also from Nigeria.
 
Question and a comment.

Q: What advantage is there to keep filmming in LA? Our production companies are still here. The people who make the money are still here, spending it here. For the most part, if you want to work in film, you have to live here.

C: The golden age of cinema has ended. We don't shoot everything inside of a soundstage anymore. A lot of things are shot on location, and LA is traffic laden and ugly.
 
There is always a local advantage, because the producers and directors live near their home, and the other professionals are literally near the scene of action, so they have better control. The problem, of course, is that California seems reluctant to provide a business-friendly environment, and that will hurt.

As an aside, manufacturing was leaving the US for China, but it's now returning to the US, because technological change has made it more cost-effective to manufacture in America. So there are ebbs and flows. California can get film work back, or at least not lose as much, but it has to work at it.
 
California's Legislative Analyst's Office, which provides reports to the state government, doesn't seem to like tax incentives, because that's a race to the bottom. But, if the Golden State doesn't provide those incentives, it will continue to lose production, not just to New York but to other jurisdictions in the US, Canada, and, increasingly, the rest of the planet. But perhaps one reason why they don't like incentives is because the state just doesn't have the money.

The report is at this link.
 
Back
Top