Hollywood's losin' it (but New Orleans is gettin' some)

Thanks to Johnny McPhail who points us to an article in The Los Angeles Times that tells a sad Hollywood story. Sad for Californians who see that everyone wants in on the act. Every city wants to be "Hollywood on the (name of your river here)."

"Over the last two decades, scores of movies have left town in search of the cheapest labor, weakest currencies and best financial incentives. ... Thanks to an array of tax incentives offered from Rhode Island to New Mexico, screenwriters are recasting their plots to accommodate new locales, producers are learning new math to stretch budgets and Hollywood has settled into a multiple-time-zone way of life."

New Orleans is a major beneficiary of the portability of the movie biz. The state of Louisiana has been making it easy for Tinseltown bottom liners who don't care where a project is made as long as it's profitable.

"The Louisiana incentives helped movie production spending soar to more than $125 million last year, up from $3.9 million in 2002, the state says. Along the way, an estimated 3,000 jobs were created. ... In 2004, 27 feature films and TV movies were made in the state, up from five features in 2003."

There's no voodoo math involved, although it seems to escape legislators in other Mid-South states. Whether the tax breaks are called incentives or investments, the end result is more money coming in.

"Louisiana last year paid out $67 million in tax credits to movie and TV productions, and has dispensed about $40 million already in 2005. The state estimates that 2004 productions generated $39.4 million in production-related payroll to state residents and a total of $125.9 million into the economy."

So if the concept is one that is appealing across party lines and can benefit rural and urban constituencies and will generate revenue for every region in the state, why aren't our legislators jumping all over this? After all, it's a starring role.