I actually live in Dallas. Right now Dallas is the center of a huge art movement in all mediums, including TV and Film. Dallas is much cheaper to work in then a lot of other cities. Not only that but the city is giving some great benefits to TV shows and films filming in the Dallas area. If your interested here's a great site that should have everything you want to know about Dallas's TV and Film scene.

http://www.filmdfw.com/

There is actually a ton of undiscovered talent in Dallas which I think might be another reason the industry is breaking in. I think it also largely has to do with the type of people. L.A. consist largely of people looking to make it big and aren't even from there, while in Dallas everyone is pretty much from the surrounding area and to me, they seem a lot more relaxed about everything.

My assumption is there is a ton of undiscovered
talent in every city.

I'm not convinced that production moves out of
Los Angeles because of the talent in any city. I
think the only reason producers shoot outside
of Los Angeles is saving money. If a grip will work
for $150/day instead of $250/day....

Of course they aren't going to shoot where there
are no resources, but I don't believe the local talent
comes into play. As you both say, it's the cost factor.

quote:

---

Originally posted by masterspud
L.A. consist largely of people looking to make it big and aren't even from there,

---

While you're correct that many people move here,
there are a lot of natives living and working here.
And it's a gross misperception that L.A. consists
largely of people looking to make it big. Most of
the people working in this business are working
here because this is where the work is and where
you can earn a living doing what you love. L.A.
largely consists of working professionals who have
the same love for the work as people in Dallas or
any other city.

=============================================
The aim of an argument or discussion should not be victory, but progress.
Joseph Joubert, essayist (1754-1824)

But is cost the only factor here?

X-files and others were shot in Vancouver which subbed as a hundred different cities but...

CSI: Miami and CSI: Vegas are both shot in Long Beach and LA. They just put new plates on the cars and have the cast go out for shots in front of famous stuff from time to time.

LA has its costs, but it also has a mature industry of professionals and generally pretty awesome weather that allows for a long season of shooting.

Each show probably wrangles over this question.

RJSchwarz

I know many companies have set up in Vancouver, because it's a nice place to live, and those companies use that as a means of attracting talent to their operations. I also know people who move to Vancouver and other cities because they like those cities.

I guess this is also another factor - finding a good city to live and work in. The producers of Hawaii Five-0 must have had that in mind too.

This is a very good discussion. 🙂

I think Vancouver is a fine town and at least in the past they set up tax benefits to attract filming. I have to imagine the weather is a factor though. Galactica filmed there but nearly everything was done inside.

RJSchwarz

I would say yes.

I cant imagine the factor was specialized talent. Los Angeles has
specialized talent. I cant imagine the factor was lifestyle -
though I admit to not understanding what you mean by that. The
reason they were shooting in Dallas was because it was cheaper.

I suspect the people who made the decision to shoot in Dallas
stayed in their Los Angeles homes and kept their Los Angeles
offices.

CI,

In the case of lifestyle, many major companies have set up in the Pacific Northwest, to attract the talent that they want, because the region is a good place to live. I don't know if that dynamic applies to film production, however.

Barney Miller, by the way, was made in LA, and I think so was All in the Family (Archie Bunker show). Both shows were set in NY, and I've been wondering why they weren't produced there.

For my own reference, if nothing else, I think I've posted before about the MovieMaker Magazine's top 10 best places for an independant movie-maker, and LA is not on it.

?url? http://www.moviemaker.com/locations/article/10_best_cities_to_live_work_make_movies_in_2010_20100119/?/url?

As the online magazine says,

quote:

---

But with previously under-utilized areas such as Shreveport, Louisiana and Albuquerque, New Mexico continuing to climb our ?best places? list year after year, the truth is that moviemaking can happen anywhere?as long as there are creative artists willing to make a go of it and a community of supporters happy to nurture their talents.

---

I know I've said this before, but review and constant review will imprint that in my mind, and, in a limited sense, create an expertise in the business. 🙂

Well Barney Miller and All in the Family are three camera sitcoms. They take place almost entirely in one location. So its gonna be in a studio, so why bother having it in NY when your studio probably has sound stages in HOllywood?

Sienfield was also shot in LA and they got out of their limited sets from time to time, yet they still faked the subway and other locations pretty successfully without the hassles of weather and traffic noise you probably have to deal with in NY.

RJSchwarz

I never knew Seinfeld was shot in LA - I learn somethng new everyday. 🙂

But cost cannot be the only reason for shooting in a different city - there must be other reasons, or the shootings would be in the cheapest city in the world, which I presume would be in Africa.

District 9, by the way, was partly shot in Africa and the story is set in South Africa.

Shooting in Africa wouldn't be the cheapest place to shoot. An
area with absolutely no production infrastructure must bring in
everything. And that includes all crew and all equipment. I've
worked on "Survivor" in Africa (and other remote areas); even
water must be brought in and waste removed. Lodging must be
provided and if there are no local places that are up to standards
(like running water for example) then an entire "city" must be
built, maintained and taken down. That isn't cost effective.

So even using your argument that there must be other reasons like
good local crews, production infrastructure (rental houses,
catering services, lodging) and access to transportation, cost
still is the only factor. And that's why Vancouver has been a
great place to shoot and why, Shreveport, Austin, Dallas and
Albuquerque are building their infrastructure. To make it cost
efficient to shoot there. Just five years ago Albuquerque was too
expensive to shoot in because of the lack of rental houses
(everything had to be rented in L.A. and shipped), studios
(everything had to built in warehouses) and local crews (everyone
had to be flown in and lodged). Now they are building stages,
offering equipment for rent and local crews are gaining experience
and skills.

So no matter how you spin it, cost is the reason. And remember the
title of that article. It's not addressing studio production.

Of course you can create a thriving business outside of L.A. and
NYC. Not a single person here believes otherwise.

South Africa is actually pretty livable. Way back when the British took control they had families move to South Africa to populate it with rich whites. I think South Africa would be a lot cheaper then you think. I mean, they have very large cities. But I do agree that most other places in Africa would be very pricey.

In addition to what CI said, you have to worry about security when shooting in the third world. Not just stolen equipment but potentially bribes and violence.

District 9 was shot with a small cast. Same guy played every prawn. During the eviction scenes the two guys (main character and prawn guy) just improved. They shot the slums in an existing slum that was being emptied out and the people moved to a nicer area so they got really lucky in the timing (at least security wise). Certainly did a good job making things look bigger scale than they were. Remarkable movie if you ask me.

RJSchwarz

Actually, you've all hit on the reason why companies don't go to places with the cheapest labor - you get what you pay for.

There's also the benefit of agglomeration economies - as companies and talent band together, they form a more dynamic whole, and this can become a virtuous cycle. That must be what happened to Hollywood and NY.

District 9 is a true inspiration to aspiring moguls. 🙂