Some members of Congress, it seems, intend to make America's movies and television programming great again — without, necessarily, making America's movies and television programming great again.
OK, that sounds confusing, but that's more or less what the proposed Motion Picture, Television, and Entertainment Revitalization Act will do; this bipartisan bill, introduced late in the session in both House and Senate, is proposing to offer subsidies to the motion picture and television industries to start filming in the United States again.
U.S. Rep. Nathaniel Moran, who introduced the Motion Picture, Television, and Entertainment Revitalization Act in the House, told The Center Square that “this bill is about American jobs.”
“When a production comes to a town, it hires local caterers, stays in local hotels, eats at local restaurants, and brings in tradesmen to help build sets and run equipment,” Moran said. “Those are the jobs this bill protects.”
“We built in extra incentives for productions that film in rural communities and in areas recovering from a federally declared disaster, so this bill reaches past Los Angeles and New York into places like Georgia, Texas and everywhere in between,” Moran said.
Wait, what? How about encouraging them to film in places that match the story? Howard Hawks' great 1962 action-comedy film Hatari, starring John Wayne, Bruce Cabot and Red Buttons, among others, was filmed in Tanganyika (as was) because that's where the story took place. Shouldn't that be the primary consideration?
Moran noted that “this is bipartisan and bicameral legislation, and that matters.”
“Senator [Tim] Scott and Senator [Adam] Schiff introduced the companion bill in the Senate, and we've got Republicans and Democrats from across the country joining us in the House,” Moran said.
“We've also heard directly from unions, guilds, and studios across the industry who want to see this bill pass,” Moran said.
Here's the thing: If something has to be subsidized, it's no longer economically viable. And television and film-making are business enterprises; they aren't holy callings. If any individual studio is losing money, they should look to the product they are producing. If a certain locality is losing the business that the industry has traditionally brought them — I'm looking at you, California — then they should take a hard look at their taxation and regulation, as that's likely what's driving the business away. Shoveling federal money at the problem isn't going to do a thing except give the American taxpayers another soaking.
As for the industry itself, here's a thought: How about the studios look to their products? When was the last time you saw a trailer for a movie that made you anxious to jump up and race to the theater? The last film I remember being interested in enough to stand in line in the theater was Christopher Nolan's Dunkirk, and if I wasn't disappointed, neither was I overwhelmed. How about making films great again? How about making them works of art again, without the necessary reliance on computer-generated graphics and flashy special effects? Films like Casablanca or the original Sahara, or The Searchers, The Cowboys, or The Outlaw Josey Wales? How about television like Gunsmoke, which ran for 20 seasons, or Firefly, which, thanks to a screwed up, out of order delivery by Fox, only lasted one?
Forget the subsidies, studios. Forget the woke horse squeeze, the posturing to improve your chances at an Academy Award. Make movies and films that will get people excited to see them, and you won't need the subsidies. Make us laugh, make us cry, make us howl, make us rage — make American films and television great again, and you won't need the subsidies — and while you're at it, tell the Academy Awards people where to head in.