26
Hush over Hollywood: why has it become so hard to make films in Los Angeles?
(www.theguardian.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 26 May 2025
26 points (88.2% liked)
[moved to piefed] movies
4258 readers
1 users here now
Matrix room: https://matrix.to/#/#fediversefilms:matrix.org
Warning: If the community is empty, make sure you have "English" selected in your languages in your account settings.
A community focused on discussions on movies. Besides usual movie news, the following threads are welcome
- Discussion threads to discuss about a specific movie or show
- Weekly threads: what have you been watching lately?
- Trailers
- Posters
- Retrospectives
- Should I watch?
Related communities:
Show communities:
Discussion communities:
RULES
Spoilers are strictly forbidden in post titles.
Posts soliciting spoilers (endings, plot elements, twists, etc.) should contain [spoilers] in their title. Comments in these posts do not need to be hidden in spoiler MarkDown if they pertain to the title’s subject matter.
Otherwise, spoilers but must be contained in MarkDown.
2024 discussion threads
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
If American companies' track record is anything to go by, I can have a guess.
I expect to be dead wrong. Now I'll read the article
I do agree that they overspend on a lot of things, but in my book buying Lucas Arts for $4b was a steal. I think they mostly got it for so cheap because George Lucas wanted to be done with it. Even with the way misshandeld it (bar some highlights like Andor), this was most certainly a good investment.
I mean the sequels were bad and yet those alone made more than $4b at the boxoffice (yes I know that isn't profit, but just to give some perspective). And star wars is also a powerhouse in terms of merchandise sales, think of the amount of baby Yoda toys being sold.
I think you’re right but according to the article, you’re wrong, it’s because the massive studios don’t get enough tax breaks.
Hollywood is highly unionised. The writers are being paid.
Disney makes a lot of profit from Lucasfilm.
Workers are sick of being out of work.
Etc.
LA is more expensive to shoot in than London, Vancouver, Prague or Atlanta, and the crews there aren’t any better, the equipment and facilities aren’t better, it has an advantageous climate.
LA isn’t competing with the tax breaks elsewhere, and meanwhile the streaming age has matured into its profit-making phase, so the boom in production is over.
Oh that union must be new. Did you not hear about the strikes recently? Two years ago, and the job market still hasn't recovered. In some shows they were winging it without writers.
And that's separate from these weird "profit sharing" contracts they've been giving to actors in recent years too. Only to then do some creative bookkeeping and write down everything they do as a loss.
Doesn't make hollywood rich, but it definitely makes the shareholders rich
You have misunderstood. Hollywood’s writers have been fully unionised since the 1930s. Shows were not winging it without writers, as showrunners were still supervising things as part of permitted work in their producorial capacity.
The job market won’t recover. That’s about market forces not strikes.
Ahh, in that case those are some meaningless darn unions. No wonder they had to go on strike
This comment makes me believe you don’t understand what unions are/do.
Feel free to bring an argument rather than attack my character. I'm covered by a union and it's a lot less terrible