From Variety, June 16:
“Baywatch” was a staple of low-budget, first-run syndication in the 1990s, as natural to Los Angeles as David Hasselhoff’s chest hair and as defining of the city in that era as the O.J. trial and the Sunset Strip.
By the time it ended its run in 1999, it had become too costly to produce at a profit.
But the show’s red trunks and swimsuits returned to L.A. lifeguard towers in March of this year. Like an endangered pelican reintroduced to its native habitat, the Fox reboot was hailed as a triumph for the industry’s hometown, which is suffering through a long slide in production activity. Gov. Gavin Newsom bragged that the show was back “where it belongs,” at a cost to the state of $21 million.
Soon, however, the producers ran into obstacles. Officials from the county Beaches and Harbors Department and the California Coastal Commission told them they couldn’t park their trucks overnight, light fires or drive on the sand.
“We’re a lifeguard show,” “Baywatch” co-creator Greg Bonann remembers saying. “What do you mean we can’t drive a truck on the beach?”
Suddenly the show was at risk of becoming the wrong kind of symbol: this one, a victim of California’s tangle of regulations. No one in power — not Newsom or L.A. Mayor Karen Bass — wanted to read the headline about “Baywatch” bailing out of Los Angeles. When elected leaders were summoned to the Fox lot to smooth things over, the show held all the leverage. “After a while, you have to sit down with the right people and say, ‘Guys, do we want to have this show here or not?’” Bonann says.
Los Angeles has been the world’s entertainment capital for 100 years and still has an unmatched concentration of talent and infrastructure. But in an age of globalization, with easy international travel and communication, the city is losing its edge.
Everything costs more in L.A., starting with labor, due to the high cost of living and elaborate union agreements. Other states and countries have developed crew bases of their own, are more solicitous of producers’ needs and offer more generous incentives. Producers are also under pressure from the audience to deliver ever more spectacular experiences. Creating a premium product — at a price — often means going overseas.
These trends have been underway for 20 or 30 years. But since the end of the streaming bubble in 2022, America has lost 73,000 production jobs — two-thirds of them in Los Angeles — bringing the issue of foreign competition to a rapid boil.
In the chaotic race for L.A. mayor, the candidates have clashed over who lost Hollywood. At a debate in May, Councilmember Nithya Raman accused Bass of failing to cut red tape. “That’s what happened in ‘Baywatch,’” she said. “The city and county weren’t talking to each other.” Spencer Pratt, the reality star who conceded last week, bemoaned the sorry state of California’s incentive program: “Even Massachusetts has better tax credits than Hollywood.”
The contenders for governor are also battling to show that they can revive the industry with the right package of incentives. Newsom doubled the state program to $750 million in 2025. Everyone seems to agree it should be more — maybe a lot more — and that it should cover above-the-line salaries for actors, writers and producers.
“In my understanding, California’s rebate is one of the least beneficial for anybody who is financing motion pictures and television,” says Charles Roven, co-founder of Atlas Entertainment and producer of “Oppenheimer” and “Wonder Woman.” “It’s capped and it has no above-the-line.”
But the state can do only so much to compete with the 81 countries that have embraced filming as an economic development tool. The U.K. alone spent $2.2 billion on film and TV subsidies in 2024, and national incentives are often stacked on top of local rebates.
California “went into this knife fight without a weapon, and now folks are bringing guns,” says Xavier Becerra, the Democratic gubernatorial candidate who is the favorite to succeed Newsom.
As she runs for reelection, Bass has to walk a fine line between projecting confidence in the city’s ability to retain production and lobbying for more federal help for Hollywood. “I don’t feel like we’re going to lose our industry,” Bass says, noting that studios and networks are still grappling with the business changes wrought by the streaming revolution. “When all of that settles, I feel confident that we can maintain our industry.”
Once a pipe dream, the idea of a federal film subsidy now seems like a real possibility.
“In order to save this industry in America, we need to be competitive with tax credits,” says Sen. Adam Schiff, the California Democrat who is working on introducing an incentive bill in Congress. “We have a lot of our influence around the world as a result of American film and TV. We don’t want to lose that soft power.”
Advocates warn that unless the U.S. responds to foreign subsidies, Hollywood is at risk of becoming Detroit, which has bled jobs as automakers pursued low-wage labor and generous incentives in other states and abroad....
....MUCH MORE
The list of shows that are not shooting in Hollywood surprised me.
