Darn it. I knew we should have been more “South Dakota-y.”
Apparently according to Hollywood, South Dakota just isn’t South Dakota-y enough. So they went to Iowa:
When Los Angeles-based filmmaker Bruce Isacson started scouting locations for his new movie, “South Dakota,” he didn’t go to Sioux Falls. Or Mount Rushmore. Or even rowdy Sturgis.
Nope, he headed for Earlham, Ia., the quiet little town 30 minutes west of Des Moines.
“After visiting Iowa, I decided it was the perfect South Dakota,” he said. “It has everything I envisioned.”
The West Coast writer and director, whose production team arrived last week to begin auditioning Iowans for supporting roles, was immediately charmed by Earlham’s hospitality and wide-open landscapes during a visit last month.
and…
“It’s that perfect Midwestern small town that Americans have fantasies about,” said Isacson, who grew up in New York City.
But there’s another reason he chose to film here: hefty tax incentives. Iowa leaders passed a law last May that offers 50 percent tax credits for films shot in Iowa with budgets of at least $100,000. Half of the credit amount helps producers recoup in-state expenses – hotel rooms, meals, rental vehicles – and the other half benefits the project’s original investors.”When we found out (about the incentives), we almost called twice to make sure,” said the movie’s production manager, Robert Gibson.
Read it all here at the Des Moines Register.
Hey! Wait a minute.
That website looks way too much like the new Argus Leader’s home on the ‘net.
Damn it. They did it to us again.
If you enjoyed this post, please consider to leave a comment or subscribe to the feed and get future articles delivered to your feed reader.
Comments
In 2006, the SD Legislature passed HB 1206 to try to attract more Hollywood filmmakers to South Dakota. The text states “Section 4. If the project cost for a production exceeds two hundred fifty thousand dollars in taxable costs, the refund shall be one hundred percent of the taxes attributed to the taxable project costs in excess of two hundred fifty thousand dollars.”
Specifically exempted by the bill were 100% of the sales tax, use tax, and contractor’s excise tax on the production costs in excess of $250,000. One hundred percent!
What we learn in this post is that it simply wasn’t enough. Good ol’ Hollywood! They’re the ones who are always clamoring for everybody to pay more taxes.
If South Dakota is good enough for Mr. Isacson to name a movie after, he ought to be decent enough to shoot the film here.
(In the interest of full disclosure, I did not support the ‘06 measure. Further, I know Isacson won’t notice, but I won’t be viewing his movie either. I’ll keep my $7.50.)
Brock you are being to kind. This idiot has his vision of SD. The morons in Hollywood think we are a bunch of hicks. I wouldn’t trade one South Dakotan for 10 people from California.
PP:
The Argus Leader and the Des Moines Register are so very Gannett-y.
Todd
SD Watch http://www.southdakotawatch.net
How active is our film development board? I know from working in MN, they are very active:
I had to dig to find anything on film development in SD, and when I found it, it was buried in the Dept Of Tourism site. We have maybe one person there working on this.
If we want Hollywood to film (and spend money) here, we gotta work at it.
Well, yes, maybe SD should work at it more, but please. A Hollywood type wants to do a movie about SD and the location is in Iowa? Let’s expose this turkey so the film doesn’t go anywhere.
Anonymous 10:42am, your heart is in the right place, but those types of movements rarely go anywhere. Look at how long the Baptsts have been boycotting Disney. Has that hurt them any? In fact, any stink you make about it would only drive more people to the box office. Like some famous huckster said: “Any publicity is good publicity”.
3rd502nd,
Like Minnesota, the SD Film Office has its own website (and a fairly informative one) for filmmakers: http://www.filmsd.com/
Prairie Roots, just because they have a website doesn’t mean they’re doing their job. Come on, if we can’t even get a film TITLED “South Dakota” filmed here, what good are they? That’s like filming a movie about the Yankees at Shea Stadium or Kaminsky Park.
How many people in state govt WORK on this? One, from what I can gather (and I know people in that office).
And here’s the biggest difference, Prairie Roots. In MN, it is run by a board of citizens, representing major businesses like Best Buy, Target, WCCO Television, etc. with obvious buy-in (financial, etc) from these entities. They see the value of this type of exposure for their community.
Until and unless SD puts that kind of effort into film/TV development, we will continue to lose projects that by other objective criteria we should have, like “South Dakota”.
HHhhmm, so Iowa is more the South Dakota that the writer / director envisions than is South Dakota.
HHhhmm, he probably doesn’t care much for the Hollywood Writer / Director type I envision, either…
Judging from IMDB, this is the famous Bruce Isacson that had a bit part in Outbreak (1995) and hasn’t been heard from since.
Perhaps, he doesn’t make good career choices?