State film breaks fall short of hopes

WHEN state lawmakers voted in 2001 to provide tax breaks to films shot in Oklahoma, proponents hoped the state would become a hub of moviemaking and the resulting films would benefit Oklahoma’s image. By those measurements, the program’s impact has been less than hoped.

Oklahoma’s program offers direct rebates to filmmakers for in-state expenditures on Oklahoma goods and services, wages and fees. Filmmakers can obtain rebates of 35 percent and perhaps slightly more in some specific circumstances.

When the state Incentive Evaluation Commission reviewed the program last year, it concluded, “There is no evidence that the Oklahoma film industry has strengthened during the time period when the rebate has been available.” The commission found that the “effect on Oklahoma’s image nationwide is unclear, but likely limited.”

One reason for those findings is that many films made in Oklahoma have been seen by few people.

Jay Chilton, director of the Center for Investigative Journalism, recently reviewed the movies receiving Oklahoma tax breaks and found that most “garnered little exposure due to their limited release and many produced no box office ticket sales.”

The movies receiving Oklahoma tax breaks include “The Jogger,” “Rudderless,” “Mekko,” “The Veil,” “Southern Tale,” “Monday at 11:01,” “Pax Masculina,” “Heartland,” “Let Me Make You a Martyr,” “Great Plains,” and “Mankiller.” Few Americans will recognize those titles.

That’s not necessarily a reflection on quality. Even good movies can fail to attract an audience. But given the state’s financial challenges, it’s not shocking that some question if the millions expended on this program are worth the benefit.

That’s even true when a movie filmed in Oklahoma does break through. “August: Osage County” received $4.6 million in Oklahoma rebates, and went on to gross more than $37 million. Yet that film also caused many lawmakers to reconsider the rebate program. The state House actually killed the program at one point in 2014 before subsequently reauthorizing it after much debate. Former Rep. Don Armes, R-Faxon, conceded that the family portrayed in “August: Osage County” was “crazier’n a bunch of cut rats.” And Armes was a defender of the program. Others believed the film’s subjects did nothing to enhance national perception of Oklahoma, and much to advance negative stereotypes.

Recently that film has also become controversial because it was produced by the Weinstein Company. So that leaves some people uneasy with the fact that Oklahomans indirectly gave money to a man, Harvey Weinstein, who has now been accused of serial sexual harassment and even rape.

At the same time, states are engaged in an arms race to attract film projects. Even California, home to the film industry, feels compelled to offer incentives. This month, California awarded $62 million in tax credits to 11 films. Oklahoma’s program is capped at $5 million annually.

The state’s film program began with high hopes. But the odds of Oklahoma reaping outsized benefit may be comparable to the chances of every actor who heads west hoping to become a star — some success stories but a great many that end in disappointment.