"I'm being told it saves money to shoot in Toronto, because of tax benefits, the crews are cheaper, but what I save in the bottom line, I lose in a million other ways"

Griffin Dunne is expressing a nuanced perspective on the decision to move film productions to cities like Toronto, motivated primarily by financial incentives. While he acknowledges that shooting in Toronto is economically attractive, thanks to government tax breaks and comparatively lower labor costs for skilled crews, he points out that this fiscal upside comes with significant, often overlooked drawbacks. Dunne’s words highlight a tension in the film industry between cost efficiency and the intangible qualities that contribute to a project’s success or its authenticity.

Toronto is frequently used as a stand-in for American cities because production expenses are lower, largely due to governmental support aimed at attracting filmmakers. While this policy helps studios reduce expenditures, Dunne underscores that there’s a trade-off involved. The “million other ways” he refers to encapsulates the loss of less quantifiable elements, such as the cultural atmosphere, the authenticity of shooting in the script’s intended location, or the unique synergy of local creative talents that are harder to replicate elsewhere. The setting of a film often isn’t merely a backdrop, but contributes to the characters’ believability and the overall emotional resonance. When productions migrate to a different city for cost reasons, there’s a risk of sacrificing this authenticity, ending up with scenes that may look generically North American rather than distinctly New York, Chicago, or Los Angeles, for instance.

Dunne also alludes to the disruption of established working relationships and professional rapport. A local crew may be technically competent, but might lack the understanding or chemistry forged through previous collaborations, which can impact the quality and efficiency of the project. Ultimately, while saving money is a tangible benefit, he warns that these savings can be offset by losses in artistic integrity, realism, and perhaps even efficiency, dimensions that are just as critical to a film’s ultimate success, though harder to measure in financial statements.