Lights, Camera, Maryland

But Gleiman's movie and television work came to a halt in September and picked up again only recently with "The Wire's" renewal, she said. "The business just dried up when states like Louisiana and Illinois and New York decided they were going to give incentives to production companies.

"It was dead," she said.

Now, state officials see signs of life thanks to the rebates. Maryland expects its $4 million investment to spur $65 million in local spending.

Some critics deride these incentives as "corporate welfare" and dismiss them as a flawed way of revving up the business climate.

A recent Sacramento Bee column blasted California's proposed subsidies as "a handout to some of the state's wealthiest residents."

Americans for Tax Reform, a group that pushes for lower taxes, said the rosy economic projections tied to these subsidies are suspect and easy to manipulate. "Politicians like to offer [incentives] because if you have a tax credit for a company that comes through and does a film, then the governor gets to stand there and cut the ribbon," said Grover Norquist, the group's president. "Cutting taxes and regulatory burdens for everyone would be more helpful."

Because of the controversial nature of the tax breaks, many studios declined to discuss them publicly, including a Disney spokeswoman, who said her company does not comment on the financing of its movies. But she confirmed that Disney abandoned Annapolis because it wanted the tax breaks Philadelphia offered.

Another executive at a major studio would speak only if his name was not used because he sees weaknesses in Maryland's program and does not want to alienate his friends there. The executive, who supports rebates, faulted the state for offering too little money and for failing to guarantee future funding.

"You have to give the film industry some assurance that there's longevity," the executive said. "The industry works on long lead times. If we don't know about what's happening in Maryland the next year or the year after, it becomes less attractive."

The appeal of these incentives has everything to do with the rising cost of making films, said Vans Stevenson, a senior vice president at the Motion Picture Association of America. Last year, the average production cost of a feature film was $62 million, up from $34 million a decade earlier, Stevenson said. Throw in advertising and marketing and the costs jump higher.

Then consider that show business, like any other business, is struggling with the increased cost of transportation, labor and just about everything else. The computer-generated special effects that thrill moviegoers and the multimillion-dollar salaries of big-name stars only exacerbate matters.

Hence, the clamoring for rebates, movie industry officials said.