A huge number of non-competes don't stand up in court. The one you're describing here sounds too sweeping. I don't think they could do it.

In the acting world they have conflicts, but they have to pay you extra to have those conflicts. So while you might get 60,000 for the first year for a commercial you could easily get 40 or 50 the next to not do one in the same area. If they use a precedent like that to show that they need to compensate in order to limit somebody or else they're bullying the employee to get something for free, I wouldn't be surprised if most non-competes hit the dust altogether.