The film business is on the move. According to ProdPro’s most recent report on production trends, the United Kingdom has emerged as the largest beneficiary of a sustained Hollywood exodus, attracting $8.7 billion in film and scripted television spending over the past year. Canada follows closely with $6.4 billion, and among the marquee projects landing in Britain is Star Wars: Starfighter, the next entry in the saga scheduled for release in May 2027.

The figures underline a strategic pivot by studios that increasingly treat production as a cross-border exercise. Facing a renewed tariff threat from the political right in the United States, studios have doubled down on geographic flexibility: spreading shooting, postproduction and visual-effects work across jurisdictions to protect schedules, reduce costs and access the best available talent and incentives. That approach, industry practitioners say, can accelerate timetables by keeping parallel workflows active in multiple locations. “It’s not uncommon at high-end films that a bunch of work would come to Australia, but a bunch of work also might go to New Zealand and to London and to somewhere else,” said Mike Seymour, Emmy-nominated visual effects specialist and lecturer at the University of Sydney.

The business calculus behind the migration is straightforward. Nations such as the U.K. and Canada have invested in competitive tax credits, studio facilities and skilled crews, creating production ecosystems that lower effective costs for large-budget projects. For Britain, the influx provides an immediate economic boost—direct spending on set operations, hospitality, transport and the local vendor chain—as well as longer-term gains in capacity and reputation that can attract still more work. For Canada, the nearshore advantage for U.S. studios continues to make it a go-to hub.

Culturally, the shift is reshaping global storytelling. When blockbuster franchises and prestige television increasingly base themselves outside Hollywood, creative labor markets broaden and local industries gain a stronger hand in the production process. That can deepen creative exchange and help diversify the stories and workforce behind global entertainment. It also raises questions about cultural ownership and the role of national film policies in shaping the narratives that reach international audiences.

There are social implications as well. Regions hosting large-scale projects see job creation and skills transfer that can fuel regional development, but reliance on volatile production cycles can leave communities exposed to sudden downturns. For U.S. workers and suppliers, the diffusion of work abroad challenges traditional centers of employment in the film trades and may intensify calls for policy responses that balance competition with protections for domestic labor.

The industry’s reaction to tariff threats underscores a broader maturity: studios are steering risk by diversifying production geography rather than remaining tethered to a single policy environment. That resilience complicates political leverage; threats of tariffs no longer offer the blunt instrument they once might have. As production continues to globalize, governments that wish to capture economic and cultural returns will likely have to compete on incentives, infrastructure and workforce development rather than rely on trade measures to keep films at home.