In zero years, nobody will care what La Haine director thinks about AI.
When I watch youtube videos, within the first 30 seconds of a video it's pretty easy to tell if it's AI.
If it's AI, I will click the dislike button, and click the back button.
I don't care if AI improves in two years, and it's perfect in every way. It's still AI. I still hate it, and refuse to watch.
What an idiotic take.
"Celebrity" worship has existed since the dawn of cinema. Star Power is what brings people into the theatres.
People have always wanted to know all the salacious gossip about their favourite celebs, and that's what makes Hollywood go around; they want to fell like they "know" their favourite actor/director etc...
For example:
I could go on and on. Point is, actors being themselves into the roles that they play.
You can't replace that with soulless homunculi that have no life off screen.
you can't leave out Brando's lazy approach to The Godfather is what makes his character so memorable
Exactly.
What a shit take from Kasovitz, I’m really sad about that one
ROFL What a lukewarm take, I'll fucking care all the time! I hate LLM slop, and don't need that shit in my life.
I will care.
I want to see people and stuff made by other people, not corporate wankery, these pieces of shit can lock themselves in with their AI's and rot for all i care. Make the matrix for billionaires call it the the misanthropy torment nexus.
He's absolutely right. Nobody will care because movies will have become such utter shite that nobody will be watching them.
Can't care about things that you're not seeing, right?
Given that 99% of the utter screen diarrhea Hollywood tries to sell us, hard to imagine it can get worse.
Funny. I was saying that c. 2000. And year after year they found new lows, even if they had to hire a backhoe to reach them.
At least actors will care
Academy Award for Best Slop of 2028 goes to....
I really don't know how I'd feel if a movie or actor was entirely AI.
We've already had some instances, like Tarkin in Rogue One. Felt a bit ok because the actor was dead and they wanted to reuse the same character. Though, I didn't see a reason the character had to look the exact same. A recast would have been perfectly fine.
But an entirely new character as AI? Feels like taking the easy and cheap way out. At the same time, actors, animators, and everyone else surrounding the production are kind of a byproduct of trying to bring a vision/story to a medium. I think I'd look at something that used AI to that degree as a lesser product, even if I like the resulting movie. Something that just uses AI as a part of the whole movie making process though? I don't think I have a problem with that.
Just pointing out, Tarkin was not generative AI. That was a CG overlay of a real actor, same as what was done for the 'deaged' Luke in the Mandalorian.
Guess I misremembered, but I don't think it changes my opinion.
It's still Mark Hamill underneath the deaged character, right?
I think Mark Hamill may be underneath there for some of it, he was at least on set while filming, but most of it was done by Max Lloyd-Jones. It is Mark's voice of course.
But yeah, I didn't think it really matters to your points, just wanted to point it out.
The guy didn't make a good movie for the last 30 years. His opinion isn't worth much.
Lol dude should not skip his meds
I dont think so with movies.
With music 10000% people won't care and already don't care. Most music is already slop generated. Its too easy to do.
There have been genres in which the talent didn't really matter since at least the 90's. Eurodance for example. Who cares who made it as long as you've got hours of doon-sh doon-sh 4:4 thump for club goers to sweat on each other to? I think Ableton cranks out a new Eurodance track if you create a new document and press Ctrl+Alt+Shift+F7.
Movies, on the other hand...what they said was "audiences won't care that movies have AI actors in them", what I heard was "audiences won't care about movies anymore."
I mean it really hasn't mattered since computers came on the scene. Most "musicians" play the computer, not an instrument.
Besides that, not only can slop bots make perfect electronic music, it makes perfect rock music that no one but a true audio person would notice and maybe not even that.
I'll stuck to all music made before 2015 thanks. Save for a few new artists I trust. Everything is shit now.
Well with rock music...that was a genre that thrived on pleasant surprises, which can no longer happen in the era of digital downloads.
Rock music was born alongside the 45 RPM single. That's how kids in the 50s consumed pop music. You'd buy the record for the A side...but they often put something the label had less faith in on the B side, often something the artist was pulling for. And "The B side turned out to be the big hit!" is a tale told over and over again for three decades. From Rock Around The Clock to You Can't Always Get What You Want.
It mostly stopped in the 80s with the advent of CDs. CD singles were a thing; that's what mini-CDs were originally meant for, but in North America at least it wasn't really a thing. But with CD albums...A CD holds twice the audio that an LP does, so you start getting bonus and filler tracks, sometimes hidden. That's where a lot of "The artist was really pulling for this track" songs went. Billboard changed the rules to allow songs to chart even if they weren't released as physical "singles" around that time. Which is why Bon Jovi's story isn't "Livin On A Prayer was the B side of You Give Love A Bad Name" it was just track 3 of Slippery When Wet.
The rise of digital downloads/streaming killed this.
Unlikely. For films that are easily forgettable and barely spoken of even a couple of months are release, sure. For films people want to rewatch, still unlikely.
There are many issues with the notion of AI in film, however two things which may always be an issue:
the systems are built on what already exists. Actors over time have had the smallest quirks become iconic, often repeatable references in everyday life. From a perfectly timed wink within a specific context, to a sort of humour that the audience hasn't been familiarised with in any way beforehand (or little enough for there to be no impact prior to seeing this hypothetical performance).
Seeing these quirks repeated just do not, and cannot have the same impact in a new film if our subconscious is already within an understanding that what we are seeing has been done before.
AI actors, by design, are only good for genericism.
AI is built on specific things, what it is told to do, and even if it does it well it has a great flaw that is going unnoticed by people praising the idea of using it: perfection.
People are not perfect. Analyse any acting considered good, and the nuance within their movements, speech, and so on will be very noticeable.
This is another flaw of the very design of AI: the aim, from the start, is to have commands produce a perfect representation of what the person wants, yet this also pushes the tool so far away from being in any way 'human', that it begs the question as to exactly HOW the use of AI will be so popular, if it's made to be as robotically detached from the principles of the filming process (almost entirely)?
I just do not see AI being capable of producing an actor worthy of a mention. And this doesn't even graze the arguments regarding the removement of passionate effort, which can go into the bulk of an essay easily.
No one who calls LLMs ‘AI’, or is impressed with the output of them, should be involved with making decisions which affect anyone not similarly cognitively incapacitated.
At least they can't take AI out of site of parents and molest them. At least they will not ask AI to trade sex for roles. At least AI eliminates nepo babies.
There are a few silver linings here.
There will be more nepo babies of CEOs of AI companies.
"We did it, Patrick! We made a technological breakthrough!"
A place for all those who loathe AI to discuss things, post articles, and ridicule the AI hype. Proud supporter of working people. And proud booer of SXSW 2024.
AI, in this case, refers to LLMs, GPT technology, and anything listed as "AI" meant to increase market valuations.