AI: The Futureof Filmmaking or the End of Creativity?

AI: The Future of Filmmaking or the End of Creativity?

You know the drill. AI is the hottest thing in the biz. It’s supposed to make everything easier and better for filmmakers. It’s supposed to help writers with their scripts, artists with their visuals, and producers with their budgets. It’s supposed to let filmmakers unleash their creativity and vision.

But is that really the case? Or are we witnessing the demise of human storytelling?

Let me tell you something. I’ve been watching the rise of AI for a while now, and I’m blown away and scared by what I see.

On one hand, I see amazing breakthroughs that create new opportunities for expression and experimentation. For example, Cuebric, the first AI system to produce and edit images for film and TV volumes. This tool can generate stunning backdrops from simple text prompts. Imagine being able to shoot anywhere you want, without leaving the studio. Imagine being able to change the mood, the lighting, the weather, the perspective, with a few keystrokes.

Or how about Midjourney, a software that converts text prompts into short videos. This tool can generate scenes, characters, actions, dialogue, music, and sound effects from natural language input. You can literally write your script and watch it come to life on the screen.

These are just a couple of examples of how AI is bringing the biggest disruption to filmmaking in 100 years. And this is just the beginning.

But what if some of the greatest movies and TV shows of all time had used AI in their production? How would they have looked different? And would they have been better or worse?

The Godfather

The Godfather. The best crime drama ever. The Corleone family, the New York mafia. Marlon Brando, Al Pacino, Robert Duvall. Legends.

But what if AI had written the script, the dialogue, or the characters? Could AI have nailed the characters’ feelings, goals, and bonds? Could AI have cooked up a better plot? Or would AI have screwed up the film’s realism and depth?

One way is that AI could have scanned Mario Puzo’s book and spit out a script from it. AI could have also made dialogue that sounds like the book. AI could have also made faces and gestures for the characters. This way could save time and money for writing and editing the script, and stick to the book. But it could also miss the director’s and the writer’s genius, who added killer scenes and lines. It could also make bland and boring characters.

Another way is that AI could have made new characters from actors or celebs. AI could have also faked or changed the actors’ looks or voices.

This way could make more varied and cool characters, and try new stuff. But it could also invade the privacy and rights of the actors or celebs whose looks or voices are stolen. It could also cause ethical problems such as truth and trust, as well as legal problems such as ownership and rights.

Friends

Friends. The best sitcom ever. Six buddies in New York. The show is famous for its laughs, chemistry, and impact. But what if AI had written the jokes, the stories, or the characters? Could AI have made the show more fun, diverse, or relevant? Or would AI have made the show less original, relatable, or memorable?

AI could have scanned previous episodes and spit out new jokes from them. AI could have tweaked the jokes based on user feedback or ratings. AI could have also scanned existing themes or genres and spit out new stories from them. This way could make more jokes per episode, and more variety and novelty in humour. It could also personalise content based on user preferences or context. But it could also miss the human touch and creativity of the writers and actors who made many classic jokes that are still quoted today. It could also make a less coherent and consistent storyline that might lack logic or continuity. Would the character of Gunther have been adored in the same way by fans, if AI had been used. So there are potential pitfalls that endanger the integrity and originality of filmmaking.

For one thing, AI is not flawless. It can produce errors, glitches, biases, and inconsistencies that can ruin the quality and credibility of the output. It can also be manipulated, hacked, or misused for malicious purposes, such as deepfakes, propaganda, or plagiarism.

Remember, AI is not creative. It can only copy what it has learned from existing data, without understanding the meaning or context behind it. It can’t invent new stories, themes, emotions, or values that resonate with human audiences. It can’t capture the subtlety, complexity, or diversity of human experience.

AI is definitely not collaborative. It can’t communicate, negotiate, or compromise with other filmmakers who have different visions, opinions, or styles. It can’t adapt to changing circumstances, feedback, or expectations. It can’t respect the ethical, legal, or artistic boundaries that govern filmmaking.

Another factor that is shaking things up is the 2023 Writers Guild of America strike. This is the biggest labor conflict between the WGA and the AMPTP in over a decade. The last strike in 2007-08 lasted for 100 days and cost the industry billions.

The main bone of contention is the residuals from streaming media. The WGA says that the AMPTP’s cut of these residuals has slashed writers’ incomes compared to 10 years ago. Writers also demand more funding and job security, more creative control and diversity, and more respect and recognition.

But there is another issue that is hanging over the strike: the use of AI in writing. Writers fear that AI could take their jobs or lower their status in the industry. They want AI to be a tool, not a replacement, for their work. They also want to have a voice in how AI is used and regulated, and to get fair pay for their work.

The strike has sparked a fierce debate among filmmakers, critics, and fans about the role and future of writers in the age of AI. Some say that writers are vital for storytelling, and that AI can never equal their talent and craft. Others say that writers are outdated, and that AI can outdo their flaws and expectations.

The strike has also raised questions about the ethical, legal, and social implications of AI for filmmaking. Who owns the rights to the content generated by AI? Who is responsible for its quality and accuracy? Who is accountable for its misuse or abuse? How does AI affect the representation and diversity of stories and characters? How does AI influence the perception and reception of films and shows by audiences?

The strike is not just about money or power. It’s about identity and dignity. It’s about creativity and originality. It’s about collaboration and communication.

It’s about what it means to be a writer in the era of AI.

So where does that leave us? Are we heading towards a utopia where filmmakers can unleash their imagination and creativity with AI as their ally? Or are we heading towards a dystopia where filmmakers are replaced by AI as their enemy? I can’t give you a clear-cut answer to this question. But I do have some advice for filmmakers who want to survive and thrive in this brave new world.

Firstly, don’t be scared of AI. Embrace it as a tool that can enhance your craft and expand your horizons. Learn how it works, what it can do, and its limitations. Experiment with it, play with it, challenge it.

Secondly, don’t be dependent on AI. Use it as a supplement, not a substitute for your own creativity and judgment. Don’t let it dictate your decisions or limit your options. Don’t let it take away your voice or your vision.

Thirdly, don’t be isolated by AI. Collaborate with other filmmakers who share your passion and values. Seek feedback from your audience who appreciate your work. Engage with your community who support your goals.

And finally, don’t be complacent about AI. Be aware of its implications and consequences for yourself and others. Be responsible for its use and abuse. Be critical of its quality and validity.

AI is here to stay. It’s not going away anytime soon. It’s changing the game for filmmakers, for better or worse. But it’s not the end of filmmaking as we know it. It’s not the end of creativity as we know it. It’s a new challenge, a new opportunity, a new frontier. It’s up to you, the filmmakers, to decide how you want to use it, and what you want to make of it. You can either accept it or reject it.