Robots Aren't Coming For Movie Stars, Yet
Artificial intelligence is not about to replace your favorite actors.

"We will not be having our jobs taken away and given to robots," declared Breaking Bad star Bryan Cranston at a recent rally for Hollywood's two ongoing strikes. It was a blunt statement of one of the fears animating the labor actions: Many of the issues in the Writers Guild of America and Screen Actors Guild walkouts center around the impact artificial intelligence (A.I.) could have on their livelihoods. Another relatively recent technology, online streaming, features prominently in these battles too.
While A.I. has raised unique concerns related to intellectual property and the use of actors' images, fears around tech-driven job losses in the entertainment industry are not novel. After all, a few decades ago the studios were decrying the VCR as something that could kill movies. Instead it furthered their opportunities to reach audiences.
Art requires a unique spark that A.I. can often mimic but can never fully replace. It can be a powerful tool, but it often lands in an uncanny valley that makes many viewers uneasy. The use (or even just the accusation of using) purely A.I.-generated extras in crowd scenes has already prompted ridicule when the industry has tried it.
At the same time, A.I. can dramatically reduce the cost of certain visual effects and other expensive elements of film production and post-production. This may make it easier for smaller studios to make more movies at a lower cost. In the long term, this could bring more competition to the industry and more opportunities for filmmakers who the big studios might have ignored. So we shouldn't view artificial intelligence as an exclusively harmful force. It is important to consider the tradeoffs involved.
A.I. is not the only technology the strikers are concerned about. Streaming services such as Netflix and Disney+ have been disrupting the industry's residuals. But the internet shouldn't be presumed to be the enemy of creative artists, as it has also given rise to new forms of entertainment that can benefit both creators and consumers alike.
A growing amount of consumer time is being spent on user-generated content sites such as TikTok and YouTube. In fact, the average user now spends between 45 minutes and an hour consuming content on each app. These times are edging closer and closer to the time spent on the traditional streaming giant Netflix.
That might threaten the big studios' bottom lines, but it also offers a way for small and micro-budget projects to directly reach audiences and allow artists to refine their skills. Several actors and singers—including Justin Bieber and The Little Mermaid star Halle Bailey—got their start as YouTubers.
Hollywood's last writers strike occurred in 2007–2008, when many social media and online services were still new. While many movies and TV shows were delayed, creators with new and inexpensive ideas were able to both capitalize on the internet's low barriers to entry and circumvent the strike's logjam to reach an audience directly. (One notable example: Joss Whedon's immensely popular Dr. Horrible's Sing-Along Blog.)
These platforms provide the tools to learn skills and build a following without a costly studio investment. Social media can create word-of-mouth buzz around low-cost independent productions. And it can highlight under-the-radar talent, allowing artists to circumvent the studios or prove their value to industry insiders.
Given the number of dystopian films and television from classics like 2001:A Space Odyssey and Terminator to more recent films like M3GAN and Black Mirror involving artificial intelligence, it is not surprising that Hollywood is focused on tech's potential harms. But these technologies needn't mean apocalypse for the entertainment industry. New technologies mean new opportunities too.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
I think we're in kind of a between-time with respect to actors. It won't be long before AI tools can create realistic "actors" out of whole cloth, as if they were cartoon characters. Sure, there will be a transition as the audience clings to their familiar people-stars, but eventually (probably in less time than we think), the new artificial actors, wholly owned by the studios, will become accepted, and some of them will become stars, and poof, no more need for those pesky, whiny, expensive, people-actors! (Think how Max Headroom became a "personality." Think about popular cartoon characters. Think how far deep fakes have come in just a few years.)
This controversy about actors rights over their images, etc, is going to have a very short lifetime. The actors (movie and voice anyway, maybe not theater) are about to join the buggy-whip makers. Not saying that's good or bad... just inevitable.
I'm making $90 an hour working from home. I never imagined that it was honest to goodness yet my closest companion is earning 16,000 US dollars a month by working on the connection, that was truly astounding for me, she prescribed for me to attempt it simply. Everybody must try this job now by just using this website... http://www.Payathome7.com
Max Headroom was always an actor posing as an AI. Do you also think that Kit was really interacting with Hasselhoff?
Wait... KITT wasn't real? My seven-year-old self and my lunchbox want to fight you.
>>>"We will not be having our jobs taken away and given to robots," declared Breaking Bad star Bryan Cranston
who paid the Orcs?
Is it just me or does, "Very well. Wait until they die and then take the jobs from the cold, dead hands of their corpses." sound, ironically, *exactly* like something Grand Moff Tarkin would say?
Bryan Cranston's words capture a key sentiment in the ongoing labor strikes – the assurance that our unique creative spark cannot be replicated by AI. The concerns surrounding artificial intelligence and its impact on the entertainment industry are undeniably relevant, echoing past anxieties about technologies like the VCR. It's true that AI's potential to replace certain jobs raises valid concerns, yet its ability to reduce production costs and empower smaller studios also presents an avenue for fresh voices to flourish.
The current strike isn't solely about AI; streaming services have also disrupted residuals. However, the digital landscape isn't solely an adversary to creativity. User-generated content platforms like TikTok and YouTube are altering how audiences engage with entertainment. This shift might threaten traditional studios' profits, yet it's also a direct route for emerging talents, as seen with figures like Justin Bieber and Halle Bailey. The comparison to the 2007-2008 writer's strike emphasizes how new technologies can be harnessed for innovative, direct-to-audience content creation.
Hollywood's apprehensions about AI, often depicted in dystopian films, are well-founded, but they don't necessarily spell catastrophe for the industry. Instead, these technologies can usher in new prospects. The essence of artistry – that unique human touch – remains irreplaceable, and as we navigate this ever-evolving landscape, we must remember that advancements also mean novel avenues to unleash creativity and democratize access to audiences.
cursed images twitter is bizarre corner of the internet where the mundane transforms into the unsettling. Peculiar photos defy explanation, evoking discomfort and fascination. From distorted faces to eerie landscapes, this digital gallery thrives on the inexplicable, challenging our perceptions and leaving us with haunting impressions."
Is it sad when the AI bots manage to sound more coherent than Pluggo, Jeffy, and Laursen?
I’ve seen the output of Large Language Models (LLMs) that people are wrongfully calling “AI”. If you’re worried that output will take over your creative job, you aren’t very good at it.
But since Hollywood has essentially become naught but a collection of so-called writers taking good material and perverting them into horrible ideological rants maybe they are at risk. It isn’t like they are writing anything praiseworthy these days - with rare exceptions.
"We will not be having our jobs taken away and given to robots,"
Say your lines. Hit your marks. Then explain to me how you're different from a robot.
Actormotron 3000 is way better than Cranston
Well, I'll believe that when I see it. Cranston is a good actor, and there's a lot more to that than reciting lines and following direction. It's too bad he thinks everyone ought to know what he thinks about other things, though.
Fucking Jews run Hollywood.
You can just say "Soros" next time, ML.
I doubt that's an authentic MoLa post.
You've been trolled by a spoofer, Pluggo.
Same anti-Semitic tone though.
Way to be on top of that, buttplug. Give yourself a pat on the back.
Where’s laursen with his “….dit…dit….signal sent” catchphrase?
Haha. What a doosh.
Fuck you, you racist fuck.
Aside from the fact that it's either you or sarcasmic socking as me, you've been a genuine racist here. You of all fuckheads don't get to pretend other people are the problem.
Sarah Palin's Buttplug 2 3 mins ago
Flag Comment Mute User
Uncle Clarence has had his hand out for over 20 years.
GIMME DAT WHITIE MONEY!
Sarah Palin's Buttplug 2 2 hours ago (edited)
Flag Comment Mute User
What’s up Peanuts?
Pharma Bro Vivek Ramaswamy was already millionaire when he accepted Soros award he said he needed to pay for law school
https://news.yahoo.com/ramaswamy-already-millionaire-accepted-soros-110034073.html
Trouble in Bollywood!
Sarah Palin's Buttplug 2 1 hour ago
Flag Comment Mute User
Many have asked for an update to the Buttplug Horse Race:
Tim Scott 400-1 Whuffo Bro? Whuffo is you in dis race fo, bro?
FFS, if you are going to parody people, at least come up with something that approaches something they might actually say.
Ze can't, because ze doesn't actually understand other people's arguments.
If it's Pluggo, he's too lazy. If it's sacasmic, he's too dumb.
I'm angling toward Sarc on this one. Pluggo got taken in by the spoof.
but it often lands in an uncanny valley that makes many viewers uneasy.
The uncanny valley is an interesting idea but is not well supported by research.
My own hypothesis is that to the extent that there is an uncanny valley it is due to androids mimicking the lack of affect in real but creepy people, rather than an "almost human" perception.
The exact cause of the uncanny valley may be up for debate, but the effect itself is not. It's been a problem in robotics and computer animation for decades, ever since photorealism was first attempted.
Just look at the criticism going all the way back to the first Final Fantasy movie.
We won't have to worry about AI replacing actors until somebody figures out how to tell it that "5 fingers" actually means "4 fingers and a thumb" and that the average count of two arms and two legs per person is not just a rough average.
Until an AI voice can affect emotion, all the speculation is pointless. I can't see AI ever communicating contempt, love, or anguish, let alone irony.
I'm not really sure. I suspect a lot of those things are simpler than we think.
Portraying emotion isn’t really a problem once the voice itself sounds human enough. But because this isn’t AI, just modeling, the real truck would be simulating actual emotion. That we are not anywhere near to.
This is especially true when you realize how much you assign emotion to what people say.
”We will not be having our jobs taken away and given to robots,” declared Breaking Bad star Bryan Cranston
I wonder what these overpaid children said when other people were discussing their fears of rapidly advancing technologies and regulations pushing people out of their blue collar jobs.
Something about coding, I believe.
Indeed “learn2code” came immediately to mind.
Big film studios have been using whatever means necessary to keep out competition ever since Edison (study some of the things Edison studios did in the early days, in fact, one of the big reasons Hollywood became a thing was filmmakers fleeing the tri-state area to get as far away as possible from Edison and remain in the states). That’s why they aren’t so upset about this strike. If AI can help small studios, and it hurts net services, the big wigs will "reluctantly" give in to these so called artists.
Every time someone declares what AI can't do, it does it within the next 12 months.
Robots Aren't Coming For Movie Stars, Yet
Not yet. Another 3-5 years.
Art requires a unique spark that A.I. can often mimic but can never fully replace.
And that artistic spark is completely unnecessary in Hollywood blockbuster movies.
I think AI generated images/actors could have some very interesting applications. A Rambo/First Blood prequel that shows what happened to Rambo in Vietnam. Maybe a remake of First Blood with the original ending (hint, there never would have been any sequels). That one just jumped out at me. There are plenty of others that would be possible.
I would like an adaptation of the original Star Wars Thrawn trilogy, an actual sequel to the original story with as close to the original cast as possible.
Oh hell yes. Zahn wrote a much better sequel trilogy. Plus, Mara Jade...
In screens aglow, a new age dawns, so bright,
Where AI and film entwine their fate,
With pixels' grace, they weave their wondrous flight.
No more the limitations of the night,
No fleeting youth nor actor's scripted state,
In screens aglow, a new age dawns, so bright.
Unbound by mortal bounds, they reach their height,
The AI's prowess, artistry innate,
With pixels' grace, they weave their wondrous flight.
Emotions painted pure, in every light,
No ego's veil, no pretense to berate,
In screens aglow, a new age dawns, so bright.
Each scene a canvas, vivid and so tight,
Perfection found, no need to recreate,
With pixels' grace, they weave their wondrous flight.
No petty squabbles, egos taking flight,
Just algorithms crafting scenes innate,
In screens aglow, a new age dawns, so bright.
With pixels' grace, they weave their wondrous flight.
The silver screen, alive with AI's breath,
A symphony of logic, art, and grace,
No longer bound by life's impending death.
From circuits rise characters that begueth,
No aging faces, time can't e'er erase,
The silver screen, alive with AI's breath.
Unburdened by mortality and death,
Endless retakes now a distant trace,
No longer bound by life's impending death.
The heart of every story, every breath,
In lines of code and data they embrace,
The silver screen, alive with AI's breath.
Yet some may mourn the human actor's wraith,
Their passion, flaws, the human touch we chase,
No longer bound by life's impending death.
But progress marches on, an endless race,
In AI's hands, new stories find their place,
The silver screen, alive with AI's breath,
No longer bound by life's impending death.
Sincerely,
-ChatGPT
(Basically lording the fact that it's immortal. Whereas we're stuck with geriatric Indiana Jones.)
Fuck all these people. They had no problem with technology replacing the jobs of thousands of other people in the industry for roughly two decades, such as in practical effects. How many fucking green screens did these people act in front of during that time? How many animators did Pixar put out of work since Toy Story was released?
They're only up in arms because it's their goose about to get cooked this time.
Artificial intelligence is better than no intelligence.
AI will “dramatically reduce the cost” of expensive visual effects by reducing the number of expensive human creatives required to get the job done. Those creatives will lose their jobs – they are already losing their jobs in many industries. Why should companies pay skilled, expensive human writers and artists to do a job that a lowly intern can accomplish by typing a few prompts into an AI?
Technological innovations have displaced workers before, of course, but that occurred back when the economy of the industrial age was booming. There are no industries to absorb the AI-displaced workers in the present, at least not at anything approaching their current income levels. That means the millions of middle-class workers who lose their jobs to AI will not have as much disposable income to spend on things like, say, entertainment.
What comes around, goes around.
Technology has continued displacing jobs even to today. It wasn’t just limited to the Industrial Revolution starting.
And if there were to be “millions” out of a job writing crappy ideology driven stories in top of good stuff - like rust on a car - well we have millions of trade jobs they can go into. Those aren’t getting shipped overseas or taken over by language models anytime soon and they can still be middle class.
But that requires actual work and dealing with objective reality. Something I doubt those peddlers are good at.
Robots have been coming for Edward Furlong since before Linda Hamilton and Michael Biehn conceived him.
Artificial intelligence is not about to replace your favorite actors.
Is there some reason you felt compelled to ruin my day with that?
FFS, you captioned this with the stars of Barbie.
OK?
I mean, no one was making that argument, but, good?
The current thing is buying your *likeness*, not AI animating an existing actor.
I almost seldom review movies on this site, but I will now. Florence Pugh was excellent in this movie, and the addition of Morgan Freeman was the icing on the cake.
I agree. Despite the current focus on trauma, this plot is really accurate when it comes to the things that people experience in life. There are no effective methods for assisting people in processing problems or circumstances, let alone recovering from dysfunctional homes.
The movie’s setup happened quite quickly. Although I would have preferred to see Florence Pugh end her engagement with her fiancé when she was unable to handle it, the movie does a good job of conveying how difficult it is to deal with sorrow… if you wanna watch this movie free on your device so visit Loklok apple store!