Hollywood is on strike. For the first time in more than six decades, both the writer and the actor have called it quits. They are primarily protesting the disruption of residual payments in the era of streaming. But they are also fighting to prevent studios from using their digital likenesses without their consent, a prospect they rightly believe would threaten their livelihoods and their reputations as artists.
These are critical times for cinema. The arrival of ChatGPT last November caused a stir in the creative industries. The chatbot’s ability to produce reliable, detailed text has led screenwriters to wonder if their skills will one day be lost.
Then, as artificial intelligence began to demonstrate astonishing capabilities in producing images and videos, people began to imagine something even more disruptive: what if AI eliminated the need for actual filmmaking altogether? The technology to make this a reality is not yet ready, but thanks to billions of dollars in venture capital funding and big-tech research and development, it is developing at a rapid pace.
On Thursday, the striking Screen Actors Guild’s chief negotiator, Duncan Crabtree-Ireland, said during a press conference that studios were already preparing for a time when the work of “background artists” or extras involved being scanned. Will happen. A day’s pay, after which the studio owns those likenesses for eternity.
Hollywood studios challenged that characterization, saying their proposals included “unprecedented” provisions that would allow the use of AI, but would give the actors final agreement on how any digital replicas would be used.
A dystopian (and highly entertaining) perspective on how this might play out comes via Black Mirror, the future-watching Netflix series whose latest season includes actors depicting their worst nightmares. In the episode, Salma Hayek, playing herself, unwittingly signs away the rights to allow her digital likeness to do whatever she wants with disgusting results.
The series is designed as a dark comedy. But in creative circles, the lack of agency over one’s actions is an immediate and serious concern.
Last month at Bloomberg’s technology summit in San Francisco, I met Hillary Krane, chief legal officer at Creative Artists Agency. The company represents thousands of film stars and other creative people. As Crain put it: “If we are in a world where technologists believe humans are not equal to humans because they are limited to zero and one, then we have overturned a major pillar of our economy.” Is .”
Crane is correct. An actor’s right not to be in a production must be heavily protected, not only for financial reasons, but also on artistic principle. Creating a set of tasks, and deciding what to include and when, is a highly individual process. Until the studios start to understand this, they may have to do several reruns.
The threat to artists doesn’t just come from movie and TV studios trying to exert control and cut costs. It is also from the coming stream of AI tools, which will mean that anyone can recreate a person’s likeness and engage them in performances or acts without their consent. Last week, an AI-generated image depicting actress Jennifer Lawrence went viral on Twitter, garnering more than six million views. And this fake-video is just the tip of the iceberg.
Similarly, now the United Writers and Actors’ Strike represents the beginning of tackling the consequences of AI in film and TV. Over the course of decades, compromises will need to be made: It would be foolish to try to prevent AI from playing a bigger role in the future of film. But creatives should have an input into how and why AI is used.
We are a long way from being able to create compelling entertainment solely with artificial intelligence. Indeed, that day may never come.
Writing in Vanity Fair earlier this month, John Lopez, who is part of the Writers Guild of America’s AI working group, pointed out Hollywood is essentially “in the business of capturing the miracle of human connection in a moving image. ” It doesn’t have any message. Machines can easily figure out the technicalities around the second part of that goal. But human connection? You won’t find data that can explain why great creative acts work.
If and when the time comes, and studios start churning out cheap AI-powered entertainment, we may well find that people instinctively vote with their wallets, rewarding productions that make the most of all their humanity. Maintains the essence of great filmmaking with complications. ©Bloomberg
catch all business News, market news, today’s fresh news events and Breaking News Update on Live Mint. download mint news app To get daily market updates.
UPDATE: July 17, 2023, 08:36 PM IST