This was good, thanks Zac and Jesse, gave me some ideas. I think the trajectory is AI will democratise movie making but there will eventually be a differentiator for what AI movies people will pay to watch or to participate in. It’s because the value of any movie is what it does for us and while anyone can make a movie with AI, it will reassure people more that the movie they or their family members watch is made by people who they can trust. While trust is firmly rooted in values, I can imagine people who trust religious evangelists, it takes someone who is outstanding to attract the most viewers. The future with AI movies might be more exciting or more scary than we think so the next development will be a set of codes imposed by people powered AI boards of social standards or something.

Point of order, we don't use typewriters. I do know lots of people who use dictation with Dragon Dictate. Also people who've written entire novels on their phones while commuting to work (not while driving).

@davidbeppler3032

3 ай бұрын

Unless they own a Tesla.

The coolest thing I've been predicting, is alot of dead famous actors an actress will/could be in New movies in the future. John Wayne, or young versions of great actors that have retired years ago.....

@2pdlpwr

3 ай бұрын

Indiana Jones has already played himself as a younger version, in his last movie

What about where the particular AI obtains the images Will the origional producers be able to stop UnSolicited use of their images? like the actors or the origional creators especially when they are creating from previous images?

@TurdFergusen

3 ай бұрын

no, this is the same things humans do anyway, analyze and improvise… artists arent as special as they think

@trampfossil

3 ай бұрын

So if they take your photo and change the color of your hair it's ok to portray you as a criminal or even worse? what about rights? There has to be a guideline and limits need to be made @@TurdFergusen

@TurdFergusen

3 ай бұрын

@@trampfossil good luck stopping it. it is already happening with celebrities, and even if they dont specifically copy a person there is a high chance there will be a person who looks very similar to a generated image or video

@TurdFergusen

3 ай бұрын

@@trampfossil the easy solution is the one we all should be following: dont believe the internet, dont believe headlines, dont believe the allegory in movies or lyrics in songs

@trampfossil

3 ай бұрын

SAD I wonder how long it will take to put legislation in place?@@TurdFergusen

Cinematic storytelling is an art that most do not possess. You can't just throw a bunch of tools and expect good storytelling when most people can barely drive a car. All of it creates more garbage. Will some of the tools help professional storytellers create faster yes, to some degree. Cinematic editing with special effects, and sound with hyper-precise canvasas that a creator has in their mind eyes, can't be done with current tools.... and the length of time that it takes to do great editing still doesn't change, that is the art. Really simple stuff, yes... super great cinematic stories nope...

A.I. disruption over the next 6 years is going to be INSANE. Then it's going to really kick off lol

@chandapwapwa8171

2 ай бұрын

Agreed.

BUT I LOVE HOLLYWOOD

So, there was just a huge strike about this. For some of the reasons you mention. And there will be more. Yes, it’s more expensive to shoot people acting. And some of your cut scene ideas are pretty good. But this isn’t going to break the way editing broke. It isn’t immediately a move from a style of editing which was hugely time consuming AND overly complex AND required perfection to one with much lower cost, time consumption, and, with protections in case of minor accidents. This is going to be more like the switch from film to digital. There will be all AI films. And they will come to a point of not being able to tell the AI characters from the real ones. We saw that, to a point, in the matrix, and it’ll get better. What this will mean is more films and tv shows which have no “soul”. Which is what many film makers feel about shooting digital. There is a level of quality loss, even with 8K or whatever the huge cameras shoot at today. Shooting on 35mm film changed a few times as well, you can shoot on film which is much, much larger. Also, and I think this is important, people know their actors. You can’t make Santa Clarita Diet without Drew Barrymore. And they can’t replace her digitally. I think that’s one of the main things sag fought for. Likenesses. Maybe in a decade we’ll all have gotten used to seeing various AI generated people playing roles. I just think that would be a waste of the tech.

In the last 10 years, unfortunately, the quality of story telling created by Hollywood humans went down hill. AI will make it even worse. A movie is about good story. NOT about special effects, acting and frame transition.

@davidbeppler3032

3 ай бұрын

So, how much would you pay to have a guy come to your house and tell you a story? $75/hr?

@raananh

3 ай бұрын

@@davidbeppler3032 What a stupid comment! Hollywood with $millions of budget will pay even $1000 / hour for a good story so the movie makes huge $$$$. In your world you prefer AI to create many stupid stories and cheap movies that nobody wants to see. I think like a human and you think worse than AI.

@Izzy_B241

3 ай бұрын

@@davidbeppler3032😂😂😂😂😂😂😂 tell him to watch the original Godzilla or Batman movies if he can stomach the it

I love your content guys but I feel like you guys are missing one point here. I’m not against the industries evolving, AI and Tesla robots are taking jobs but I feel like all of these developments are benefiting the rich companies getting even richer with even less work force. It’s just so obvious to me that now all these people are gonna have to find other jobs that might possibly be taken in the future by another AI or Robot that’s developed by the rich. I feel like the government should start regulating all this stuff to smooth the transitioning.

Your arguments are typical over-estimation of how much technology actually changes anything. Editing is still editing, whether on a computer or cutting pieces of film and taping them together. It requires the same skill. That skill is knowing how humans will react to images. I know some older guys who saw the switch from tape to tape to non-linear, and very rare was the great editor in one who was "replaced" when the new tech came in. Both required the same skills, with a very small learning curve in between. And... Films cost a lot because of star talent (which people want to see in a real way, not AI generated), script development (AI can't write a script - it just can't. They're absolutely terrible.) and many other factors that all boil down to HUMAN creative decisions that have a particular sensitivity and insight, down to the set designer who just "gets" what a certain kind of character's apartment should look like based on the psychological arc they are going through in the story. As for Ai "filmmaking" we have all seen what it actually delivers - creepy horror film dream sequences, that all kind of look alike. Your dog soldiers are lifeless, weird in that repetitive, AI-ish way and void of any real interest. That is not a film. No one wants to watch that on a regular basis. People want real human drama and insight, and these are core drivers even in Marvel films. An AI can't feel anything so...

I mean, AI will disrupt everything. You're not talking about AI of course, I think that's quite important. We don't need AI before the components we'll use to build AI, will disrupt everything. Your language models will help with things like outlining scripts, storyboarding, finding plot holes, checking facts so you don't get pulled up on your historical accuracy, continuity, running autocues, time management for the thousands of people involved in bigger films and even helping the camera operator just set their equipment up for the shot. It'll make the gimbals much easier to use, the cameras much lighter. It'll allow low budget student film makers to dramatically improve their output - and remember how much Clerks and The Blair Witch have made on low budget. True AI will obviously be able to do all the things that a human can be. That's why it's artificial intelligence. We won't call it AI if it's got the intelligence of a housecat. We'll get more content which is good. It'll be cheaper to make which is good. Bear in mind there are going to be at least 11 billion people on the planet in a few decades, there'll be a bigger market (and a growing percentage will be middle class if not 100% of them due to Optimus).

@robertruffo2134

3 ай бұрын

They actually don't help much, if at all. Their stories are all derivative dreck.

Hopefully entirely. Theyre bound to the union contracts and new players will come along unhindered by the “technical debt” of legacy. People will flock to whichever is more entertaining or realize that legacy hollywood is just propaganda.

@trampfossil

3 ай бұрын

A simple solution : ALL AI must be required to follow the law and respect and do no harm to humans and the person who used or directed the AI to break a law and cause harm shoulc be restricted from using AI and be held responsible for ALL damages!!!

@TurdFergusen

3 ай бұрын

@@trampfossil good luck with that

@davidbeppler3032

3 ай бұрын

@@trampfossil Can we hold humans to the same laws? plz?

Unfortunately I fear you're right. But like Marvel movies and other CGI slop, I won't be watching!

@davidbeppler3032

3 ай бұрын

I will!

Adam Conover says that AI can not take the Hollywood jobs. Not today, not tomorrow. Maybe in the next 50 years. I think Adam Conover is very, very wrong. I expect him to be out of work in a few years, if not months. His main point is, computers can't do funny. They don't get the "joke". That is true today, not tomorrow.

@robertruffo2134

3 ай бұрын

Funny is a human thing. Adam Conover is a MUCH more successful comedy pro than you are