www.forbes.com: Hollywood fears AI might threaten prestige films and award-season scripts. The first real shift is happening somewhere else. The fastest-growing category in filmed entertainment is the one-minute vertical soap opera, the micro-drama. Viewers enter these stories the way they enter social feeds, without intention or commitment.
8 comments:
I don't fully get the hatred of AI. I think there are defiantly instances where it's gonna backfire if it's used. But there are places for it. I recently made a comment on an article that was discussing using it for dubbing. Which I thought was actually a really good use case for AI. As it might be able to better capture the needs of the original film. Then actors that are just sourced for being able to speak the other language. I'm not saying that AI can't be bad. It's definitely got a long way to go. But people are definitely attempting to improve it. It has its purpose and the burying of it. The controversy around it. Seems really unnecessary. This article nails it on the head. AI is able to improve Hollywood where it's needed. Where it can penitentially be used to prop up a section of the industry that is struggling. Hence why I'm so for it being used to dub over content. Dubbing is hard, and it's inaccessible. AI can solve that problem.
I’ve always been pretty mixed about AI being used in entertainment. I think the best part about movies, shows, and stage performances is that it’s all hand-made. It makes watching it all more enjoyable knowing that it was created by other people. If certain design choices or even actors are replaced by AI, I believe that takes away the enjoyment of entertainment knowing that it wasn’t man-made. If anything I believe that it should be used more as a tool. If it’s used to aid creatives and management, I’m sure it can further enhance the quality of a production. When I see it’s used for dubbing and video models I think it’s just getting rid of the purpose of entertainment. It’s taking away opportunities for actors both in-person or voice acting. I feel it also is taking away the need for creative professions if it’s all AI generated.
I don’t think AI is going to necessarily destroy the Hollywood movie industry, and especially won’t destroy theatre. You can still tell it’s AI by just watching it as a normal person would do, from the way it talks to the way it acts and the appearance of it. It just speaks very flat with little to no emotion, kinda sounding robotic while trying to sound human, it will always have mistakes on how it actually looks, for example it might have 7 fingers rather than actually 5, and it will just not be as good as humans who have human emotions. While sure, AI is progressing and one day will be less noticeable, I do believe that is quite far away and not gonna happen anytime soon, and by that point we more likely then not will have some regulations on it. It will be very interesting seeing further mistakes AI makes.
I do agree with this article that this is one of the most likely places to be taken over by AI, as the content is indeed designed to be as cliche and easily digestible as possible. One of the areas that AI struggles in the most is originality, and there is none needed when the goal is to write a cheesy story based on all the tropes you could think of. However, what is interesting about this is that I’ve found that the AI versions of these “vertical short films” are actually still not as successful at this as it may appear on paper. Because AI is still drawing on past creations, unable to come up with anything truly groundbreaking, it still ends up coming off flat and lifeless, noticeable even in a situation where you are designed to just watch blankly for a few minutes before you move on.
I understand that AI might help reduce costs of creating content but that comes at the expense of actual humans losing their jobs. I do not think that AI should be used in creative industries. AI takes a lot of water and power to use which is still a cost to using AI even if people do not always think about that cost. The entertainment industry is really good at finding ways to “cut costs” at the expense of humans. This article made it seem like there is no respect for humans who do the jobs that AI was given for their productions. To call your studio a “content laboratory” feels weird to me because entertainment should not be made in a “factory” because that takes all of the humanity out of it even if they were not using AI. Good entertainment shows different sides of humanity through its work which is not as reachable of a goal when using AI.
Two hundred thousand to two hundred fifty thousand is a lot of money for a micro drama that is sent out in a couple minutes chunks and is made to be forgettable. I think the main driver behind this push for these micro dramas is the need to keep people trapped in a cycle of scrolling and unhinged content devouring. The push to keep this content flowing and to keep users engaged takes away from already short attention spans drives revenue largely for the social media platform and not the content creators themselves. If Ai takes away from the quality content creators that strive to push longer format quality content that has individuality and overarching goals will continue to shrink. Again we're seeing money being taken away from artists towards machines that can't keep 5 fingers on a hand. Unless more legislation comes out and limits the rampant use of energy and environmental harm that is happening we will continue to see communities harmed by ever increasing ai data centers and eventually it's collapse if the whole industry can't find a useful outlet for it.
This is one of the many areas of media that you can already see AI taking over, and it's awful. I understand it may reduce costs and be quicker, but this is literal AI slop. People lose jobs over this, no matter how small. On top of that, this sort of content is already bad enough for people on its own in terms of shortening attention spans and just overall being bad for the brain. Adding AI to the equation could have disastrous effects in that department on both the consumer and producer sides. AI content tends to be less stimulating, dumber, and of lesser quality, and even if it's being used on smaller platforms like these, it's still reaching people and being prompted. Prompting AI means that the person doing so is not being stimulated creatively or improving any skills, really, which is bad (No AI prompting isn’t a skill). The fact that this slop will reach people bad inherently.
When reading about AI like this, it makes me wonder about my own media consumption and what percentage of content I consume is completely AI generated and also how quickly I may be losing my ability to passively perceive its presence. In a time where media literacy is so highly needed, we are facing our toughest competitor which is now in the hands of people who see it as a tool of efficiency and cost effectiveness as opposed to a choice between people and profit. Further, I wonder if we are likely to get into a recursive cycle of AI informing our language and thought and it in turn cycling around itself in the ways in which it produces language and shapes our own. Will AI begin setting trends? Or will it only have the ability to follow what people have done and imitate it? AI TV seemingly becomes more dangerous with each pass.
Post a Comment