Agreed! I see absolutely no problem with it as a tool. I was given an invitation to try it out (AI) on Chapterly recently and while I can see the use for it if you're stuck? At this point? It can take quite a few sessions to get something out of their AI worth using. But having said that? It's still pretty interesting and with OpenAI now being available? I see all kinds of tools like this developing FAST.I get you. GOOD high concept. Although I do think high concept in general would be easier for the AI bot than low concept.
People need to appreciate AI as a tool. Why not? Maybe I have writer's block. Maybe I feed my script in and it spits out a scene I use. I continue writing without AI. Excellent!
Breaking News: Movies are already FAKE! Actors are playing a part. Stunts. CGI. Dialogue replacement... AI!
No, it can't, at least not a good one, but then neither can Terrance Mallick, so maybe this is a matter of opinion.
Not really. There has never been a good one once in the history of the world, and all the buzz isn't changing that.
It's not the next phase in filmmaking. It might be the next FAD in filmmaking, like when Mumford and Sons became the next "Phase" in music. Here's something real for contrast. 1080p is the next phase after 720p, 4k is the next phase after 1080p. Each phase is quantifiably better than the last. The best AI script example isn't as good as the Fritz Lang script for "Metropolis" People just keep saying this garbage because the headlines get clicks.
How I made a sentence with a computer keyboard. Equally impressive. I used a tool to do thing with no inherent value. A lateral move. Just because you can do something doesn't make it worthwhile. I can make a film out of the text on the side of a soup can. It would make a catchy headline on twitter, or frakker, or slank, or chird, or whatever the hell random garbage morons come up with next week. "Are soup cans the future of Hollywood?" Click here to find out.
It's funny because it's terrible, you are not at risk of loosing a job to this toy robot.
Directing is a creative artform, Parrots are not creative directors, but they can yell action, and there is real money to be made by TELLING people that a parrot is directing your movie, and you can get a lot of hits by shopping around an instagram post of a bird in a directors chair yelling action each time the trainer prods it.
AI's can't make any of these things well. And a movie is all these things combined, if you're doing it right.
This article actually makes sense. This is exactly what I use AI for. Automating work intensive, mundane, and repetitive tasks. It's good at that.
This sounds like a good thing, but it's probably a bad thing. An AI can't identify fresh creativity. It can only understand how well a writer conforms to what's been effective before. This actually could be the beginning of the end for creativity, if enough clueless executives start evangelizing each other with these articles.
Sigh, more of the same, people failing horribly at something, then handing each other money and being excited about how great they are. It's the indie film festival circuit all over again.
No, I'm not scared yet. I'm far more scared of people getting dumber than I am of Ai getting smarter. At this point every person that wins a music award is someone who can't play any music. It's not some ultra evolved super musician using next gen AI to clear unimaginable creative hurdles. It's a guy in a 3000 dollar jacket standing on Mozart's grave and yelling "yeah" over and over while 3 of their friends try to figure out how to operate a drum machine.
I provided those links after just a very brief search on Google... There's a lot more out there too. All I'm simply saying is that people are AT WORK right now trying to develop this. That's all. Am I worried? LOLOL. Not at all. I'll put my writing up against anyone's. Nothing to be worried about if you know what you're doing in this industry but having said that? Trust me when I tell you that there's a lot of money being sunk into this technology and one of the many hopes is that eventually? This shit can replace a writer. All I'm saying. Nobody's WORRIED. LOLOL. I just think it's SAD that the industry has such a low confidence level and is so worried about pissing somebody off somewhere that we are heading in a direction where content will eventually be dumbed down so much that it won't even be worth watching.I use AI all the time, I have a dozen tensorflow applications installed right now, and I have about 14,000 cuda cores (specialist cores used by AI, think "AI horsepower") I built an AI from the ground up, and once built a company on top of that AI. Here's what I think about these articles.
I'll just reply to these magazine writers one at a time
You mean the original stargate sg1 series wasn't written by an AI? It was so painfully dumb I just assumed all 10 seasons were created by a commodore 64 that had been dropped into a bathtub by accident.
No, it can't, at least not a good one, but then neither can Terrance Mallick, so maybe this is a matter of opinion.
Not really. There has never been a good one once in the history of the world, and all the buzz isn't changing that.
It's not the next phase in filmmaking. It might be the next FAD in filmmaking, like when Mumford and Sons became the next "Phase" in music. Here's something real for contrast. 1080p is the next phase after 720p, 4k is the next phase after 1080p. Each phase is quantifiably better than the last. The best AI script example isn't as good as the Fritz Lang script for "Metropolis" People just keep saying this garbage because the headlines get clicks.
How I made a sentence with a computer keyboard. Equally impressive. I used a tool to do thing with no inherent value. A lateral move. Just because you can do something doesn't make it worthwhile. I can make a film out of the text on the side of a soup can. It would make a catchy headline on twitter, or frakker, or slank, or chird, or whatever the hell random garbage morons come up with next week. "Are soup cans the future of Hollywood?" Click here to find out.
It's funny because it's terrible, you are not at risk of loosing a job to this toy robot.
Directing is a creative artform, Parrots are not creative directors, but they can yell action, and there is real money to be made by TELLING people that a parrot is directing your movie, and you can get a lot of hits by shopping around an instagram post of a bird in a directors chair yelling action each time the trainer prods it.
AI's can't make any of these things well. And a movie is all these things combined, if you're doing it right.
This article actually makes sense. This is exactly what I use AI for. Automating work intensive, mundane, and repetitive tasks. It's good at that.
This sounds like a good thing, but it's probably a bad thing. An AI can't identify fresh creativity. It can only understand how well a writer conforms to what's been effective before. This actually could be the beginning of the end for creativity, if enough clueless executives start evangelizing each other with these articles.
Sigh, more of the same, people failing horribly at something, then handing each other money and being excited about how great they are. It's the indie film festival circuit all over again.
No, I'm not scared yet. I'm far more scared of people getting dumber than I am of Ai getting smarter. At this point every person that wins a music award is someone who can't play any music. It's not some ultra evolved super musician using next gen AI to clear unimaginable creative hurdles. It's a guy in a 3000 dollar jacket standing on Mozart's grave and yelling "yeah" over and over while 3 of their friends try to figure out how to operate a drum machine.
You seem very worried about super intelligent robots taking your job. That's not who is going to take your job. It's going to be a guy with an IQ of 70, from a rich family, born in Burbank, who doesn't know how to type, producing a 150 million dollar feature film about a 10 second video he saw on tik tok while he was drunk. AJ Soprano, that's your real enemy. When one of the Sackler kids writes a screenplay, it will get greenlit, by their uncle.
This is a person who lives in Hollywood, has lucrative contracts I seriously doubt he can read, and is now on a panel of judges, telling other creative people whether or not they deserve a shot.
I'm ok with it as long as it's OUR world meaning everyone, rather than THEIR world exclusively. There are some signs that things will turn out ok though. I was actually a bit spooked by the rise of reality TV in the 2000s. I thought that perhaps soon there would be nothing left for people on the north side of 100 IQ to watch, but eventually, the pendulum swung back, and we now have a hundred different fairly intelligent serial TV shows. More than there ever were before "Survivor" crashed the vitals monitor of tv writing.I provided those links after just a very brief search on Google... There's a lot more out there too. All I'm simply saying is that people are AT WORK right now trying to develop this. That's all. Am I worried? LOLOL. Not at all. I'll put my writing up against anyone's. Nothing to be worried about if you know what you're doing in this industry but having said that? Trust me when I tell you that there's a lot of money being sunk into this technology and one of the many hopes is that eventually? This shit can replace a writer. All I'm saying. Nobody's WORRIED. LOLOL. I just think it's SAD that the industry has such a low confidence level and is so worried about pissing somebody off somewhere that we are heading in a direction where content will eventually be dumbed down so much that it won't even be worth watching.
That's just ME. My opinion. However, I'm also open-minded enough to acknowledge that those growing up into this developing and evolving environment today may very likely embrace the kind of content that I personally can't even stand to watch. Nothing wrong with that. It is what it is... It's just NOT for me.
You're reaching.It'll be more powerful than that but even IF it's NOT? What makes you think that wouldn't be good enough for a studio? LOL. Throw enough advertising at it as part of the formula and they'll be lining up to buy tickets.
Not for the reason you purport.Yes... With a computer. LOL. Look it up, they're damn near doing that NOW already i.e., feeding human-written scripts into software to see if they're worth developing into a production. It's already being done.
So you're saying it is incapable of originality. It can only regurgitate.pattern recognition teaches it to recognize a good script. computers are exceptionally good at pattern recognition if you use a neural network based AI.
You're reaching.
I'm a Studio System Trained guy. I don't "think", I know, because I ask.
JGR laughed at the idea.
Look around-- Even Cameron, the man who wants to get rid of Actors, is a rewriter.
Had you bothered to actually read the thread and understand what I'm saying? You wouldn't have simply JUMPED to your conclusion LIKE YOU ALWAYS DO. But that's how you are... YOUR way or the HIGHWAY. LOLOLOL.Not for the reason you purport.
ALL screenplays are put through thier paces to see if they are a feasible production. This is a financial thing, not a creative one. They used to use paper and pen, now we use computers. This is one of the jobs I do. Again, it has NOTHING to do with creativity.
Business first, and the fringe world of Film is not about the Business of Film Production, it's about the Business of Advertising sales.
And HOLLYWOOD is OH SO ORIGINAL... LOLOLOL.So you're saying it is incapable of originality. It can only regurgitate.
That's exactly my point.