I can see why you say that, Jurgen. But perhaps this development will spark something new, even breathing new life into creative fields like movies that were stymied by the old studio gatekeeper system.
So far in film, we have seen five major ages in filmmaking. 1) The invention of the movie camera, 2) Talkies 3) Color 4) VCR/Camcorders and 5) Phone cameras.
We are now entering the sixth, and what I believe to be, the most important age of filmmaking - the age of AI moviemaking.
Now, I've done two feature-length AI-powered films so far, and a number of shorts. My first feature, The Wizard and The Scholar (every director should do a Robin Hood film at some point in their career), had a scene showing a dozen or so medieval ships exploding in a port. That scene took me.... 5 minutes (?) to create with AI at a minimal cost - an investment most people could afford.
But what would have been required to create that scene alone (especially live action) without AI? I sometimes joke that I'll put the environmental impact of all AI filmmaking against the environmental cost of just Titanic alone. :)
And the monetary costs to do that live would have been outrageous.
That is part of what keeps millions of people from seeing their dreams of being a filmmaker come true. One needs to either have money, connections, or both to get a break in Hollywood.
So, with enormous costs running into the hundreds of millions of dollars, mega-studios need mega-investors.
So mega-films get made for the sole purpose of making a return for the investors. Well-known actors get paid $80M for 10 days of work playing dead superheroes for the sole cold metric of who will put butts in seats.
Even if your favorite actor or director is a one-in-a-million talent, then there are still 330 people in the US alone as talented as they.
Hollywood’s model isn’t built to find the "one in a million." It’s built to de-risk art.
A $200M film can’t bet on unknown voices. It needs proven formulas, franchises, and familiar faces.
Result: Thousands of visionary storytellers—the undiscovered Camerons, Fosters, Howards, Nairs, and Tarantinos—get sidelined not for lack of talent, but for lack of access.
AI doesn’t just lower costs—it obliterates the gate, opening a flood of new, unrecognized talents.
The most interesting art isn’t where the money is. It’s where the constraints vanish.
Great points, James. I think you totally have the right (optimistic) approach to this technology.
Personally, I can tell you my friends from film school and I felt very discouraged with the old Hollywood gatekeeper system. We always felt locked out of getting our visions made.
Now, based on what you are describing we needn't wait for some developmental exec's blessing to make our project.
That's great! But the challenge is finding a way to distribute your content to a large following—and growing audience.
Everything is "dead" these days. The movie star can join the long line of dead agile coaches, dead software engineers, dead copy writers, dead middle managers, dead song writers, dead whatever-you-want.
I can see why you say that, Jurgen. But perhaps this development will spark something new, even breathing new life into creative fields like movies that were stymied by the old studio gatekeeper system.
Another well thought out article, Michael.
So far in film, we have seen five major ages in filmmaking. 1) The invention of the movie camera, 2) Talkies 3) Color 4) VCR/Camcorders and 5) Phone cameras.
We are now entering the sixth, and what I believe to be, the most important age of filmmaking - the age of AI moviemaking.
Now, I've done two feature-length AI-powered films so far, and a number of shorts. My first feature, The Wizard and The Scholar (every director should do a Robin Hood film at some point in their career), had a scene showing a dozen or so medieval ships exploding in a port. That scene took me.... 5 minutes (?) to create with AI at a minimal cost - an investment most people could afford.
But what would have been required to create that scene alone (especially live action) without AI? I sometimes joke that I'll put the environmental impact of all AI filmmaking against the environmental cost of just Titanic alone. :)
And the monetary costs to do that live would have been outrageous.
That is part of what keeps millions of people from seeing their dreams of being a filmmaker come true. One needs to either have money, connections, or both to get a break in Hollywood.
So, with enormous costs running into the hundreds of millions of dollars, mega-studios need mega-investors.
So mega-films get made for the sole purpose of making a return for the investors. Well-known actors get paid $80M for 10 days of work playing dead superheroes for the sole cold metric of who will put butts in seats.
Even if your favorite actor or director is a one-in-a-million talent, then there are still 330 people in the US alone as talented as they.
Hollywood’s model isn’t built to find the "one in a million." It’s built to de-risk art.
A $200M film can’t bet on unknown voices. It needs proven formulas, franchises, and familiar faces.
Result: Thousands of visionary storytellers—the undiscovered Camerons, Fosters, Howards, Nairs, and Tarantinos—get sidelined not for lack of talent, but for lack of access.
AI doesn’t just lower costs—it obliterates the gate, opening a flood of new, unrecognized talents.
The most interesting art isn’t where the money is. It’s where the constraints vanish.
James
Great points, James. I think you totally have the right (optimistic) approach to this technology.
Personally, I can tell you my friends from film school and I felt very discouraged with the old Hollywood gatekeeper system. We always felt locked out of getting our visions made.
Now, based on what you are describing we needn't wait for some developmental exec's blessing to make our project.
That's great! But the challenge is finding a way to distribute your content to a large following—and growing audience.
Perhaps AI can help with that too?
Everything is "dead" these days. The movie star can join the long line of dead agile coaches, dead software engineers, dead copy writers, dead middle managers, dead song writers, dead whatever-you-want.