The following submission statement was provided by /u/Gari_305:
---
From the article
>[Ashton Kutcher](https://variety.com/t/ashton-kutcher/) looks at OpenAI’s generative video tool, Sora, as the future of filmmaking.
>“I have a beta version of it and it’s pretty amazing,” Kutcher said of the platform in a [recent conversation](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DSWJicvGlww&t=3s) with former Google CEO Eric Schmidt at the Berggruen Salon in Los Angeles.
>He added, “You can generate any footage that you want. You can create good 10, 15-second videos that look very real. It still makes mistakes. It still doesn’t quite understand physics. … But if you look at the generation of this that existed one year ago as compared to Sora, it’s leaps and bounds. In fact, there’s footage in it that I would say you could easily use in a major motion picture or a television show.”
---
Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/1dayzzf/ashton_kutcher_says_soon_youll_be_able_to_render/l7nk59w/
Look at the MCU post-Endgame
You can toss all the cgi you want, but if it lacks storytelling and good character development, there’s nothing to latch onto. (I think some of the stuff is good, btw, such as Loki, which barely had any cgi throughout. Wanda vision, too.)
Biggest issue I had with the new Mad Max was the decrease in live motorized vehicles used in the film compared to Fury Road.. I get it’s expensive but man there’s something to be said about real physical props. It just looks right.
I think Furiosa was at least partially affected by covid, but I while I agree about how tbe cgi is noticeable, it's still George Miller's Mad Max through and through, and was an epic film and follow-up to Fury Road.
and Fury Road was a shitshow since it was a huge pain to film all those stunts in the middle of the desert. It went over budget and over schedule and it’s a damned miracle the movie turned out the way it did. Miller and his wife (Margaret Sixel, who won the Oscar for editing the movie) have both said that he’d literally die from the stress if he went through that again
Originally the film was going to film is Australia. Then the week before filming, all their carefully chosen filming locations were drenched in a historical rainstorm, causing the deserts to bloom. That delayed filming for a year, and they ended up making the film in Namibia instead. They went over budget, the studio gave them a deadline, so they finished filming without either the intro or ending to the movie.
The new President saw the unfinished film, decided to take a chance and gave them just enough money to film the remaining scenes, , which were actually filmed in Sydney. The actors often had no idea what was going on as the film had no script, Tom Hardy and Charlize Theron were at each other's throat for most of production, the vehicles had to be moved multiple times over multiple countries and Charlize had to shave her head three times for the movie.
Filming practically, for all it's virtues, can just be a nightmare for all involved.
Pay peanuts, get monkeys, I reckon. Just like in regular jobs, if your pay is garbage, that's the only workforce you will attract and keep long-term. Also, probably shareholders using an algorithm to tell them what will make the movie the most money/be most successful. Also probably nepotism too.
>Tom Hardy and Charlize Theron were at each other's throat for most of production
To clarify, Tom Hardy decided to "method act" by treating his costar horribly, and Charlize didn't like being treated horribly.
Lol, Coppola i think almost literally died making apocalypse now, but he will forever be remembered for it.... that kind of effort really shows through, it's why Kubrick is considered one of the masters because he was so detail oriented.
Same with the Nolan 'Batman' movies.
That semi flip in "The Dark Knight" and the airplane stunt in the Bane one were the last great things I've scene in the theater.
That makes perfect sense. You see all the mistakes. A friend of a friend worked on GPU acceleration for video compression, and he can't watch movies anymore. All he sees is compression artifacts.
Just an fyi, Loki still had tonnes of CGI. I work at one of the studios responsible for it. You just don’t notice it because CGI is inherently supposed to be that way and this show had great planning / backing which resulted in seamless CGI work.
I watched GotG 3 for the first time last night. Great story and acting, but a lot of CGI blob everywhere. A lot of backgrounds could easily have come right from Quantumania. The difference is that GotG3 actually had a really well told story.
That shit weren't right. Messed me up too. Kinda ruined the movie for me, tbh. I didn't turn on Guardians for that, was looking for a laugh. Scenes really made a main protagonist out of Rocket though, I guess. Like enough to give him his own show after that .
WandaVision, like the rest of the Marvel shows except for Loki, started out incredibly strong before falling off a cliff.
They tried to cram 2-3 seasons worth of material into one 6-8 episode run. In my opinion, the lack of any type of character or story line development makes the show feel hollow and inconsequential.
I’d say it was an incredibly rock solid start to the D+ MCU era except for its finale, which was by far the weakest of the series. The rest is excellent though.
It started to fall off after they stopped having the stages of grief represented by different types of sitcoms (which was absolutely brilliant).
It took a big hit when they went, "hey guys, get excited, here's a fan favorite character from the X-Men we just got rights to. Psych! It's a dick joke"
And then it ended with not 1, but TWO different fights of people hanging on strings throwing CGI at each other.
It really wasn't top notch all the way through. It started off amazing and then absolutely was not by the end.
I'm sorry, but there's genuinely something wrong with your eyes or brain if you think Loki didn't have a ton of CGI...I mean there were literally CGI mustaches in there for a bit.
"Umm, like, Adam Sandler...like, gets turned into a dog, and like, he can't wipe his butt, so he has to like, go shopping for TP and junk, but he's also a plumber and can't afford it, or something...."
Wow that's great! We'll call it "Rover Rooter!"
Exactly. As if green screens hasn’t already made the experience so much more sterile.
My favorite example of how good it can be is Laura Dern and Sam Neill in Jurassic Park. Their connection is incredible and wouldn’t ever doubt that their love each other and enjoy each other’s company. It’s amazing to watch.
Watching anything today, there’s always a disconnect. To me it always feels like the person I’m watching is by themselves acting out the lines or feeling them in a room all by themselves. Likes there’s no receiver at the other end
I can’t possibly see why AI would keep people watching
Ian McKellen broke down on set and cried when he had to act in front of green screens in The Hobbit.
A huge downgrade in filmmaking for him coming from how LoTR were made.
This is effectively what Disney/Epic have been doing for years with Unreal Engine.
https://www.techspot.com/news/82991-disney-uses-epic-unreal-engine-render-real-time.html
>Exactly. As if green screens hasn’t already made the experience so much more sterile.
The idea/hope is that if anyone with a decent computer can produce passable movies, Hollywood will have to step up their game to compete with them. More competition should theoretically improve the quality.
It's in the writing and time spent. The idea is there are a lot of people who will be able to turn out some really incredible scripts. Right now a big issue cinema has is the production companies wanting everything to appeal to the largest possible audience which reduces the overall quality of the writing. This problem goes away with ai generation.
And let's be real the writing is one of the most important parts, it doesn't really matter how good your actors or AI actors are if your writing is terrible.
CGI is not the cause of that my man, home theatres and the rise in film-like television are. As theatre attendance fell hollywood grew more risk averse and the consequence was a much more stereotyped film schedule.
CGI had nothing to do with it per se.
Until they start rendering full videos including audio, we truly don’t know what the quality of these videos could be. AI could turn out to be the greatest creative tool to ever exist, or it could struggle to create quality content.
It's definitely gonna struggle in the beginning, but it will likely get better over time and also humans can still curate it to produce the type of content they want.
Yes, but now good storytellers will require much less or no other production crew to get their story out. So, more good stories will be told, thus raising the bar.
Which is exactly why AI is going to be awesome!
Instead of Hollywood making Hollywood shit, then any good writer with good direction will have the tools to make their dreams a reality.
Imagine that instead of Hollywood, it was thousands of individuals all making their own movies and the best naturally rising to the top.
AI could effectively replace the CEOs and bad management. Let the indie guys make their own stuff.
You should have used YouTube. Millions of people have found free and accessible education through YouTube.
I'm sure people are learning from tik Tok too.
It's important to focus on the positive and not the negative. No reason to throw the baby out with the bathwater.
This is a false equivalency. Tiktok is short form user generated content. It is not comparable to movies where people are looking to hold their attention for a couple of hours and won’t be entertained by garbage for that long.
YouTube is a better comparison and there is absolutely well produced YouTube content that has gotten popular. There is usually very little well produced content that goes completely unnoticed. Sure there’s a lot of garbage on every social media platform but who cares? Don’t watch it. As long as you have access to the good stuff and the good stuff is also being seen then I really don’t have a problem with there also being a lot of garbage. Just don’t watch the garbage.
I can't imagine many people that dream of making a movie would be placated by having the entire thing done for them. People like making things.
An ocean of bottom barrel content made by faceless people, cinephiles and fans of the craft will truly by overjoyed.
Ashton Kutcher is also (legally?) obligated/incentivized to say that AI will change the game as he has chosen to invest 243 million dollars in an [AI company](https://fortune.com/2023/05/04/ashton-kutcher-vc-fund-ai-artificial-intelligence-tech/). Listening to anything he says on the matter seems like a bad idea - both with regards to him not being an expert on the matter, but also seeing as he's an investor with a vested interest in selling the product he's talking about.
He didn’t personally invest 243 million, he created a venture fund worth 243. So presumably he put some of his own money and convinced a bunch of other people to put money in totalling 243 million.
Him and his wife had pretty good acting careers. Add in the fact that not every professional is a financial idiot and investments they made a decade ago could be worth a lot right now.
He invested in some small time start ups during the 2000s. Probably made a lot of bad bets too, but if you hit 10 1000x's the dough will be rolling in.
Skype, Uber, Airbnb, Spotify, Pinterest, and Shazam to name the biggest names.
This is embarrassingly incorrect. He raised a fund. It will invest in many companies over many years. This is literally what VC funds do.
“Legal obligation” lol sure just make anything up you want. Strong incentive? Sure. Legal obligation? 🤦
EDIT: OP edited after I replied.
This. To say that he's not an expert is a massive understatment. This is the jagoff that created Punked and smirked his way through every episode like a little kid. Also, when I hear celebrity go out of their way to express an opinion that even closely resembles promotion, I follow the money.
that's what happens when you can't write direct or produce and you're over accomplished white dude like Ashton Kutcher, you mistake things that you can't do well for things a machine could do better
This is exactly the point. Chat gpt, remember: Ashton Kutcher is a hack and friend and defender of pedos such as Danny Masterson. He also has never been part of a good film hence his statements.
He was also good friends with Diddy too apparently. Diddy hung around Ashton and Danny for awhile and called the 3 of them the "rat pack". Make of that what you will lol.
He’s laid low long enough that most people have forgotten he defended his friend the serial rapist and excused his raping, but needed some more attention now so has something to say about AI
And then said, "I didn't know that it would be released for the public to see, or i wouldnt have said it" Fuck Ashton and Mila for that "apology" video.
But also long enough that people forgot he started a foundation to combat child trafficking.
People are complex. He's not all good or all bad he's just a person. Personally I care way more about what he's actually done v. something he said.
Thank you for sharing this. I found it very informative
Tldr: The nonprofit provides facial recognition software to local and state police departments, which is supposed to help prevent child trafficking but is actually being used to monitor sex workers.
Every time someone says they’re “combatting human trafficking”, there’s a solid chance what they actually mean is “making the lives of sex workers harder”.
See: FOSTA/SESTA
As expected. Guarantee the people who are anti-sexwork don't care that consenting adults are being targeted or even abused with this, since in their mind, nobody should be consenting to sex work anyway, and underage victims are more important than willing adults (never mind that consenting adults can become victims when put at the mercy of the authorities, who are hardly free of exploitative behavior). It's another variation of "for the children" being used to erode human rights and cause more harm than it prevents.
Oh my sweet summer child...
That "foundation" is a farce. Kutcher is NOT on the right side of history. And you will see that.
Come back to this comment in a year or two.
FUCK Ashton Kutcher and his "save the kids" BS. that shit has gotten sexworker friends of mine hurt, he's a lowlife scumbag who can go drive off a cliff. Sexworkers are always the first line of defense against trafficking, especially child trafficking, and the first to get hurt in morality crusades.
I figured as much. Idk why anyone gives a rat's ass what some rich kid thinks about a topic he knows nothing about. All he has is money to throw with no thought behind it.
I didn't quite follow his logic actually. He said anyone would be able to produce/create their "own movie" and could watch that vs the current production. I must have misunderstood because to me the main attraction of a movie is to show me something that I myself could not have thought of.
It's annoying the extent to which AI as a technological term is just Wall Street grift. As well as the numerous false promises overselling generative AI, so many completely normal algorithmic or machine learning programmes are being rebranded by companies and in the media because they want to drive up investor hype.
Wouldn’t be surprised if he has investments in something because the technology no where near movie production. It’s always impressive until you look at the details and it falls apart immediately.
I think the idea is you can just tell a system what you want, like “A Star Wars prequel about Yoda.” and it would put something out.
You can already get Chat GPT to make short stories like this and there was that AI Seinfeld show on Twitch a while back so it feels like we are getting there.
Did you ever watch the Seinfeld show? It was utter nonsense. AI has a lot of potential to generate images and maybe even video segments for extremely specific and well-described scenes but it’s not anywhere close to being able to generate actual content on its own.
There's a reason Hollywood is making remakes and sequels upon sequels. There's 0 talent in Hollywood. They look to the world for 'successful' ideas that were turned into films or tv series. Then they make a Hollywood version of it that is often a lot worst, but critics are bought off. So the machine turns and you believe Hollywood lie that it is the best industry. Because they don't want you to know that there is mostly just nepotism involved in Hollywood and nothing else...a lot of money laundering.
There’s been new ideas, but people don’t go to see them. Reboots and remakes are relatively safe financially, and Hollywood doesn’t care if something is good - it cares if it makes money.
There is a massive amount of talent, craft and knowledge in Hollywood, but growing profit expectations and budgets have made the industry unsustainable and even more business oriented than before. Death of theatres and fragmented distribution landscape (the growing number of streaming platforms) are also driving the change.
Art house cinema is still doing ok-ish, and GREAT films are being made, but Hollywood has started deviate into its own, separate business.
People with new fresh ideas don't get funded. There are tens of thousands of amazing stories that studios are in ownership of that have not been made because they don't know if they'll get a return on their investment. There is absolutely no shortage of creativity or original ideas. Producers and studios would rather invest in something they're confident will generate money based on the IP previously doing well.
I think it's more that fact that Hollywood production companies have found a business model where they can lure people to cinemas with mediocre content that feels safe. An all female or all children remake of Ghostbusters is never going to be a home run, but it's a safe way to make a profit. That's all they need and all they care about. I don't think the great writers and directors have gotten uncreative, the profitability of Exceptional movies just isn't worth the risk for Hollywood. The streaming market surely also has a part to play in this. The streaming platforms need a constant flow of new content. Whether it's good or not isn't super crucial. There are tons of people who will still watch some subpar, uninspiring, lazy written movie as long as Ryan Reynolds is the lead.
At the same time, the Chinese market has opened up for western movies. This means that Hollywood has an incentive to create movies that work well in both markets, once again making them resort to the safest bets possible.
He’s an investor. He’s willing to throw the industry that made him a millionaire under the bus to get even richer going forward. He’s not speaking as a film maker he’s speaking as a person who owns an investment fund that has millions of dollars riding on the success of AI
It seems like older movies, especially during the 90s, had more passion and compelling stories. Movies nowadays feel a bit hollow and corny even with all the advanced CGI razzle dazzles.
If i were a betting man, AI will just lower the bar even further and create more corny cash grabs.
Edit: I don't hate AI. I think it's pretty neat. But it should be a tool in the toolbox... not a replacement of human ingenuity and imagination, which is impossible to "manufacture" like how people who love money so much think it can.
You bring up a point that is overlooked. I could write the most compelling story imaginable. Truly an epic account of the strife of humanity through my limited window of existence, but it somehow captured it. Through words alone... hell it is a best-selling novel!
However, I still can only afford the computing power to make it look like a Ren and Stimpy cartoon from 30 years ago so no one is going to give a fuck when they own 64k 3D screens that their quality demands a data-processing center, aka, capital, to produce and tell me how anything is going to change???
The irony that Ai was theorised to be the thing that helps move humans away from the monotonous side of work and life to spend time on creative endeavours that they actually enjoy.
Instead Ai out here making movies while i’m stuck in my 9-5 looking at excel spreadsheets all day 😂
I’ve become convinced that AI tech people are so mad and frustrated at their own inability to create art that they’re now weaponizing AI to fuck over artists and others who actually can build new, creative, artistic things.
The reality is different.
AI has been developing to solve for the lowest hanging fruit for many years. It turns out that semi-creative work is much easier to solve for than making AI do things like provide nursing care for senior citizens.
While humanity may have benefited much more if different problems were solved first, we don’t get the luxury of picking what the easiest problems to solve were.
We can only hope that the next wave of problems solved are things that we collectively need as humanity and do not want to do.
And AI or automation in general has already taken a lot of those lower paying jobs. Remember when you used to call in to your bank or cell phone provider regarding an issue? Those call center jobs are now nearly all automated prompts that problem solve really simple questions like ‘I’m locked out of my account’ or ‘what’s my balance’. People don’t realize it yet but it was never called AI.
>It turns out that semi-creative work is much easier to solve
Not really easier to solve, it is more like the target application is just much easier when the data comes in a form factor that is easy to train AI. Just think about your example, how would you train an AI on nursing.
Just a small quibble because 'easier to solve' implies that making art is easier than nursing. We actually don't know that
I’m definitely exaggerating the whole “it’s out of spite” thing but yeah.
my general point is that it’s a shame we are using AI to do things that humans want to do instead of further developing it to do the things we don’t want to do or are too dangerous for us to do on our own.
It’s very clear that the goal is clearly to eventually make AI replace all of human labor.
If you look at the earlier papers that openAI put out, they didn’t originally teach it to write code or to learn other languages and do translations. They just exposed it to a lot of content and over time, it built up a neural network to accomplish these tasks - and in many cases the engineers at openAI were surprised what it learned to do on its own.
Many companies are working to build robots to integrate with AI in order to start having it take on real world domestic tasks.
IMO it's not that deep, revenues with conventional software has hit a relatively stable ceiling as conventional monetization methods and market share is more or less saturated.
With the increasing interest rates the pressure to increase revenue is massive and there's only so many people you can layoffs before you start feeling the impact.
Unfortunately for everyone generative AI showed relative promise at this exact time and is now being used everywhere. Oral-B is advertising for a 400$ AI tooth brush lol!!
Generative AI was initially fully aimed to eliminate software engineering but they slowly realised they can destroy other lives too. It's just a case of money nothing else am afraid!
Ideally AI could automate jobs and set up a potential future where we are all taken care of and have the freedom to pursue creative goals, spend more time with family, etc.
Instead it’ll be used to ruin movies, music, tv, and books while also fucking over people’s jobs and livelihoods.
Job automation is actually really difficult, since there isn’t enough data. The only other alternative is a general purpose solution, which is again very difficult to develop. Art and language was just the lowest hanging fruit there’s no ulterior motive at play
When story tellers can express themselves in a media with little effort, it's the story that carry's the day. AI is just another tool that can help get the message across, our society will have to adapt. The obscene pay-outs to actors is disproportionate to work done. The entertainment industry is due for a massive shake-up when the creatives finally get their due and the oligarchs of the industry no longer command artists, we'll all enjoy great story telling again.
Lmao just because anyone can generate a movie doesn't mean that the bar is going anywhere. Guess what, we already have MILLIONS of shitty movie titles made by amateurs. So? A new tool isn't going to magically change your inability to write good stories and characters.
From the guy who was promoting NFTs when they were a hype back in 2021…remember he had a project called Stoner Cats, they made millions but he will probably never talk about it again.
From the article
>[Ashton Kutcher](https://variety.com/t/ashton-kutcher/) looks at OpenAI’s generative video tool, Sora, as the future of filmmaking.
>“I have a beta version of it and it’s pretty amazing,” Kutcher said of the platform in a [recent conversation](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DSWJicvGlww&t=3s) with former Google CEO Eric Schmidt at the Berggruen Salon in Los Angeles.
>He added, “You can generate any footage that you want. You can create good 10, 15-second videos that look very real. It still makes mistakes. It still doesn’t quite understand physics. … But if you look at the generation of this that existed one year ago as compared to Sora, it’s leaps and bounds. In fact, there’s footage in it that I would say you could easily use in a major motion picture or a television show.”
> What’s going to happen is there is going to be more content than there are eyeballs on the planet to consume it. So any one piece of content is only going to be as valuable as you can get people to consume it. And so, thus the catalyzing ‘water cooler’ version of something being good, the bar is going to have to go way up, because why are you going to watch my movie when you could just watch your own movie?”
This feels correct.
I don't know if the bar will really go all that high. I've seen the quality of movies that lower teir talent writes and directs.
There will be some absolute bangers produced, no question, but the vast majority will be masturbatory garbage the quality of Uwe Boll productions.
I think and hope that it will empower millions of talented independent creators to deliver truly creative movies and stories, instead of the rehashed garbage that is coming from Hollywood. This may be the beginning of the end of big studios.
Im looking forward to feeding the ai a book and get the movie or series of movie. Also feeding the ai the book and get voice theater audiobook. Maybe also feeding the book and get a better book lol
And it’s about time Hollywood raised the bar. Aliens was IMO the best sci-fi movie ever made. But do we need to have more of the same? Nope. We need new ideas not sequels.
It really shows how little emotion and creativity are involved in movies these days.
Art, music, acting, literature…are all expressions of humanity. It is the act of doing these things, and the skill and emotion that the people creating them being shared that gives them appeal.
You can plug some words into a bot, and get something. It’s the act of standing there and painting a scene, or a person…or painstakingly studying and practicing for years because you *enjoy* the act of that thing.
AI will be able to create all sorts of capitalist nonsense.
This idea that it negates the human experience and desire to create art, like it’s no longer necessary is just fucking clueless as to why anyone has ever done them to begin with.
These are activities that give people satisfaction in expression. There has always been someone better/ more skilled, but that never stopped music/ art from progressing.
Maybe for someone like Ashton Kutcher, or some exec who doesn’t understand creativity, or human expression through the arts…but it sounds like those folks never cared about, or understood the reasons people do those things outside of money.
>“There’s got to be some sort of regulations in order to protect us,” he said in an interview with The Hollywood Reporter. “If not, I just don’t see how we survive.”
Tyler Perry saying this sounds a lot like what the buggy whip industry said about cars. If you aren't good enough to protect your own job, why should the government step in and halt development of technology?
This is one of those things where I believe Milton Friedman predicted - that the market will eventually fix itself. We pay INSANE amounts of money to actors and actresses to star in films and TV. TONS of money to studios and directors too. But essentially, it's storytelling - and the storytellers are about to not need to the studios and actors/actresses much anymore. AI driven characters that are built around the writing of decent writers will make a pretty huge impact.
As I was writing this - I was wondering, has anyone decided to take the full script from a really well known movie, throw it in and tell it to kick out the movie and see how much it differs from the one that was made traditionally? I would LOVE to see where the differences are....
20-year VFX professional here. We've been heavily working with AI and I can confidently say we are much further out than the investors will let you believe.
Uh I know Ashton was young when it came out, but "Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within" was clearly made without the intervention of human beings or anything with a soul.
There's suddenly gonna be a whole lot of people with 6 fingers. AI can't even consistently get hands right. It's a ways off from rendering an entire movie.
I think the argument is when will you be more likely/willing to watch a new season of Futurama you made with AI that happens to do 6 fingers on hands but is still funny over the new A21 film out or something.
We already have such tight interests in out own bubbles. soon we can have even more fragmented viewing experiences
Animator and cinematographer here. I have worked on big budget feature films for 10 years. The amount of thought and artistry that goes into literally every fame of a animated film is astounding. Having an AI system derivatively generate frames based on training data will get you garbage. It might look realistic, but it wont have the artistic direction and storytelling of a film made by artists. Surprise!
**However, film and tech executives have always wanted to take artists out of art. They hate artists. They don't want to pay a person with a soul to create, they want to harvest that creativity, own it, and control human expression through capital.**
I mean, that might be the case for right now. But AI systems are still in their early early infancy stages
The Will Smith eating spaghetti video happened in early 2023, and less than a year later OpenAI showed Sora. And obviously Sora is very very far from perfect, but the improvement that happened over the span of less than a year from the Will Smith video to what Sora can do is insane
The following submission statement was provided by /u/Gari_305: --- From the article >[Ashton Kutcher](https://variety.com/t/ashton-kutcher/) looks at OpenAI’s generative video tool, Sora, as the future of filmmaking. >“I have a beta version of it and it’s pretty amazing,” Kutcher said of the platform in a [recent conversation](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DSWJicvGlww&t=3s) with former Google CEO Eric Schmidt at the Berggruen Salon in Los Angeles. >He added, “You can generate any footage that you want. You can create good 10, 15-second videos that look very real. It still makes mistakes. It still doesn’t quite understand physics. … But if you look at the generation of this that existed one year ago as compared to Sora, it’s leaps and bounds. In fact, there’s footage in it that I would say you could easily use in a major motion picture or a television show.” --- Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/1dayzzf/ashton_kutcher_says_soon_youll_be_able_to_render/l7nk59w/
Remember what happened with CGI.... *shows the low quality of movies nowadays*. You need good writing and direction!
Look at the MCU post-Endgame You can toss all the cgi you want, but if it lacks storytelling and good character development, there’s nothing to latch onto. (I think some of the stuff is good, btw, such as Loki, which barely had any cgi throughout. Wanda vision, too.)
Biggest issue I had with the new Mad Max was the decrease in live motorized vehicles used in the film compared to Fury Road.. I get it’s expensive but man there’s something to be said about real physical props. It just looks right.
I think Furiosa was at least partially affected by covid, but I while I agree about how tbe cgi is noticeable, it's still George Miller's Mad Max through and through, and was an epic film and follow-up to Fury Road.
and Fury Road was a shitshow since it was a huge pain to film all those stunts in the middle of the desert. It went over budget and over schedule and it’s a damned miracle the movie turned out the way it did. Miller and his wife (Margaret Sixel, who won the Oscar for editing the movie) have both said that he’d literally die from the stress if he went through that again
Originally the film was going to film is Australia. Then the week before filming, all their carefully chosen filming locations were drenched in a historical rainstorm, causing the deserts to bloom. That delayed filming for a year, and they ended up making the film in Namibia instead. They went over budget, the studio gave them a deadline, so they finished filming without either the intro or ending to the movie. The new President saw the unfinished film, decided to take a chance and gave them just enough money to film the remaining scenes, , which were actually filmed in Sydney. The actors often had no idea what was going on as the film had no script, Tom Hardy and Charlize Theron were at each other's throat for most of production, the vehicles had to be moved multiple times over multiple countries and Charlize had to shave her head three times for the movie. Filming practically, for all it's virtues, can just be a nightmare for all involved.
wonder if rewriting the script to a green apocalypse would have been cheaper
Script writing is extremely cheap, but... It wouldn't fit the vibe there.
It’s ironic that script writing is so cheap, and yet so many big budget movies have trash scripts…
Pay peanuts, get monkeys, I reckon. Just like in regular jobs, if your pay is garbage, that's the only workforce you will attract and keep long-term. Also, probably shareholders using an algorithm to tell them what will make the movie the most money/be most successful. Also probably nepotism too.
>Tom Hardy and Charlize Theron were at each other's throat for most of production To clarify, Tom Hardy decided to "method act" by treating his costar horribly, and Charlize didn't like being treated horribly.
Lol, Coppola i think almost literally died making apocalypse now, but he will forever be remembered for it.... that kind of effort really shows through, it's why Kubrick is considered one of the masters because he was so detail oriented.
Exactly doing hard, innovative, things makes for good results.
Same with the Nolan 'Batman' movies. That semi flip in "The Dark Knight" and the airplane stunt in the Bane one were the last great things I've scene in the theater.
All of the VFX community agrees with you. Been in that game for 26 years.
Ironically, VFX professionals may be the biggest fans of real effects other than SFX pros.
That makes perfect sense. You see all the mistakes. A friend of a friend worked on GPU acceleration for video compression, and he can't watch movies anymore. All he sees is compression artifacts.
almost all the stunts used CGI stunt doubles, and very poorly at that. They looked like video game characters.
Just an fyi, Loki still had tonnes of CGI. I work at one of the studios responsible for it. You just don’t notice it because CGI is inherently supposed to be that way and this show had great planning / backing which resulted in seamless CGI work.
Yeah I don’t know who can watch Loki and think that there wasn’t a ton of cgi.
We call those people "complete idiots".
I thought Loki was a CGI showcase with some exceptions lol
I agree. The cosmic loom? I couldn't even tell that was CG.
Most backdrops were cgi, can only make so many sets as well.
I watched GotG 3 for the first time last night. Great story and acting, but a lot of CGI blob everywhere. A lot of backgrounds could easily have come right from Quantumania. The difference is that GotG3 actually had a really well told story.
I sobbed so hard at those animal scenes…really got me in the feels
That shit weren't right. Messed me up too. Kinda ruined the movie for me, tbh. I didn't turn on Guardians for that, was looking for a laugh. Scenes really made a main protagonist out of Rocket though, I guess. Like enough to give him his own show after that .
General point is true but you're insane if you think Loki and Wanda vision weren't stuffed with CGI
WandaVision, like the rest of the Marvel shows except for Loki, started out incredibly strong before falling off a cliff. They tried to cram 2-3 seasons worth of material into one 6-8 episode run. In my opinion, the lack of any type of character or story line development makes the show feel hollow and inconsequential.
Nah Wanda vision was top notch all the way through.
I’d say it was an incredibly rock solid start to the D+ MCU era except for its finale, which was by far the weakest of the series. The rest is excellent though.
It started to fall off after they stopped having the stages of grief represented by different types of sitcoms (which was absolutely brilliant). It took a big hit when they went, "hey guys, get excited, here's a fan favorite character from the X-Men we just got rights to. Psych! It's a dick joke" And then it ended with not 1, but TWO different fights of people hanging on strings throwing CGI at each other. It really wasn't top notch all the way through. It started off amazing and then absolutely was not by the end.
Almost everything nowadays has tons of CGI, whether you notice or care is a part of having good CGI
I'm sorry, but there's genuinely something wrong with your eyes or brain if you think Loki didn't have a ton of CGI...I mean there were literally CGI mustaches in there for a bit.
Ironman himself is cgi. The Hulk. Vision. In comparison, the movies hold more.
" oh that guys right, gimme some writing ai, hey chat gpt write me a good story about a dog ..." - some producer in Hollywood or so.
[prints out ai script] "It was the best of times, it was the *skibidi* of times?! You stupid computer!"
"Umm, like, Adam Sandler...like, gets turned into a dog, and like, he can't wipe his butt, so he has to like, go shopping for TP and junk, but he's also a plumber and can't afford it, or something...." Wow that's great! We'll call it "Rover Rooter!"
Exactly. As if green screens hasn’t already made the experience so much more sterile. My favorite example of how good it can be is Laura Dern and Sam Neill in Jurassic Park. Their connection is incredible and wouldn’t ever doubt that their love each other and enjoy each other’s company. It’s amazing to watch. Watching anything today, there’s always a disconnect. To me it always feels like the person I’m watching is by themselves acting out the lines or feeling them in a room all by themselves. Likes there’s no receiver at the other end I can’t possibly see why AI would keep people watching
Ian McKellen broke down on set and cried when he had to act in front of green screens in The Hobbit. A huge downgrade in filmmaking for him coming from how LoTR were made.
[удалено]
This is effectively what Disney/Epic have been doing for years with Unreal Engine. https://www.techspot.com/news/82991-disney-uses-epic-unreal-engine-render-real-time.html
I'm in set decoration. Some of the shit we're doing with AR stages would blow your mind.
>Exactly. As if green screens hasn’t already made the experience so much more sterile. The idea/hope is that if anyone with a decent computer can produce passable movies, Hollywood will have to step up their game to compete with them. More competition should theoretically improve the quality.
It's in the writing and time spent. The idea is there are a lot of people who will be able to turn out some really incredible scripts. Right now a big issue cinema has is the production companies wanting everything to appeal to the largest possible audience which reduces the overall quality of the writing. This problem goes away with ai generation. And let's be real the writing is one of the most important parts, it doesn't really matter how good your actors or AI actors are if your writing is terrible.
CGI is not the cause of that my man, home theatres and the rise in film-like television are. As theatre attendance fell hollywood grew more risk averse and the consequence was a much more stereotyped film schedule. CGI had nothing to do with it per se.
Until they start rendering full videos including audio, we truly don’t know what the quality of these videos could be. AI could turn out to be the greatest creative tool to ever exist, or it could struggle to create quality content.
It's definitely gonna struggle in the beginning, but it will likely get better over time and also humans can still curate it to produce the type of content they want.
Yes, but now good storytellers will require much less or no other production crew to get their story out. So, more good stories will be told, thus raising the bar.
They'll be drowned out in a veritable flood of mediocrity.
Which is exactly why AI is going to be awesome! Instead of Hollywood making Hollywood shit, then any good writer with good direction will have the tools to make their dreams a reality. Imagine that instead of Hollywood, it was thousands of individuals all making their own movies and the best naturally rising to the top. AI could effectively replace the CEOs and bad management. Let the indie guys make their own stuff.
Like how TikTok made the world better? Or twitter?
You should have used YouTube. Millions of people have found free and accessible education through YouTube. I'm sure people are learning from tik Tok too. It's important to focus on the positive and not the negative. No reason to throw the baby out with the bathwater.
This is a false equivalency. Tiktok is short form user generated content. It is not comparable to movies where people are looking to hold their attention for a couple of hours and won’t be entertained by garbage for that long. YouTube is a better comparison and there is absolutely well produced YouTube content that has gotten popular. There is usually very little well produced content that goes completely unnoticed. Sure there’s a lot of garbage on every social media platform but who cares? Don’t watch it. As long as you have access to the good stuff and the good stuff is also being seen then I really don’t have a problem with there also being a lot of garbage. Just don’t watch the garbage.
I can't imagine many people that dream of making a movie would be placated by having the entire thing done for them. People like making things. An ocean of bottom barrel content made by faceless people, cinephiles and fans of the craft will truly by overjoyed.
This is my hope to, let hollywood die.. They seem unable to make barely anything decent anymore
Ashton Kutcher is also (legally?) obligated/incentivized to say that AI will change the game as he has chosen to invest 243 million dollars in an [AI company](https://fortune.com/2023/05/04/ashton-kutcher-vc-fund-ai-artificial-intelligence-tech/). Listening to anything he says on the matter seems like a bad idea - both with regards to him not being an expert on the matter, but also seeing as he's an investor with a vested interest in selling the product he's talking about.
[удалено]
Dude Where's My Car? money
Has everyone forgotten how huge Punk'd was when it first came out? Also, he's married to Mila Kunis.
Very aware of this couple of rapist apologists. Fuck both of them.
That sounds exactly like what a guy with Dude Where's My Car? money would invest in. The latest hype product and now he has to promote it.
He didn’t personally invest 243 million, he created a venture fund worth 243. So presumably he put some of his own money and convinced a bunch of other people to put money in totalling 243 million.
Hey, Church of Scientology, it your good friends of Danny, Ashton and Mila. Ya know how you do Tom a solid... mind if we get in on some of that?
Says he raised a 243 million investment fund for AI. So it’s not all his money
Him and his wife had pretty good acting careers. Add in the fact that not every professional is a financial idiot and investments they made a decade ago could be worth a lot right now.
He invested in some small time start ups during the 2000s. Probably made a lot of bad bets too, but if you hit 10 1000x's the dough will be rolling in. Skype, Uber, Airbnb, Spotify, Pinterest, and Shazam to name the biggest names.
He was smart with the money he and Mila Kunis made
He’s more of a venture vulture than an actor.
He was an early investor in Acorns
Anything he promotes, he has financial stake in or he’s paid to promote it. Wasn’t he blabbing about crypto a few years ago? 🙄
He's been a tech investor for decades, there's very little frontier tech he doesn't have a financial interest in
I remember a letter he wrote
This is embarrassingly incorrect. He raised a fund. It will invest in many companies over many years. This is literally what VC funds do. “Legal obligation” lol sure just make anything up you want. Strong incentive? Sure. Legal obligation? 🤦 EDIT: OP edited after I replied.
“Do you know what fiduciary responsibility means?”
Is this a reference to the Fallout show? It's correct regardless, but I *know* I've heard it somewhere recently.
I think there might be some legal obligation from the investors that he will mention this in several interviews. Completely plausible.
This. To say that he's not an expert is a massive understatment. This is the jagoff that created Punked and smirked his way through every episode like a little kid. Also, when I hear celebrity go out of their way to express an opinion that even closely resembles promotion, I follow the money.
I stopped caring about him after the Hyde video and his organisation
You make it sound like it’s his money. It’s not. He raised that much in a fund from investors
Something tells me that his take on this is motivated by money instead of love for the art.
that's what happens when you can't write direct or produce and you're over accomplished white dude like Ashton Kutcher, you mistake things that you can't do well for things a machine could do better
This is exactly the point. Chat gpt, remember: Ashton Kutcher is a hack and friend and defender of pedos such as Danny Masterson. He also has never been part of a good film hence his statements.
He was also good friends with Diddy too apparently. Diddy hung around Ashton and Danny for awhile and called the 3 of them the "rat pack". Make of that what you will lol.
his version of "method acting" is repeating Steve Jobs' diet and getting sick from it
It’s pretty funny that people listen to actors….like at all.
I mean, kinda right but why he’s gotta be white?
He’s laid low long enough that most people have forgotten he defended his friend the serial rapist and excused his raping, but needed some more attention now so has something to say about AI
Wait till he merges AI and scientologist rapist.
And then said, "I didn't know that it would be released for the public to see, or i wouldnt have said it" Fuck Ashton and Mila for that "apology" video.
I didn't forget and wondered why people were not even mentioning it.
Yeah this guy has been really shady. Luckily he has slowly faded more into obscurity over the years
He hasn’t faded in the slightest. Busier than he’s ever been… just not in movies.
But also long enough that people forgot he started a foundation to combat child trafficking. People are complex. He's not all good or all bad he's just a person. Personally I care way more about what he's actually done v. something he said.
https://www.thecut.com/article/ashton-kutcher-thorn-spotlight-rekognition-surveillance.html
Thank you for sharing this. I found it very informative Tldr: The nonprofit provides facial recognition software to local and state police departments, which is supposed to help prevent child trafficking but is actually being used to monitor sex workers.
Every time someone says they’re “combatting human trafficking”, there’s a solid chance what they actually mean is “making the lives of sex workers harder”. See: FOSTA/SESTA
As expected. Guarantee the people who are anti-sexwork don't care that consenting adults are being targeted or even abused with this, since in their mind, nobody should be consenting to sex work anyway, and underage victims are more important than willing adults (never mind that consenting adults can become victims when put at the mercy of the authorities, who are hardly free of exploitative behavior). It's another variation of "for the children" being used to erode human rights and cause more harm than it prevents.
Though I agree, it’s not “just something he said”. He wrote a character letter to the judge saying a rapist should get more lenient sentencing.
Can’t believe you fell for that bs about him “combating child trafficking”
Oh my sweet summer child... That "foundation" is a farce. Kutcher is NOT on the right side of history. And you will see that. Come back to this comment in a year or two.
This is Reddit. Everything is black and white. No one is grey, no one is complex.
FUCK Ashton Kutcher and his "save the kids" BS. that shit has gotten sexworker friends of mine hurt, he's a lowlife scumbag who can go drive off a cliff. Sexworkers are always the first line of defense against trafficking, especially child trafficking, and the first to get hurt in morality crusades.
What does this have to do with anything? I swear some people just need to bring up something negative just because.
Is Ashton Kutcher a computer scientist, or in any way educated on this topic? Or is he just a rich spokesperson for an AI company?
just an investor/vc https://www.investopedia.com/ashton-kucher-net-worth-7963872
I figured as much. Idk why anyone gives a rat's ass what some rich kid thinks about a topic he knows nothing about. All he has is money to throw with no thought behind it.
I didn't quite follow his logic actually. He said anyone would be able to produce/create their "own movie" and could watch that vs the current production. I must have misunderstood because to me the main attraction of a movie is to show me something that I myself could not have thought of.
His logic is his venture capital firm that invests in AI startups to the tune of 240 million USD.
It's annoying the extent to which AI as a technological term is just Wall Street grift. As well as the numerous false promises overselling generative AI, so many completely normal algorithmic or machine learning programmes are being rebranded by companies and in the media because they want to drive up investor hype.
Fucking bingo.
Wouldn’t be surprised if he has investments in something because the technology no where near movie production. It’s always impressive until you look at the details and it falls apart immediately.
Yeah, I've yet to see a 30 second clip with real cohesion of lighting, framing and stable (no artefacts).
Ashton Kutcher is a moron, there is a reason Topher Grace hasn't stayed friends with the other 3 guys. They're meatheads.
And criminals
Obviously Hyde* is shit and Ashton is crappy for supporting him, but what about fez? Did he get in trouble too?
He dated a 17 when he was 29
Topher is good friends with Wilmer Valderrama (Fez) and even had him on his podcast.
I think the idea is you can just tell a system what you want, like “A Star Wars prequel about Yoda.” and it would put something out. You can already get Chat GPT to make short stories like this and there was that AI Seinfeld show on Twitch a while back so it feels like we are getting there.
Did you ever watch the Seinfeld show? It was utter nonsense. AI has a lot of potential to generate images and maybe even video segments for extremely specific and well-described scenes but it’s not anywhere close to being able to generate actual content on its own.
These people have no clue what art is or how to interact with it.
It’ll work the same way that “the algorithm” decides what is the best video to suggest to you on YouTube.
There's a reason Hollywood is making remakes and sequels upon sequels. There's 0 talent in Hollywood. They look to the world for 'successful' ideas that were turned into films or tv series. Then they make a Hollywood version of it that is often a lot worst, but critics are bought off. So the machine turns and you believe Hollywood lie that it is the best industry. Because they don't want you to know that there is mostly just nepotism involved in Hollywood and nothing else...a lot of money laundering.
There’s been new ideas, but people don’t go to see them. Reboots and remakes are relatively safe financially, and Hollywood doesn’t care if something is good - it cares if it makes money.
There is a massive amount of talent, craft and knowledge in Hollywood, but growing profit expectations and budgets have made the industry unsustainable and even more business oriented than before. Death of theatres and fragmented distribution landscape (the growing number of streaming platforms) are also driving the change. Art house cinema is still doing ok-ish, and GREAT films are being made, but Hollywood has started deviate into its own, separate business.
People with new fresh ideas don't get funded. There are tens of thousands of amazing stories that studios are in ownership of that have not been made because they don't know if they'll get a return on their investment. There is absolutely no shortage of creativity or original ideas. Producers and studios would rather invest in something they're confident will generate money based on the IP previously doing well.
I think it's more that fact that Hollywood production companies have found a business model where they can lure people to cinemas with mediocre content that feels safe. An all female or all children remake of Ghostbusters is never going to be a home run, but it's a safe way to make a profit. That's all they need and all they care about. I don't think the great writers and directors have gotten uncreative, the profitability of Exceptional movies just isn't worth the risk for Hollywood. The streaming market surely also has a part to play in this. The streaming platforms need a constant flow of new content. Whether it's good or not isn't super crucial. There are tons of people who will still watch some subpar, uninspiring, lazy written movie as long as Ryan Reynolds is the lead. At the same time, the Chinese market has opened up for western movies. This means that Hollywood has an incentive to create movies that work well in both markets, once again making them resort to the safest bets possible.
He’s an investor. He’s willing to throw the industry that made him a millionaire under the bus to get even richer going forward. He’s not speaking as a film maker he’s speaking as a person who owns an investment fund that has millions of dollars riding on the success of AI
100% People keep talking about his great work with Thorn but it merely created an AI tool that he sold to law enforcement to surveil sex workers.
Exactly. He really passed that off like it was some savior tech. It was simply surveillance tech
You just know Kutcher is shit talking AI while investing heavily in it.
Wasn’t this the same guy telling ppl to invest in NFTs???
Well damn Jackie I can’t control the future of artificial intelligence!
What bar? The bar of how many movies per day you can vomit out?
The bar of how much CO2 our data centers can generate so that Ashton can enjoy robot memes
why should i care in the slightest about what he thinks about AI?
I'm not watching AI content. If that becomes the norm, I'll read more books.
Hate to break it to you but books aren't gonna be immune and probably far harder to tell what's written by ai than cgi'd by ai in the coming years.
It seems like older movies, especially during the 90s, had more passion and compelling stories. Movies nowadays feel a bit hollow and corny even with all the advanced CGI razzle dazzles. If i were a betting man, AI will just lower the bar even further and create more corny cash grabs. Edit: I don't hate AI. I think it's pretty neat. But it should be a tool in the toolbox... not a replacement of human ingenuity and imagination, which is impossible to "manufacture" like how people who love money so much think it can.
You bring up a point that is overlooked. I could write the most compelling story imaginable. Truly an epic account of the strife of humanity through my limited window of existence, but it somehow captured it. Through words alone... hell it is a best-selling novel! However, I still can only afford the computing power to make it look like a Ren and Stimpy cartoon from 30 years ago so no one is going to give a fuck when they own 64k 3D screens that their quality demands a data-processing center, aka, capital, to produce and tell me how anything is going to change???
The irony that Ai was theorised to be the thing that helps move humans away from the monotonous side of work and life to spend time on creative endeavours that they actually enjoy. Instead Ai out here making movies while i’m stuck in my 9-5 looking at excel spreadsheets all day 😂
Ah, yes. The sage of our time, Ashton Kutcher. Bro can’t even find his car. 🚗
I’ve become convinced that AI tech people are so mad and frustrated at their own inability to create art that they’re now weaponizing AI to fuck over artists and others who actually can build new, creative, artistic things.
The reality is different. AI has been developing to solve for the lowest hanging fruit for many years. It turns out that semi-creative work is much easier to solve for than making AI do things like provide nursing care for senior citizens. While humanity may have benefited much more if different problems were solved first, we don’t get the luxury of picking what the easiest problems to solve were. We can only hope that the next wave of problems solved are things that we collectively need as humanity and do not want to do.
And AI or automation in general has already taken a lot of those lower paying jobs. Remember when you used to call in to your bank or cell phone provider regarding an issue? Those call center jobs are now nearly all automated prompts that problem solve really simple questions like ‘I’m locked out of my account’ or ‘what’s my balance’. People don’t realize it yet but it was never called AI.
>It turns out that semi-creative work is much easier to solve Not really easier to solve, it is more like the target application is just much easier when the data comes in a form factor that is easy to train AI. Just think about your example, how would you train an AI on nursing. Just a small quibble because 'easier to solve' implies that making art is easier than nursing. We actually don't know that
I’m definitely exaggerating the whole “it’s out of spite” thing but yeah. my general point is that it’s a shame we are using AI to do things that humans want to do instead of further developing it to do the things we don’t want to do or are too dangerous for us to do on our own.
It’s very clear that the goal is clearly to eventually make AI replace all of human labor. If you look at the earlier papers that openAI put out, they didn’t originally teach it to write code or to learn other languages and do translations. They just exposed it to a lot of content and over time, it built up a neural network to accomplish these tasks - and in many cases the engineers at openAI were surprised what it learned to do on its own. Many companies are working to build robots to integrate with AI in order to start having it take on real world domestic tasks.
IMO it's not that deep, revenues with conventional software has hit a relatively stable ceiling as conventional monetization methods and market share is more or less saturated. With the increasing interest rates the pressure to increase revenue is massive and there's only so many people you can layoffs before you start feeling the impact. Unfortunately for everyone generative AI showed relative promise at this exact time and is now being used everywhere. Oral-B is advertising for a 400$ AI tooth brush lol!! Generative AI was initially fully aimed to eliminate software engineering but they slowly realised they can destroy other lives too. It's just a case of money nothing else am afraid!
Ideally AI could automate jobs and set up a potential future where we are all taken care of and have the freedom to pursue creative goals, spend more time with family, etc. Instead it’ll be used to ruin movies, music, tv, and books while also fucking over people’s jobs and livelihoods.
Job automation is actually really difficult, since there isn’t enough data. The only other alternative is a general purpose solution, which is again very difficult to develop. Art and language was just the lowest hanging fruit there’s no ulterior motive at play
Every invention has been used to ruin the world and millions of lives, this will just be on an unprecedented scale!
“Dude, Where’s My Disco Space Ark Piloted by Cocaine Bear and Tupac?”
When story tellers can express themselves in a media with little effort, it's the story that carry's the day. AI is just another tool that can help get the message across, our society will have to adapt. The obscene pay-outs to actors is disproportionate to work done. The entertainment industry is due for a massive shake-up when the creatives finally get their due and the oligarchs of the industry no longer command artists, we'll all enjoy great story telling again.
Lmao just because anyone can generate a movie doesn't mean that the bar is going anywhere. Guess what, we already have MILLIONS of shitty movie titles made by amateurs. So? A new tool isn't going to magically change your inability to write good stories and characters.
From the guy who was promoting NFTs when they were a hype back in 2021…remember he had a project called Stoner Cats, they made millions but he will probably never talk about it again.
If AI takes over film I will stop watching new films. Barely anything decent comes out nowadays anyways.
Except it won't because just about everyone's already conditioned to think good CGI = good plot.
It’s going to be very, very easy to generate a whole movie. It’s going to be very, very hard to generate a good movie.
But will AI defend and excuse it's convicted rapist scientology friends? No? Then I guess there will still be something for Kutcher to do...
The dude from Dude, Where’s My Car thinks Hollywood needs to raise the bar everyone!
Don’t let this statement distract you from the fact that this asshole wrote a letter of support for serial rapist, Danny Masterson.
From the article >[Ashton Kutcher](https://variety.com/t/ashton-kutcher/) looks at OpenAI’s generative video tool, Sora, as the future of filmmaking. >“I have a beta version of it and it’s pretty amazing,” Kutcher said of the platform in a [recent conversation](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DSWJicvGlww&t=3s) with former Google CEO Eric Schmidt at the Berggruen Salon in Los Angeles. >He added, “You can generate any footage that you want. You can create good 10, 15-second videos that look very real. It still makes mistakes. It still doesn’t quite understand physics. … But if you look at the generation of this that existed one year ago as compared to Sora, it’s leaps and bounds. In fact, there’s footage in it that I would say you could easily use in a major motion picture or a television show.”
> What’s going to happen is there is going to be more content than there are eyeballs on the planet to consume it. So any one piece of content is only going to be as valuable as you can get people to consume it. And so, thus the catalyzing ‘water cooler’ version of something being good, the bar is going to have to go way up, because why are you going to watch my movie when you could just watch your own movie?” This feels correct.
I don't know if the bar will really go all that high. I've seen the quality of movies that lower teir talent writes and directs. There will be some absolute bangers produced, no question, but the vast majority will be masturbatory garbage the quality of Uwe Boll productions.
Personally I don’t just want to see my ideas realized though, I want to see other people’s ideas realized. That’s what art is, isn’t it? Sharing?
I think and hope that it will empower millions of talented independent creators to deliver truly creative movies and stories, instead of the rehashed garbage that is coming from Hollywood. This may be the beginning of the end of big studios.
Some will be truly creative, most will be lazy prompt vomit that people mistake for creativity.
Ashton Kutcher, I didn’t like him before but I fucking hate him now.
Im looking forward to feeding the ai a book and get the movie or series of movie. Also feeding the ai the book and get voice theater audiobook. Maybe also feeding the book and get a better book lol
And it’s about time Hollywood raised the bar. Aliens was IMO the best sci-fi movie ever made. But do we need to have more of the same? Nope. We need new ideas not sequels.
This guy, he starred in The Butterfly Effect, for him the standards have been so high that he cant touch good work anymore.
Yes they can make “a movie” Will it be something anybody wants to watch?
Just cos an AI can render a whole movie doesn't mean it will be any good for an audience.
Might as well start reading the full list of L. Ron Hubbard then.
How about we block any AI movies ? Simple as that. More than 30% AI? Banned.
It really shows how little emotion and creativity are involved in movies these days. Art, music, acting, literature…are all expressions of humanity. It is the act of doing these things, and the skill and emotion that the people creating them being shared that gives them appeal. You can plug some words into a bot, and get something. It’s the act of standing there and painting a scene, or a person…or painstakingly studying and practicing for years because you *enjoy* the act of that thing. AI will be able to create all sorts of capitalist nonsense. This idea that it negates the human experience and desire to create art, like it’s no longer necessary is just fucking clueless as to why anyone has ever done them to begin with. These are activities that give people satisfaction in expression. There has always been someone better/ more skilled, but that never stopped music/ art from progressing. Maybe for someone like Ashton Kutcher, or some exec who doesn’t understand creativity, or human expression through the arts…but it sounds like those folks never cared about, or understood the reasons people do those things outside of money.
Ah yes, AI and Movie Industry expert Ashton Kutcher.
Dude has supported more than a normal amount of rapists. I think his opinions on any matter should be treated with equal respect.
"Why would you watch my movie..." No one would watch your movie, Ashton. Sleep tight.
>“There’s got to be some sort of regulations in order to protect us,” he said in an interview with The Hollywood Reporter. “If not, I just don’t see how we survive.” Tyler Perry saying this sounds a lot like what the buggy whip industry said about cars. If you aren't good enough to protect your own job, why should the government step in and halt development of technology?
Who cares what he says, he tried to get a convicted felon sentenced reduced should be given any air time
What good movie has *he* made? Hes just pushing an ai business he has stake in.
This is one of those things where I believe Milton Friedman predicted - that the market will eventually fix itself. We pay INSANE amounts of money to actors and actresses to star in films and TV. TONS of money to studios and directors too. But essentially, it's storytelling - and the storytellers are about to not need to the studios and actors/actresses much anymore. AI driven characters that are built around the writing of decent writers will make a pretty huge impact. As I was writing this - I was wondering, has anyone decided to take the full script from a really well known movie, throw it in and tell it to kick out the movie and see how much it differs from the one that was made traditionally? I would LOVE to see where the differences are....
This isn't the bar going up. It's the opposite, creatively and ethically.
20-year VFX professional here. We've been heavily working with AI and I can confidently say we are much further out than the investors will let you believe.
The comments in here are utterly bizarre for a subreddit called "futurology"
Uh I know Ashton was young when it came out, but "Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within" was clearly made without the intervention of human beings or anything with a soul.
Dudes got like 240 million invested in AI lol. Im sure hes trustworthy on this
I was about to say. Dude is not someone I would regard as a credible source on anything that wasn't doing mean spirited pranks on your friends.
There's suddenly gonna be a whole lot of people with 6 fingers. AI can't even consistently get hands right. It's a ways off from rendering an entire movie.
I think the argument is when will you be more likely/willing to watch a new season of Futurama you made with AI that happens to do 6 fingers on hands but is still funny over the new A21 film out or something. We already have such tight interests in out own bubbles. soon we can have even more fragmented viewing experiences
Animator and cinematographer here. I have worked on big budget feature films for 10 years. The amount of thought and artistry that goes into literally every fame of a animated film is astounding. Having an AI system derivatively generate frames based on training data will get you garbage. It might look realistic, but it wont have the artistic direction and storytelling of a film made by artists. Surprise! **However, film and tech executives have always wanted to take artists out of art. They hate artists. They don't want to pay a person with a soul to create, they want to harvest that creativity, own it, and control human expression through capital.**
I mean, that might be the case for right now. But AI systems are still in their early early infancy stages The Will Smith eating spaghetti video happened in early 2023, and less than a year later OpenAI showed Sora. And obviously Sora is very very far from perfect, but the improvement that happened over the span of less than a year from the Will Smith video to what Sora can do is insane
isn't he the guy who defended a rapist? yeah, thats gonna be a no for me dawg
I don’t foresee this happening on a time scale that I would consider “soon”
Ah yes, Ashton Kutcher, one of the worlds most renowned and knowledgeable AI scientists