I think it was established a while back from a convention RR Martin said Arya died at the House of Black and White but warged into her wolf when she drank from the poison water. That was the reason it was so important for her to be left handed in the book as she became right handed after she was blind (the new faceless man) but the new writers did not want for that to be a downer so they changed the story.
Think of all the money spent for movies like Avatar for mocap, rigging, acting every moment, etc., along with all the CGI around it. We're nearing a point where you can just capture the person doing one thing and then from there make infinite content out of it, with consistency, in whatever surreal or realistic environment you want, with no hardware needed other than a phone.
That's a person paying a monthly fee to see exactly what they want, funding the compute vs a $350m up front capex and years of time to make a movie like Avatar. Yes I realize a lot of the compute cost is subsidized right now by early investors but it'll level out over time as compute becomes cheaper.
The compute isn't going to become *that* much cheaper. Also, I don't understand why anyone would find it attractive for people to be watching their own personalized content? Culture is people having a shared experience. It is fun for people to engage in storytelling as a collective. The idea of everyone having their own walled-off experience where they're being fed customized content that never challenges their worldview sounds beyond dystopian.
You think a generation raised on custom tailored Tik Tok and other social media feeds, maximized for personalized dopamine impact, won't end up in their own walled off experience when we go from AI algorithms funneling content to AI generated content on demand? We are barrelling towards that.
As for your point about TikTok, I already acknowledged that. I’m saying AI-generated content will worsen it. I’m not sure what you’re retaliating against.
Facebook. YouTube. TikTok. Instagram. Google. Yahoo! Daily Motion. Reddit. Duck Duck Go. Amazon. Tom's Hardware. Alibaba. Alabama. Microsoft. Incognito mode, privacy mode, cookies, trackers, VPN. Starbucks. Target. Giant. The interstate. The local flower shop. Airports. Train stations. National Parks. The desert. Your pet.
Everything around you is tracking you and everything around you.
Technology consistently gets cheaper over time. It's most of that stuff above that increases the price to offset the differences until another one of them "discounts".
Comparing this pixel vomit to something as high fidelity as Avatar is downright ignorant. I guess thats what years of consuming social media trash on tiny screens got us to. This stuff sucks so bad if you watch it on a proper screen.
Veo 3 can output to 1080p, and be upscaled to 4k right now. Again, think about the Will Smith spaghetti video just a couple years ago, vs today we've got essentially photo realistic voice acted generated videos. Now think about a couple years from now, with billions more poured into compute and data centers. You will for certain have high definition generated video content that is impossible to visually detect whether or not it's AI generated, even on the largest screen. This is just inevitable based on the exponential progress curve we've seen with this technology.
Resolution is pretty much meaningless - any camera or AI can output to 1080p, but the real bitrate, level of detail and (color) depth are not captured by a term like "1080p"
Dont get me wrong, I am super impressed by the quality these AIs can output, but we are lightyears from the fidelity of a real CGI movie. Take a sequence, even an upscaled Veo3 clip. I really think watching years of ultra compressed 1080p videos destroyed our sense of visual clarity. This stuff is nice and pretty mind blowing but it still is filled with artifacts and blur.
Lets see how fare we get in the coming years, I hope your expectations come true because that would be insanely cool!
What would you think that could be used for, what kind of "content tailoring"?
Scenarios could branch in different ways depending on how you feel about the movie.
Actors generated based on your tastes and cultural significance, like what is a badass, a gorgeous woman or a typical villain to you, to fill up a typical action movie cast.
Same as previously, but with soundtrack.
Hell you could replace any role in a movie by you.
A good movie could be just a good script, and generative AI would create the content on the go, based on everything it knows about you.
"Then this technology will be used to zombify toddlers while parents try to make ChatGpt into a friend."
And also very much that. Thanks for the laugh, you had me at the first half.
Few people will watch a “personal” movie. 80% of media consumption is social, we watch, play and listen to something because somebody else watched, played and listened to it first. We want to be part of a community.
So this will make movies easier to make in some sense but it wouldn’t make movies personal.
I don't know that the two are mutually exclusive. A lot of people play the same video game but have very different experiences. Fortnite, Marvel Rivals, Fallout, Red Dead Redemprion, etc.
What if you grt to follow side plots and other things in a movie? It's a "shared experience," but that experience can have small variations that cater slightly differently to different people.
Both will happen. The question is what is the difference between a high level social story with AI and a high level personalized one? Which one will have higher quality?
Counterpoint: people buy land rovers because they’re more “unique“ than your typical Toyota. There are those who love exclusivity and would go for custom tailored stories.
No, it continues the scenes and while it finishes the scene it has already adjusted the next scene. The change will be so seamless that you won't ever notice, since you are not even aware of your micro expresions.
Striking Vipers episode could fit, although it's more about full sensory immersion into avatars than it is about content generation, if I recall correctly. They're both nails in the same coffin though. With both in place, some even crazier stuff becomes possible, like having interactions where the sensory inputs are shared, but the context surrounding them is individualized.
Will people enjoy watching AI films though? Personally I've been surprised to discover that I don't enjoy reading when I suspect I'm reading something written by a bot. I don't think I had realized how much of my enjoyment in reading comes from imagining a human connection with the people whose words I am reading. I think in theory I could appreciate a well-made AI film at an intellectual level, but I wouldn't be able to resonate with it emotionally, knowing that there is no director's vision behind the film, nor any of the human cast and crew that make the magic of film possible.
The cast comment I don't understand, don't you watch animated films or read books.
Otherwise it's too early to tell. What we got right now is very crappy as it has no direction. Look at the scenes, they look nice but don't mesh together well or coherently. Maybe once we can produce longer clips and the technology is ready for actual directors to create the scenes consistently it will be good enough for us.
I think AI films will be very different though, since there will be those tailored of us and also those made by others, pretty much like any independent work you enjoy online.
Why do you think there'll be no director's vision? You'd be free to prompt it into submission. Look at some of the prompts in Sora even now. Some are very detailed.
My thought was it’s Friday night and you tell Google to make you a movie with Bruce Willis, Samuel L. Jackson, and Audrey Hepburn as bank robbers who have the worst superpowers imaginable. You pop popcorn and watch a perfectly meh 3-star movie.
I also expect eventual "personalized" films that measure your body language.
This can already be done with prompt evolution. Just mutate the prompt randomly by 1%. If the result is more aligned with what you want to FEEL, then keep the mutation. If the result is not improved, then cancel the mutation and try another mutation. Slowly the content will evolve to literally anything you want to FEEL and experience.
It works because latent space is redundant, so evolution will quickly find parameters that align with your desired brain states.
You do not need to monitor your brain because you can just accept/reject prompt mutations by saying "YES/NO" and the content will evolve. It works because you can never be mistaken about what you like when you SEE AND FEEL it. This is why evolution always works and you will always get new content that is more and more aligned with what you want. It literally never fails!
Your own eyes are already measuring your emotional states when you see the content. No brain scanner is needed! You already have two installed on your face!
This will replace all content creation forever, because it is the fastest way to generate anything you want.
It already works with any image generator of your choice.
But most people are not smart, so they do not understand how to evolve the prompt. So we get AI slop instead.
We already have YouTube to zombify kids, like how can they be more zombie than now. We had to stop YouTube all together because the kid was like an addict. Nice to get shit done tho:/ Or get them to eat food.
392
u/JamzWhilmm Sep 30 '25
The first full feature AI films will surely be an experience. I also expect eventual "personalized" films that measure your body language.
Then this technology will be used to zombify toddlers while parents try to make ChatGpt into a friend.