Feb 26, 2025 01:04 AM
https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/1074923
INTRO: In 2023, a good portion of Hollywood went on strike — in part over concerns about artificial intelligence in filmmaking. Now the use of AI has roiled this year’s Academy Awards: Several of the best picture nominees used AI in production. “The Brutalist” showed AI generated architecture blueprints in a scene and its editor used a program called Respeecher to hone actors’ Hungarian pronunciations. “Emelia Peréz” used Respeecher to adjust an actor’s singing voice.
Brett Halperin, a University of Washington doctoral student in human centered design and engineering, interviewed picketing film workers about AI during the 2023 strikes. Their concerns ranged from AI’s effects on wages and jobs to the inauthenticity of the resulting art.
Halperin published the findings Feb. 6 in ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction. UW News spoke with Halperin about how film workers are thinking about AI and the history of technology in filmmaking.
The striking film workers you spoke with raised various concerns about the use of AI in filmmaking. Were you surprised to see some consternation around the Oscars this year?
Brett Halperin: We have seen backlash to AI from workers and the general public manifest in multiple ways over the past few years — from striking to protesting screenings. Many filmmakers have valid concerns about how studio use of AI can undermine their craft and labor. Meanwhile, many writers and artists object to how their materials are scraped and co-opted as training data for machine learning models without their consent or compensation. This makes AI particularly thorny and controversial. But it’s also important to situate this backlash in the broader historical context.
Throughout history, the “death of cinema” trope has resurfaced with each major technological shift. For example, the use of synchronized sound systems starting in 1926 rendered many silent-era acting techniques, production methods and even professions obsolete. While this caused massive disruption, it ultimately created new professions, such as sound specialists, and transformed rather than eradicated cinema. The rise of color, television, digital media and so on follow similar trajectories. AI presents another iteration of this trope that continues to reflect the shifting cultural and industrial anxieties about technological agency. Part of what makes cinema unique relative to other art forms is that it has always depended on complex, evolving technologies. This change is unsettling, but also an opportunity for all of us, including the Academy, to reevaluate what makes film meaningful.
The Academy is reportedly considering making AI disclosure mandatory for the 2026 Oscars. Do you see value in this?... (MORE - details, no ads)
INTRO: In 2023, a good portion of Hollywood went on strike — in part over concerns about artificial intelligence in filmmaking. Now the use of AI has roiled this year’s Academy Awards: Several of the best picture nominees used AI in production. “The Brutalist” showed AI generated architecture blueprints in a scene and its editor used a program called Respeecher to hone actors’ Hungarian pronunciations. “Emelia Peréz” used Respeecher to adjust an actor’s singing voice.
Brett Halperin, a University of Washington doctoral student in human centered design and engineering, interviewed picketing film workers about AI during the 2023 strikes. Their concerns ranged from AI’s effects on wages and jobs to the inauthenticity of the resulting art.
Halperin published the findings Feb. 6 in ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction. UW News spoke with Halperin about how film workers are thinking about AI and the history of technology in filmmaking.
The striking film workers you spoke with raised various concerns about the use of AI in filmmaking. Were you surprised to see some consternation around the Oscars this year?
Brett Halperin: We have seen backlash to AI from workers and the general public manifest in multiple ways over the past few years — from striking to protesting screenings. Many filmmakers have valid concerns about how studio use of AI can undermine their craft and labor. Meanwhile, many writers and artists object to how their materials are scraped and co-opted as training data for machine learning models without their consent or compensation. This makes AI particularly thorny and controversial. But it’s also important to situate this backlash in the broader historical context.
Throughout history, the “death of cinema” trope has resurfaced with each major technological shift. For example, the use of synchronized sound systems starting in 1926 rendered many silent-era acting techniques, production methods and even professions obsolete. While this caused massive disruption, it ultimately created new professions, such as sound specialists, and transformed rather than eradicated cinema. The rise of color, television, digital media and so on follow similar trajectories. AI presents another iteration of this trope that continues to reflect the shifting cultural and industrial anxieties about technological agency. Part of what makes cinema unique relative to other art forms is that it has always depended on complex, evolving technologies. This change is unsettling, but also an opportunity for all of us, including the Academy, to reevaluate what makes film meaningful.
The Academy is reportedly considering making AI disclosure mandatory for the 2026 Oscars. Do you see value in this?... (MORE - details, no ads)