15 ms·
AI is coming to Hollywood with Metaphysic
- dreamer7 4y agoAt some point, AI will replace stuntmen with completely synthesized action scenes. Contrast that with the money that was poured into one scene in MI7 where Tom Cruise rides a bike off a cliff. If AI could make us feel the same way as Tom Cruise himself jumping off a cliff, isn't it a no-brainer to use it? If we stretch this scenario to the ultimate - Generating an entire movie using AI, it doesn't feel as fun, as real. But I wonder if it is the future
- yuy910616 4y agoThis generative AI stuff always makes me feel like my world is just a dynamically generated RPG or MMORPG.
- suby 4y agoSame. I don't actually believe this to be true, but I have had the thought that as I get older there's been a clear progression of tech being created which could convincingly create a fake reality. The thought being that at the culmination of my life will be the perfection of this tech followed by the universe revealing that my existence has been an elaborate generative hallucination all along.
- altruios 4y ago> my existence has been an elaborate generative hallucination all along. Consider the fact that there is no objective 'blue', there is a wavelength with a particular frequency measured in hertz, but the wavelength is not the same thing as what we know to be color... See, what happens is: a photon (oscillating at a frequency) hits a rod or cone in your eye tuned to detect that frequency of light: which travels down the optic nerve as an electro-chemical signal (no more photons involved at all at this point). Which eventually turns into a chemical reaction in your brain. That chemical reaction is 'blue' to us - not the photon that never reaches this point nor even the original frequency: just our brain's translated chemical signal; it's interpretation of 'blue'. Blue is your brain hallucinating what it thinks that frequency actually is... blue is a "guess" at reality... So yes, your brain IS generating an elaborate hallucination after all.
- yuy910616 4y agoi mean...wow. that's a bit mind blowing
- strogonoff 4y agoWhat makes you believe those photons and chemicals and the brain exist when you have no access to any of that and all of the information about it comes from your mind (the only thing guaranteed to exist)?
- dwallin 4y agoEven more so than that, “blue” is not even attempting to “guess” at reality. A more accurate statement is that the concept of “blue” is a useful abstraction for the goals of the vision system of your brain.
- CatWChainsaw 4y agoThat's just simulation theory with extra steps.
- ggambetta 4y agoI don't know. Part of the appeal of Tom Cruise doing it for real is that you know it's real. They emphasize that in the behind the scenes materials. The experience is vastly different to mostly-CGI movies like Marvel.
- noduerme 4y agoAgreed; watching Marvel movies these days feels like watching someone else play a video game. Less interesting, actually.
- krapp 4y agoBut the Marvel movies make more money and sell more merchandise, which is really all that matters.
- VanTheBrand 4y agoDon’t be so sure! Top Gun Maverick made more money than any marvel movie last year.
- krapp 4y agoTIL they made a sequel to Top Gun...
- ggambetta 4y agoToday? Go watch it, it might still be in cinemas, it's a fantastic movie. (Disclaimer: I'm a big fan of Tom Cruise's movies, especially the Mission:Impossible franchise)
- CuriouslyC 4y agoThey also didn't field a marquee marvel title, and people are suffering a bit from marvel fatigue at any rate.
- polygamous_bat 4y ago
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- luxuryballs 4y agoMaybe once it can also make Tom Cruise feel like he rode that bike off a cliff.
- croes 4y agoBut not today. I still prefer the practical effects of films like Mad Max Fury Road over most full CGI FX movies.
- GiorgioG 4y agoOr even further back in time: I watched "The Thing" (1982) the other day and the practical effects were far more frightening than any CGI monsters I've ever seen.
- rqtwteye 4y ago" Contrast that with the money that was poured into one scene in MI7 where Tom Cruise rides a bike off a cliff." I don't know much about stunt stuff but I don't really understand the fuzz about this. Taking a bike down a ramp and then pulling a parachute doesn't seem to be that crazy compared to a lot of other stuff people are doing.
- CatWChainsaw 4y agoThis is the new "you will own nothing and be happy." Your world is synthetic and you will like it.
- LunarAurora 4y agoMy prognosis is that in this century, AI will prove most fruitful in Visual Media. We will hit some kind of transparent barrier for Language and music, but video editing tools will expand without limits (including animation art/metaverse/holograms/bots...). Just a personal guess.
- fritzschopen 4y agoAmazing stuff indeed. These are the creators of deepfaked tom cruise. Very pro and apparently super legit.
- hackernewds 4y agohere is an example of their work, deftly tackling the complex tasks smoothly https://www.linkedin.com/posts/petehuang_artificialintelligence-machinelearning-technology-activity-7026669957866287104-1YVA https://www.linkedin.com/posts/petehuang_artificialintellige...
- Flatcircle 4y agoI heard a podcast, (the town with Matt belloni) and he had an CGI guy on from a company called MARS. And the most interesting thing he said is 80 percent of the visual effects in films are cosmetic. Meaning artists are basically photoshopping lines off the faces of older actors to make them look better etc. That's 80 percent of the work!
- wincy 4y agoJust curious, and this is hacker news so I feel emboldened to ask about linguistic quirks, do you pronounce “CGI” in a way that necessitates an “an” instead of “a” preceding it? If so where are you from and what accent would you say you have? Do you pronounce the letters or the words? I swear I’m asking from a place of genuine curiosity and am not trying to be a pedantic jerk.
- boredemployee 4y agoNot a native speaker but I usually see it when using acronyms. Please someone clarify this :)
- dwringer 4y agoAs the poster commented, it was a typo in this case and should have been "a". But, in general, we would use "an" preceding an acronym whenever the pronunciation of the acronym begins with a vowel sound. To use some broadcast networks as examples, you could say "A CBS production" [analogous to "a CGI"], but "An ABC production" or "An NBC production" (note NBC is pronounced starting with a vowel sound, at the start of "en").
- ajcp 4y agoYou use `an` in front of an acronym when the first letter of it has a vowel _sound_, even if the letter itself is not a vowel. Example: "A member of parliament talked to me." "An MP talked to me." Here when pronouncing the m in `MP` the vowel sound for e is made, as in 'em'.
- 4y ago
- levesque 4y agoWhat an obnoxious title and article. AI has been part of the Hollywood pipeline for a while, they have always been using bleeding edge technology, sometimes AI-assisted.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- sctgrhm 4y ago"Perfect De-Aging with Antoine De Caunes." They got that one backwards, Antoine is the younger version.
- RcouF1uZ4gsC 4y agoI hope AI/CGI will be able to replace all real guns/ammo during filming. Whatever you may think about the case against Alec Baldwin, what happened on the scene of Rust was an utter and complete tragedy and I hope we can use computers to make that impossible to happen again
- karmakurtisaani 4y ago> imposublet I happen again Smartphones are the worst thing that happened to typing.
- rnd0 4y agoTyping is the worst thing to happen to shorthand
- johnohara 4y agoRead the article and thought it was going to be about AI being used to assist in story development, unexpected plot twists, believable character dialogue, etc. Using it for CGI de-aging seems more like driving a Ferrari to the grocery store.
- wincy 4y agoIf you watch Corridor Crew on YouTube (some special effects guys who I think are really on the cutting edge), they’ve got some excellent videos showing how much better the AI/ML de-aging is compared to doing it by hand. I think there’s a really good one with Luke Skywalker somewhere, but I don’t have the time to look it up.
- NateEag 4y ago> assist in story development, unexpected plot twists, believable character dialogue, etc. This is the sort of thing I'd expect current ML language models to be terrible at, judging from my limited exposure to them. They just shove in what's the most likely completion based on their training data. Most writing on the internet is by people with little grasp of character, believable dialogue, or compelling plot arcs (including twists). If you trained one on solely the scripts of the great films and literature of the past thousand years, maybe you'd get somewhere - or maybe it would just rehash the tropes with no understanding of what makes a great story. :shrug:
- johnohara 4y agoGood points. And appreciated. But CGI de-aging doesn't work well without human involvement either. I was alluding to the need for strong collaboration between AI and writer. A properly trained AI, as you point out, with a skilled human writer to shape the arc. Credits reading: "Written and directed by <name>" with assistance from "advanced learning technology."
- college_physics 4y agoEverything on screen is a visual illusion anyway (including, famously, the sense of motion), so some sprinkling of AI fakeness seems fairly well placed here. Whether it will have fundamental impact on how movies are made (either the economics side of it or the cultural output) remains to be seen though. The obvious case might be some new tricks on the visual effects side but people have been very creative in this space (with very modest technical means) for a very long time. The human brain is very good at getting the cues and playing along with the creator's intention / filling the blanks.
- coolspot 4y agoDe-aging in latest season of Stranger Things was very bad and obvious. Not sure what company was doing it.
- marstall 4y agoplus ça change ... film is "24 lies per second" as Michael Haneke says.
- arisAlexis 4y agoI think it's very very unlikely that OpenAI will embed covertly suggestions. Also it's quite unlikely that there will be many of these. It's always has been a winner take all market. Maybe google + openai or google+microsoft(with openai). They will not do it. Google doesn't do it even now, pagerank is not paid, ads are extra.
- boh 4y agoIt's ironic that Robin Wright is now doing in real-life what she did in the movie, The Congress. (She sells her likeness to a company that generates movies/VR with it). https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Congress_(2013_film) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Congress_(2013_film)
- ChewFarceSkunk 4y agoCame here to write the same. But then I'd like to add that despite her brilliant play in The Congress, it would be too wishful to expect that, as a person, she's as deeply aware of implications of depicted techno-medical fascist future as her film character is. Acting is just her daily job, after all. I can also perfectly imagine some inhumane owners of the film industry indulging in an exquisite psychological torture of making an actress play herself getting digitized in a movie, only to find herself realizing the same scenario in her real life later. This adds even more eerie recursion to the already outlandishly eerie and recursive Congress. Let's wait and see if they'll actually merge Miramax and Paramount into Miramount one day.
- genderwhy 4y agoLet me tell you about the Luddites. People hear "Luddites" and think "Anti-Technology, backwards mentality! Closed Minded!" No. The Luddites were highly trained, technical workers who had built careers around being loom operators. They worked in the factories for a decent wage, and earned the factory owners a tidy profit. New auto-looms were invented, and the Luddites were like, "This is great! Our highly trained staff can increase our production! We'll get paid more, the factory owner will earn more, it's a win-win!" Except the factory owners said, "LOL. No, you are all fired, we're going to hire bargain labor and hold 100% of the profit. Get bent." So the Luddites, who wanted to use the looms and increase the well being of all were turned out. And the factory owners extracted as much from the workers as possible. The Luddites then decided, "Fuck it, let's burn these looms." and they went around and smashed up a bunch of them. When I see AI tools being developed, I think, "Wow, an auto-editor. An auto-script-writer. An auto-matte painter." Surely the studios will want to use these tools to raise the efficiency of their highly trained staff and split the profits with them, right? No... of course not. The writing is on the wall already -- the studios are going to fire their highly trained staff, lean on technology, and try to maximize the profit to the studio at the expense of the people who work there. We're setting ourselves up for a neo-Luddite moment where people get angry enough to start doing industrial sabotage, imo. Maybe I'm wrong, but it seems so short-sighted to just turn out all the people who wrote code, drew art, edited scripts, composed music, etc. (Maybe it's a good time to consider collective bargaining and/or unionization, if your job is likely to go the way of a Luddite's job in the future?)
- evilantnie 4y agoThere is a huge difference between the creative content industry and commodities such as fabrics production. While there are some lessons to be learned from that history and the current situation, I don't think you can compare apples to apples. The results are unlikely to be the same in my opinion. I don't think you can leverage AI in Hollywood for profit on blockbusters without highly trained artists in the mix. It is possible that it could impact the long-tail of b-movies out there, but I think audiences will be able to see through this. I don't know how sabotage will work in this case either.
- 4y ago
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- m3kw9 4y agoLooks alright but the Simon cowell live demo looked as bad as those replace your face apps.
- andrea76 4y agoSo, can we have a Back to the future IV?
- mromanuk 4y agoDisappointed with the AI deepfake video featuring Elvis. The result falls short in terms of realism and takes us to the uncanny valley. This reliance on CGI takes away from the true focus of the movie - the story