12 ms·

I hope I live to see the day when I can feed an AI the "Hamlet" skit from Last Action Hero, the original text of Hamlet itself, and the entirety of Arnold's wor

I hope I live to see the day when I can feed an AI the "Hamlet" skit from Last Action Hero, the original text of Hamlet itself, and the entirety of Arnold's work in the 80s and 90s and have it spit out the full length version for me to goon over and die happy.

mosquitobiten 3y ago
My bet is 20 years for this to happen.
- luckman212 3y ago
  I'll take the other side of that bet and say we will see this happen in <5 years.
  - echelon 3y ago
    Agreed. This is moving faster than people not working in the field realize. In fact, I'll wager to say that Disney and Pixar are both toast in just a few short years. You won't need Disney, $50-$100M in production funding, or more than one person to make a film. Films will cost $5,000. Then $1,000. Then very little at all. Everything visual. Cartoons. Anime. Movies. Influencers. Actors. Porn stars. Music is going to be right there with it.
    - jfoutz 3y ago
      I think live shows, improv and plays will stick around for a long time. But probably not for much money. It’s fun to do, it’s fun to watch. Who knows?
      - echelon 3y ago
        > improv So a fun thing is happening on Twitch right now! VTubers are improving [1] against LLM-powered actors. They're effectively able to put on one-person improv shows in fully dynamic worlds. It's wild. Check out CodeMiko (probably NSFW). It's captivating to behold. [1] (yes, we all know)
    - hakfoo 3y ago
      The problem is that they are wealthy and politically powerful, so it's unlikely they'll go down without a fight. I fully expect a lot of large-model stuff will become legally nuclear over time, much like the sampling culture in music died off.
    - noduerme 3y ago
      And once the reviews are written by AI and the views are generated by bots, we can get those pesky humans out of the loop completely! Eventually we won't even need to have movies, just an agreement between two AIs that one will make a theoretical movie and the other will theoretically review it and watch it a million times. Heck, no human will have any money to go to the movies or buy any merch anyway. The only humans left in Hollywood will be copyright lawyers!
      - echelon 3y ago
        > those pesky humans out of the loop completely I don't know why you have such a bad outlook about this. I have wanted to direct epic fantasy films my entire life, and this is the first tangible shot I have at making something that might look like a "blockbuster". My chances of doing that without GenAI were slim to none. Hollywood is a steep pyramid. I don't know how you can't be excited. This is the dreams-come-true timeline.
        noduerme 3y ago
        Hm. We may have a difference of outlook. I don't mind a fantasy blockbuster once in awhile, but to me the most interesting films involve interhuman drama that speaks to my own emotional experience, and often just consist of a lot of people talking with occasional plot twists and unexpected bursts of action. I went to film school for a couple years and dropped out, because as much as I enjoyed lighting and directing, I saw that everyone around me was obsessed with good effects and had no interest in good writing. [edit: That and it was insanely expensive and unjustifiable unless I wanted to be a commercial DP when I got out... and I wanted to be a writer.] Yeah, I guess it would be awesome to just have an AI build your dream movie, but if you have a good script and a couple thousand bucks you can go out and find some actors and make something real right now. If it's good enough, you can get a shot at directing something massive where you actually have control over how your vision is executed, rather than sending your ideas into a "black box". There's also the problem that visual fx are already pretty cheap, and no longer a reason to go see a movie. No one can even count the number of Viking shows or Lost Starship movies on streaming services, or tell them apart. It's not like when the original Jurassic Park came out and everyone was like I HAVE TO SEE THESE DINOSAURS. (My best friend recently described Avatar 2 as "that movie with the flying blue turds"). So my point is that the market is already oversaturated... just like mobile gaming. Chasing cool graphics, even if you get a monentary viral hit, you just end up lost in the flood of noise when everyone else has access to the same technology. The pyramid is a good thing, actually, because it forces you to be imaginitive. The people at the top are less imaginative because they think their vast resources can compensate for bad writing. See: George Lucas. Without a compelling story, a movie is worse than watching someone else play a video game. And with a compelling story, it doesn't matter if it's set on Mars or in your basement. I think it's also why the best games aren't the ones with the best rendering engines, but the ones with the best story and mechanics.
    - personjerry 3y ago
      Media is popular and valuable not only because it's entertaining, but also because it's something you can talk about and relate to with others. So in that sense having the big brands with popular shows that most people watch is still relevant.
    - pandominium 3y ago
      What does "few years" mean? Bet on a timeline or stfu. And what makes you think that Pixar and Disney won't want to automate the process of movie creation? The movie streaming platforms all reached a equilibrium, so they would work on the "full self-making movie" I suppose?
    - bryanrasmussen 3y ago
      Disney and Pixar have IP and parks, and a lot of cost with animators, actors, and directors to make new productions off of that IP. If in a few years all you need is 5000 Disney will make new IP for 5000 and structure it in the way that is most beneficial for their multiple franchises based off of their IP. Disney won't be toast, they'll be a full continental breakfast in a 5-star hotel served by Star Wars Mickey in a waiter's costume.
    - _xivi 3y ago
      I bet when CGI was first introduced (~40 years ago), you'd have said the the same or even more hyped: "Dude, in two years, all movies would be made on a computer. All 3D and VFX, by a single guy in his basement. No production or filming. Everything would be done on your computer, you don't need a crew. All these actors are gonna be jobless. Cameras? They're obselete." Yeah, again, not how things works. Neither financially, nor the technology itself, nor the craft of film production. Not to be a party pooper, but the landscape will still look mostly the same in 5 years.
      - tetris11 3y ago
        I agree to the extent that CGI took 40 years to fully mature to be accessible to the masses (read: see what Blender 4.0 can do on a kid's desktop[0]). AI is maturing fast. It's already on some people's smartphones. 0: https://wiki.blender.org/wiki/Reference/Release_Notes/4.0/ https://wiki.blender.org/wiki/Reference/Release_Notes/4.0/
        hnlmorg 3y ago
        But the stuff that works on people’s smartphones isn’t cinema quality. Which is precisely why it took decades for CGI to become accessible on our home PCs. Generative AI is already powerful enough to replace big studios for short skits on YouTube. But a full length cinema-quality movie is a totally different ball game. That all said, I definitely don’t think it will take 20 years to get there either. I do agree that the field is moving fast.
        echelon 3y ago
        "I've seen things you people wouldn't believe" But seriously, the edge research is already ready to put an end to animation for good. Classic Disney animation -- that's 100% done as of right now. Today. It's about to be productized. It won't be long until we have photorealism too.
        rogerclark 3y ago
    - timthelion 3y ago
      Given that %60 of a films production budget goes to marketing I'll say there will still be studios... They'll just have a higher margin.
      - postexitus 3y ago
        If they have a higher margin there will be more studios competing for the same attention span/money and margins will come down.
  - schneems 3y ago
    I’ll take the other other side and bet that they’re in their room gooning right now.
    - Unbefleckt 3y ago
      Hey, that's a half truth!
- gumballindie 3y ago
  But folks are “already creating movies”, “writing code” and “replacing people” with ai. /s
whats_a_quasar 3y ago
These aren't AI generated, FYI. I thought so too at first but someone just put in a crapload of work collecting fake movies or TV shows which were in real movies or TV shows.
- TheCoelacanth 3y ago
  I think the idea is to use AI to turn these short snippets of imaginary shows into actual full-length show, not to generate more imaginary shows.
  - tetris11 3y ago
    Check out Frinkiac[0]. An extremely well annotated dataset of all Simpsons stills for almost every single frame. How has someone has not used this huge corpus of image and text to write their own Simpson episode? 0 :https://frinkiac.com/gifmaker/S07E04/1166047/1166047 https://frinkiac.com/gifmaker/S07E04/1166047/1166047
    - Narretz 3y ago
      Probably because "The Simpsons" has many (great) episodes already. The closest thing is probably "Dark Simpsons" or Simpsons Shitposts.
    - aspenmayer 3y ago
      There's also Morbotron[0] for Futurama, The Penske File[1] for Seinfeld, and memeSRC[2] for any/all of the above; from what I hear, memeSRC may be superior to Penske File, but I can't speak to that, as it is relatively new to me, but I've definitely seen it before, although it is newer than the show-specific sites previously mentioned. [0] https://morbotron.com/ https://morbotron.com/ [1] https://www.penskefile.com/ https://www.penskefile.com/ [2] https://beta.memesrc.com/ https://beta.memesrc.com/ (newish beta v2 @ beta subdomain; use root domain for stable/legacy v1)
    - meepmorp 3y ago
      Remember Alf? He's back! In pog form.
GaryNumanVevo 3y ago
You might want to look up the current definition for "goon" It might not mean what you think it does
- phyllistine 3y ago
  He clearly meant what he said.

mosquitobiten 3y ago

My bet is 20 years for this to happen.

luckman212 3y ago
I'll take the other side of that bet and say we will see this happen in <5 years.
- echelon 3y ago
  Agreed. This is moving faster than people not working in the field realize. In fact, I'll wager to say that Disney and Pixar are both toast in just a few short years. You won't need Disney, $50-$100M in production funding, or more than one person to make a film. Films will cost $5,000. Then $1,000. Then very little at all. Everything visual. Cartoons. Anime. Movies. Influencers. Actors. Porn stars. Music is going to be right there with it.
  - jfoutz 3y ago
    I think live shows, improv and plays will stick around for a long time. But probably not for much money. It’s fun to do, it’s fun to watch. Who knows?
    - echelon 3y ago
      > improv So a fun thing is happening on Twitch right now! VTubers are improving [1] against LLM-powered actors. They're effectively able to put on one-person improv shows in fully dynamic worlds. It's wild. Check out CodeMiko (probably NSFW). It's captivating to behold. [1] (yes, we all know)
  - hakfoo 3y ago
    The problem is that they are wealthy and politically powerful, so it's unlikely they'll go down without a fight. I fully expect a lot of large-model stuff will become legally nuclear over time, much like the sampling culture in music died off.
  - noduerme 3y ago
    And once the reviews are written by AI and the views are generated by bots, we can get those pesky humans out of the loop completely! Eventually we won't even need to have movies, just an agreement between two AIs that one will make a theoretical movie and the other will theoretically review it and watch it a million times. Heck, no human will have any money to go to the movies or buy any merch anyway. The only humans left in Hollywood will be copyright lawyers!
    - echelon 3y ago
      > those pesky humans out of the loop completely I don't know why you have such a bad outlook about this. I have wanted to direct epic fantasy films my entire life, and this is the first tangible shot I have at making something that might look like a "blockbuster". My chances of doing that without GenAI were slim to none. Hollywood is a steep pyramid. I don't know how you can't be excited. This is the dreams-come-true timeline.
      - noduerme 3y ago
        Hm. We may have a difference of outlook. I don't mind a fantasy blockbuster once in awhile, but to me the most interesting films involve interhuman drama that speaks to my own emotional experience, and often just consist of a lot of people talking with occasional plot twists and unexpected bursts of action. I went to film school for a couple years and dropped out, because as much as I enjoyed lighting and directing, I saw that everyone around me was obsessed with good effects and had no interest in good writing. [edit: That and it was insanely expensive and unjustifiable unless I wanted to be a commercial DP when I got out... and I wanted to be a writer.] Yeah, I guess it would be awesome to just have an AI build your dream movie, but if you have a good script and a couple thousand bucks you can go out and find some actors and make something real right now. If it's good enough, you can get a shot at directing something massive where you actually have control over how your vision is executed, rather than sending your ideas into a "black box". There's also the problem that visual fx are already pretty cheap, and no longer a reason to go see a movie. No one can even count the number of Viking shows or Lost Starship movies on streaming services, or tell them apart. It's not like when the original Jurassic Park came out and everyone was like I HAVE TO SEE THESE DINOSAURS. (My best friend recently described Avatar 2 as "that movie with the flying blue turds"). So my point is that the market is already oversaturated... just like mobile gaming. Chasing cool graphics, even if you get a monentary viral hit, you just end up lost in the flood of noise when everyone else has access to the same technology. The pyramid is a good thing, actually, because it forces you to be imaginitive. The people at the top are less imaginative because they think their vast resources can compensate for bad writing. See: George Lucas. Without a compelling story, a movie is worse than watching someone else play a video game. And with a compelling story, it doesn't matter if it's set on Mars or in your basement. I think it's also why the best games aren't the ones with the best rendering engines, but the ones with the best story and mechanics.
  - personjerry 3y ago
    Media is popular and valuable not only because it's entertaining, but also because it's something you can talk about and relate to with others. So in that sense having the big brands with popular shows that most people watch is still relevant.
  - pandominium 3y ago
    What does "few years" mean? Bet on a timeline or stfu. And what makes you think that Pixar and Disney won't want to automate the process of movie creation? The movie streaming platforms all reached a equilibrium, so they would work on the "full self-making movie" I suppose?
  - bryanrasmussen 3y ago
    Disney and Pixar have IP and parks, and a lot of cost with animators, actors, and directors to make new productions off of that IP. If in a few years all you need is 5000 Disney will make new IP for 5000 and structure it in the way that is most beneficial for their multiple franchises based off of their IP. Disney won't be toast, they'll be a full continental breakfast in a 5-star hotel served by Star Wars Mickey in a waiter's costume.
  - _xivi 3y ago
    I bet when CGI was first introduced (~40 years ago), you'd have said the the same or even more hyped: "Dude, in two years, all movies would be made on a computer. All 3D and VFX, by a single guy in his basement. No production or filming. Everything would be done on your computer, you don't need a crew. All these actors are gonna be jobless. Cameras? They're obselete." Yeah, again, not how things works. Neither financially, nor the technology itself, nor the craft of film production. Not to be a party pooper, but the landscape will still look mostly the same in 5 years.
    - tetris11 3y ago
      I agree to the extent that CGI took 40 years to fully mature to be accessible to the masses (read: see what Blender 4.0 can do on a kid's desktop[0]). AI is maturing fast. It's already on some people's smartphones. 0: https://wiki.blender.org/wiki/Reference/Release_Notes/4.0/ https://wiki.blender.org/wiki/Reference/Release_Notes/4.0/
      - hnlmorg 3y ago
        But the stuff that works on people’s smartphones isn’t cinema quality. Which is precisely why it took decades for CGI to become accessible on our home PCs. Generative AI is already powerful enough to replace big studios for short skits on YouTube. But a full length cinema-quality movie is a totally different ball game. That all said, I definitely don’t think it will take 20 years to get there either. I do agree that the field is moving fast.
        echelon 3y ago
        "I've seen things you people wouldn't believe" But seriously, the edge research is already ready to put an end to animation for good. Classic Disney animation -- that's 100% done as of right now. Today. It's about to be productized. It won't be long until we have photorealism too.
        rogerclark 3y ago
  - timthelion 3y ago
    Given that %60 of a films production budget goes to marketing I'll say there will still be studios... They'll just have a higher margin.
    - postexitus 3y ago
      If they have a higher margin there will be more studios competing for the same attention span/money and margins will come down.
- schneems 3y ago
  I’ll take the other other side and bet that they’re in their room gooning right now.
  - Unbefleckt 3y ago
    Hey, that's a half truth!
gumballindie 3y ago
But folks are “already creating movies”, “writing code” and “replacing people” with ai. /s

whats_a_quasar 3y ago

These aren't AI generated, FYI. I thought so too at first but someone just put in a crapload of work collecting fake movies or TV shows which were in real movies or TV shows.

TheCoelacanth 3y ago
I think the idea is to use AI to turn these short snippets of imaginary shows into actual full-length show, not to generate more imaginary shows.
- tetris11 3y ago
  Check out Frinkiac[0]. An extremely well annotated dataset of all Simpsons stills for almost every single frame. How has someone has not used this huge corpus of image and text to write their own Simpson episode? 0 :https://frinkiac.com/gifmaker/S07E04/1166047/1166047 https://frinkiac.com/gifmaker/S07E04/1166047/1166047
  - Narretz 3y ago
    Probably because "The Simpsons" has many (great) episodes already. The closest thing is probably "Dark Simpsons" or Simpsons Shitposts.
  - aspenmayer 3y ago
    There's also Morbotron[0] for Futurama, The Penske File[1] for Seinfeld, and memeSRC[2] for any/all of the above; from what I hear, memeSRC may be superior to Penske File, but I can't speak to that, as it is relatively new to me, but I've definitely seen it before, although it is newer than the show-specific sites previously mentioned. [0] https://morbotron.com/ https://morbotron.com/ [1] https://www.penskefile.com/ https://www.penskefile.com/ [2] https://beta.memesrc.com/ https://beta.memesrc.com/ (newish beta v2 @ beta subdomain; use root domain for stable/legacy v1)
  - meepmorp 3y ago
    Remember Alf? He's back! In pog form.

GaryNumanVevo 3y ago

You might want to look up the current definition for "goon" It might not mean what you think it does

phyllistine 3y ago
He clearly meant what he said.