10 ms·

Tyler Perry Puts $800M Studio Expansion on Hold After Seeing OpenAI's Sora

• DudeOpotomus 3y ago
  $800mm = a lot of jobs
  • bamboozled 3y ago
    "Oh well" \s
• Kluggy 3y ago
  I fear we are going to slog though decades of low quality content that looks amazing, but the meat of the story is just empty. Truth is that most production try to tell a human story at their core and being able to have AI generate it off a small description is going to leave it feeling empty.
  • fragmede 3y ago
    except for fully ai generated everything, it'll still be people driving an ai to generate the content, so the advancement in technology will let more people tell their own stories. if you want a tv series of you and your friends getting up to hijinks, you can self fund and make just that. you could always do that before Sora, but if the costs are knocked down an order or magnitude or two, it becomes a more attractive proposition to a wider group of people.
    • asadotzler 3y ago
      When film transitioned to video in the early 90s and many film school projects changed from $40K to $4K almost overnight, we didn't see a mess of new film makers because making good art is hard and almost always requires study and practice, even if the process is inexpensive (Picasso's brushes and black paint cost very little and were not difficult to acquire, it was his skill that was difficult to acquire.) We're not going to get better movies and shows by unleashing the TikTok generation on movies and shows. We'll get more, but not better because they are simply not capable of better. They don't have the training and the practice and it doesn't matter how cheap the tools if you don't have the ability, the skills that come with an education and a lot of trial and error. These skills are absent in all but the rarest of untrained persons so your friend's tv series is going to be shit, along with any tv series or movie created by people without the skills of a trained tv or movie maker. We don't need more shit. We have enough with the Disney, Apple, and Netflix and I should also include YouTube and TikTok. Wider is not better in art because art is a developed skill not a party trick. As someone who went to art and architecture schools, I promise you that the camcorder did not bring a grand new wave of democratized citizen cinema. It just didn't and neither will so-called A.I. because, once again, art is a skill, not trick. There are no shortcuts and no secrets to bypass learning and practice.
      • fragmede 3y ago
        I didn't go to art school but that's hard to take. things like the blair witch project, Napoleon dynamite, the original mad max, and rocky were made on shoe string budgets and were the result of, yes, art skills, but also camcorders. not to mention that there is, actually, good stuff on YouTube. some of it the product of artists with art school degrees. there's gonna be a ton of ai generated shit out there, no doubt about that, but it also makes it more accessible. But okay, what I'm hearing is that it's going to be cheaper for Hollywood to pump out really good ones, putting people out of a job until they can retrain, from carpenters who were set builders to vfx artists, and Sora is just gonna let the low end pump out bad stuff and the high end will maybe use it to still pump out good stuff. in today's attention economy, I don't know what that means. there's a whole lot of SoundCloud out there and a lot of it's bad but some of it's good, and, like you said, it's a skill not a trick, so theres still going to be cream that rises to the top, even in a morass of ai generated dreck.
  • TheAlchemist 3y ago
    This is already the case with animated movies for kids. When I was young, they were not many, but most of them were amazing. And there was a real story. Now, on Netflix there are thousands. But most feel like completely empty and stupid. Recently after watching one with my kids, I'm much more careful in the selection. Sadly, it looks like it's the case with everything that will be available on the internet soon.
    • bombcar 3y ago
      Amusingly enough “didn’t get released on physical DVD” is becoming a bit of a quality bar; second only to checking if the library has it. There are some very nice animated movies coming out of smaller countries - but finding them amongst the drek is the hard part.
  • aurareturn 3y ago
    I don’t agree. I think it will create new experiences such as pairing it with the Vision Pro and “live” through movie instead of watching one. We’re unlikely going to be watching movies like we have been in the next 10 years.
  • Wohlf 3y ago
    Most major shows and movies released lately already feel AI generated since they were written in a corporate boardroom, if anything AI could be an improvement as it will trend towards giving regular viewers/fans what they want.
  • throwaway13337 3y ago
    It could have the exact opposite effect. If movie-quality content is easy to generate, then what is left to separate the good from the bad? Probably story, characters, originality, etc. Generative models could, across the board, commoditize the aesthetic leaving only substance as a discernible trait. This could be positive for the world in both encouraging people to create things of substance and consume things of substance. When instagram pictures are so easily made perfect, why bother posting? Or watching? What credit do you get for looking the way you do? When shallow political arguments are made in a comment, why not just assume they are computer generated? We could become blind to vapid content like we are blind to billboard ads.
    • krapp 3y ago
      What happened to the quality of journalism once it went online? When news media had to compete against bloggers and social media. It went into the toilet. What happened to the quality of video games once game frameworks became easily available? The market got flooded with low-effort garbage. Youtube and Tiktok and other social media platforms make global video distribution easy, but most of it is uninteresting and uninspired, when not low-effort clickbait or ragebait. Making things easy doesn't lead to more substance, only exponentially more of what sells, which is shallow, low effort aesthetic. What point is there in encouraging people to create things of substance when that substance will only be consumed, commoditized and shat out by AI? Every time you see authentic, human generated art online now, it just gets assimilated. It's a sign of something forever tainted and blighted from the collective human soul. We can't be blind to vapid content when the systems and algorithms that generate our culture optimize only for it. The only hope is that somehow AI fails to follow through on its promise. Maybe it will never be able to create content of high enough quality, quickly enough or at a low enough cost. Given the evolution of technology, and the capability of LLMs in particular, that seems unlikely. Only another AI winter can save us. As long as AI remains deeply integrated into all possible electronic and online means of communication, creativity and expression (as it seems destined to be) then human expression just feeds the machine, and becomes as impossible to find in the ocean of machine-generated slime as non-commercial content on Google.
      • 3y ago
  • ranqet 3y ago
    >but the meat of the story is just empty I assume you've never seen a Tyler Perry 'Madea' movie before
    • defrost 3y ago
      The movie franchise that grossed $570 million US? https://www.boxofficemojo.com/franchise/fr4115107589/ https://www.boxofficemojo.com/franchise/fr4115107589/ I think I can see where the meat is.
  • alvah 3y ago
    This describes much of Hollywood's output for at least the last 10 years, probably a lot longer. You'd expect removing or lowering the barriers to entry & the cost would result in an explosion of content - there will be a curation problem, but the quality of storytelling will not automatically be worse than the current state.
    • mvdtnz 3y ago
      Yeah I started writing a post criticising the smeared out average of popular media output that AI will put on the screen and realised Marvel films have been selling like hotcakes for years now. It seems like people actually love the idea of just mooshing every boring trope into a big couldron, stirring it up and sampling the pathetic goo that results.
  • dorkwood 3y ago
    There are ways around this. You could use a negative prompt of "empty, two-dimensional" to generate a story with more depth.
  • deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  • brigadier132 3y ago
    > I fear we are going to slog though decades of low quality content that looks amazing, but the meat of the story is just empty Already happening without AI, see superhero movies. What we are actually going to get is millions of stories, the vast majority of which will be terrible but a small percent that will be revolutionary.
  • dylan604 3y ago
    Wait, I thought we were talking about AI. You just described Marvel Studios
• aetherson 3y ago
  Well, if Tyler Perry, the greatest technology prognosticator of our time, thinks Sora will supplant human filmmaking, it must be so.
  • anigbrowl 3y ago
    He's a very, very successful film producer who rose through the industry against significant odds. Your sarcasm is misplaced.
    • aetherson 3y ago
      And if a very, very successful AI researcher who rose through the industry against significant odds got headlines for talking about the mechanics of film production, I'd discount him, too.
  • John23832 3y ago
    You should probably go to Atlanta and see how many people this man employs both directly and indirectly. He doesn't have to be "the greatest technology prognosticator of our time". He is a large capital owner and employer.
• fnordpiglet 3y ago
  First, labor laws isn’t the answer to technology. It would be like regulating the camera because it put portrait artists out of work, or steam drills because it puts tunnel diggers. Art improved dramatically in a short period of time with the advent of the camera, became reflective of what the camera couldn’t do - reflect the nature of humanity back to us. Second, if you’ve done much with generative imagery you know the raw experience is difficult to control to a specific visual outcome. Fine tuning, in painting, image to image, control nets, all these things help. But it’s easy to make something stunning, but difficult to make your vision come out from the machine. It’s a tool, like any other. It’ll require rethinking what’s better to do with generative ai and what’s better to shoot directly. But direction, cinematography, and acting are about extreme control to achieve a specific outcome. Generative AI doesn’t help that. However what I’ve seen it really do well is take imagery and add detail and nuance, interpolate scenes, and other feats that will likely make post production much more powerful, requiring fewer reshoots, etc. Creating CGI will be simpler, especially bootstrapping, and l will bet it’ll be extremely heavily used preproduction to create visual story boarding. But completely replace humans ? The camera didn’t replace artists, and if you’ve seen a tunnel boring, there’s no lack of humans there. A strong back isn’t as important as a strong engineering mind, but that’s a pressure on labor that’s been building for centuries. These new tools won’t change the dynamic, it’ll just up the game.
  • endisneigh 3y ago
    I disagree, we are clearly in the end phase. Generative AI (not necessarily LLM) is clearly in a completely different category from the things you describe. Suppose it becomes such that it’s equivalent to a human using all the tools of today, but instantly. What would there be to do? I guess we still need to mine for the natural materials, so there’s that.
    • fnordpiglet 3y ago
      Portrait painters and tunnel diggers said the same things. Impressionism, expressionism, modern art, etc weren’t obvious outcomes. The thing AI lacks, and will lack for the foreseeable future as we have a much weaker grasp on its mechanisms, is agency and at the root of that creativity. Most movie making today is a lot of mechanical craftsmanship and a lot of that will probably disappear. The bar for good will be raised dramatically. But the demand for the best won’t disappear, it’ll likely amplify as the stakes get higher. I will wager you we will see a dramatic realignment in the sorts of work that go into production, but the demand for those skills will be so high and the value so immense that we will see a profusion of new work, better output, and more employment in the arts.
• endisneigh 3y ago
  Teenagers with Limewire: pirates. OpenAI with terabytes: pioneers. Guess file size matters more than file type in the court of public opinion.
  • notyourwork 3y ago
    What does piracy have to do with generative AI? I don’t understand your analogy.
    • endisneigh 3y ago
      Useful generative AI is only possible by the same collection of copyrighted material previously deemed illegal. I imagine a model trained solely on material explicitly marked for AI use would be significantly worse.
      • ghshephard 3y ago
        On the flip side - almost (say, 99.99%) of Human Engineers, Artists, Technicians, Scientists, etc... have mental models trained on copyrighted material. Nobody (to my knowledge) has ever said that you can't train on copyrighted material - what you aren't allowed to do is copy or directly plagiarize. Something that all the generative systems are going to great pains to remove from their system where possible. Are they doing a perfect job - nope. But they'll get better, and this is good - copyrights are supposed to prevent replication, not use of their material.
        • jprete 3y ago
          Lots of people have said that it's illegal to train on copyrighted material without a license to it. Also, performance licenses for movies, plays, recorded music, and copyrighted scores are all required. The lack of copying is not relevant there, the performance alone can be infringing.
          • ghshephard 3y ago
• skepticATX 3y ago
  Seems like quite the overreaction to a research demo. Yes, it will get better. But generating anything close to coherent film / television show is a tall task. For all of the progress in image generation we still seem somewhat stagnant when it comes to fixing hallucinations. Video generation is a much harder problem than image generation, so it's not super clear to me we're very close to this having a material impact on Hollywood.
  • xnx 3y ago
    Not for Oscar-worthy films, but definitely for a bunch of marginal stock-photography-ish material. Look at the state of generated videos 2 years ago to get a sense of the trajectory.
    • Turing_Machine 3y ago
      TV commercials will probably be the first to fall. They're short, and don't really need to be realistic at all -- just eye-catching. Right up generative AI's alley.
      • xnx 3y ago
        Great example. The best commercials will still have big budgets and location shoots but generated videos will raise the quality floor for local commercials.
• geodel 3y ago
  So long back when internet was rare and expensive, sms would cost per message, there would be fewer messages and mostly from people who one could reply to. And then in time of abundance when they get generated and forwarded in bulk I see that they get deleted in same fashion. I think same will happen with AI once we get tons of autogenerated TV shows and movies watching 3 min of 40 min show or 5 min of 2 hr movie would become common. People would bulk delete unwatched movies/shows and other material from queue without ever playing it. Or maybe by then person entertainment AI bot would be tasked with processing 5000 hour worth of media every week and summarize it to owners. The idea that 5 million dollar movie would generate 500 million dollar revenue would be hilarious just from plain economic analysis.
  • anigbrowl 3y ago
    The Electric Monk was a labour-saving device, like a dishwasher or a video recorder. Dishwashers washed tedious dishes for you, thus saving you the bother of washing them yourself, video recorders watched tedious television for you, thus saving you the bother of looking at it yourself; Electric Monks believed things for you, thus saving you what was becoming an increasingly onerous task, that of believing all the things the world expected you to believe. - Douglas Adams, Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency
• paulpauper 3y ago
  Over the past four years, Tyler Perry had been planning an $800 million expansion of his studio in Atlanta, which would have added 12 soundstages to the 330-acre property. Now, however, those ambitions are on hold — thanks to the rapid developments he’s seeing in the realm of artificial intelligence, including OpenAI’s text-to-video model Sora, which debuted Feb. 15 and stunned observers with its cinematic video outputs. I had no idea Tyler Perry movies made so much as to necessitate such a big studio
  • _zagj 3y ago
    [flagged]
    • richardgreeko27 3y ago
      Well the Left is generally opposed to the bourgeoisie so I don't see the disconnect there, but to call HN "far left" is laughable.
  • anigbrowl 3y ago
    He has a large body of work, producing others' films as well as his own, plus a large TV series output. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyler_Perry#Filmography https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyler_Perry#Filmography
• defrost 3y ago
  It's odd that he's winding back on soundstages .. I suspect this is on hold while they reconsider the soundstage tech stack. The other comments are correct about fully generative imaging from AI .. having that fluid and tight to a directors vision is still some way down the road. As mentioned in article what will change is being able to generate fully digital sets with AI assistance, character makeup and "look" to tie onto a real actor, background non player AI extras, etc. This sees a AV media future with a lot more work in giant green rooms and AI production .. and the $800 m is most likely "on hold" while the big picture is revaluated - fewer carpentry shops, more server farms.
• dorkwood 3y ago
  Can anyone here estimate what it costs OpenAI to generate, say, a 5 second video using Sora?
  • John23832 3y ago
    That is actually a great question.
  • fragmede 3y ago
    At a guess, less than $0.50? > Pay-per-use: $0.01-$0.10 per second of generated video, based on existing tools and computational demands. https://medium.com/@christianray.drapete/openai-sora-understanding-access-and-potential-costs-e6bca85e24be https://medium.com/@christianray.drapete/openai-sora-underst...
    • dorkwood 3y ago
      Thanks for the link! Although this appears to be more focused on what it will cost the end user, as opposed to what it will cost OpenAI.
      • fragmede 3y ago
        Which is your question, I didn't miss the subtle difference. (and you pointed it out nicely :) If we assume openai is making a profit on queries, it means that their cost to run this is less than what they're charging, at which point, the guess for what they're charging is a ballpark for what it costs. Training is impossibly expensive, inference is totally cheap.
• rkho 3y ago
  As an aside, this website has one hundred and sixty seven trackers and loading them caused my CPU temperatures to spike so high that my fans kicked into high gear.
• m3kw9 3y ago
  Maybe an entire movie can be done on a green screen if the tools are good enough to get the details
  • dylan604 3y ago
    Have you not seen Star Wars Eps 1 - 3?
    • fragmede 3y ago
      Have you seen any of the movies that have come out after them?
      • dylan604 3y ago
        Yes. What's your point? We've moved away from green screen and now shooting realtime "projections" on OLED screens that allow the actors to see the environment and moves in sync with the camera to show parallax in the image. if you think we're still shooting green screen for anything with a budget, you'd be a bit out of touch
        • fragmede 3y ago
          Somewhere in-between Star Wars Eps 1-3, and today's projection movie sets, are a whole slew of movies that were basically all green screen, and weren't as bad as Star Wars Eps 1-3.
          • dylan604 3y ago
            > weren't as bad that's one hell of an endorsement, and not a good one. pretty much sums it up. 300 and Sin City at least styled them to look like the comic they were based, but the Willy Wonka and Alice all just were a bunch of nope from me. these movies just look/feel uncanny valley, and we just expected to accept it. compare Mad Max Fury Road. yes, there's some digital additions, but it feels real because so much of it was real.
  • 3y ago
• John23832 3y ago
  People make fun of this because it's Tyler Perry, but go to Atlanta and see how many people he employs. Both directly and indirectly. All the major tech companies are laying off due to their ambitions/utilizations of AI. This is a major employer in a major city seeing the writing on the wall.
  • paxys 3y ago
    > All the major tech companies are laying off due to their ambitions/utilizations of AI. Citation needed. Tech companies are having layoffs because they spent the last decade under the assumption that money was free and profits were optional. Now they are hitting reality and investors/shareholders are demanding returns. AI has nothing to do with it. Heck the wave of layoffs started well before ChatGPT even launched. If anything AI is actually fueling another bubble and extending the charade. Look at the tens, maybe hundreds of thousands of people that suddenly work "in AI" now.
    • John23832 3y ago
      Citation Given: Googles layoffs in ad sales are attributed to their leaning into AI ads https://www.theinformation.com/articles/google-plans-ad-sales-restructuring-as-automation-booms https://www.theinformation.com/articles/google-plans-ad-sale...
      • paxys 3y ago
        "are attributed" By who? What is the source?
        • John23832 3y ago
          The Information. They do credible reporting. Did you read the article? I can't make them out their sources.
• joshestroud 3y ago
  ouch
• rapjr9 3y ago
  From the article: "And I think the only way to move forward in this is to galvanize it as one voice, not only in Hollywood and in this industry, but also in Congress." Assume AI does pan out and widespread change is soon upon us, making a very significant percentage of labor unemployable. So one solution widely touted is universal basic income. Is that even possible? The US government prints money and then collects some of that money as taxes. Remove a large part of the taxes and it is just printing money. Maybe that works? I haven't seen any analysis, especially on the short term changeover. Maybe in the future only corporations and AI's will pay taxes and everybody else lives for free and starts a restaurant for extra cash? Congress today seems unlikely to pay to support people whose skills have become obsolete, but maybe if it happens to a lot of people at the same time...
  • A4ET8a8uTh0 3y ago
    Yes, but there is a line of people and corporations wanting government money. Right now, the top of those groups include Intel[1], because they feel they did not quite get enough to re-shore. It annoys me, because I recognize it has to be done ( moving fabs to US ), but it does seem very.. opportunistic. [1]https://www.pcgamer.com/intel-is-asking-for-an-additional-dollar10-billion-from-chips-act-subsidies-because-the-chip-giant-feels-it-deserves-more-cash-for-investing-in-us-developments/ https://www.pcgamer.com/intel-is-asking-for-an-additional-do...
• throwaway118899 3y ago
  [flagged]
  • MatekCopatek 3y ago
    For someone not from the USA, what's a culture war movie? Are you talking about America being the good guy in all the movies? Or the thing where there are more black and gay characters now and conservative people don't like it? More importantly though - why would AI change the prevalent ideology in movies? Won't the same people who already make movies keep making them, just using AI?
    • bhpm 3y ago
      “Culture War” is a dog whistle for any movie that includes women, gays, or blacks. Notice the comment you’re replying to was written by a throwaway account. There is no culture war in America. There is only a group of people who feel threatened by the existence of content that isn’t targeted squarely at them. There is only a group of people who are terrified that, if they aren’t the majority voice in absolutely everything, they will end up being treated how they treat out-group members.
      • mdale 3y ago
        Tolerance for everything but intolerance?
        • rsynnott 3y ago
          Congratulations, you have rediscovered https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance
      • jterrys 3y ago
        I think it's poignantly obvious that there is a shift in making entertainment that is above all, inclusive and preaching, rather than entertaining. This is the most glaring in the context of historical dramas. No, I am sorry, but Victorian English Aristocracy did not consist of Africans, Indians, and Southeast Asians. There were no acceptable forums for the 'yaas queeen slaaayyy' attitudes of today. Queen Elizabeth wasn't black. Hannibal wasn't Sub-Saharan African. These productions don't even try to be historically accurate. They're just minority power fantasies. Poorly dressed up shows with scenarios in which the minorities prevail over the racist white people sensibilities of the day. It's genuinely pathetic. >Notice the comment you’re replying to was written by a throwaway account. And this brings up the next point: There has never been a time in media entertainment where both the industry and it's professional critics have been so openly hostile, so fervent, so downright dogmatic in insulting and hunting down their detractors to punish them for holding the wrong opinion. They encourage their audience and supporters to go out of their way to harass and silence anyone who disagrees with their content. The fact that people don't want to be associated with that toxicity doesn't make them cowards or racists. Terms like "dog whistle" have come to be dismissive phrases of any criticism. You are attacking the speaker rather than earnestly trying to address the argument. You are dismissing an opinion because it comes from a throwaway account. Nobody is terrified of your shitty entertainment. They're terrified about losing their jobs because people can't take an insult over the internet and have to make it personal when their favorite manufactured outrage garbage show gets criticized.
• Havoc 3y ago
  It’ll take some time for sofa tech to be production ready. Big difference between getting it to generate a plausible snowy Tokyo scene vs actually controlling the detail and style on a manner that is consistent and controllable. No point in having a movie where every perspective and angle has a slightly different style
  • sfeng 3y ago
    Sure but an $800M investment is supposed to pay off over 10-20 years. It seems like the industry will change in more like 1-2.
    • Havoc 3y ago
      Yeah that’s fair. I wouldn’t want to be in that biz right now
  • zimpenfish 3y ago
    > No point in having a movie where every perspective and angle has a slightly different style Michael Bay begs to differ ("Transformers: The Last Knight has aspect ratio changes throughout the film, often randomly, mid-scene and between shots.")
    • Havoc 3y ago
      Yeah I don’t think openAI can get away with a “just add more explosions and lens flare” strategy :p
• bentt 3y ago
  This feels more like a play for attention than an actual doomsday announcement. The guy is savvy and knows that being in the spotlight right now with AI next to your name is a win.
  • beardedwizard 3y ago
    100% this. He is going to be the first one laying folks off. The interview specifically mentions eliminating the need to shoot on location, and his use of AI makeup. I guess he didn't feel bad about the makeup artists he put out of business.
• gcanyon 3y ago
  Anyone saying: - it’s only short videos - it’s not fully consistent - it is hard to direct to get what you want …is looking at where it is now, and failing to consider where it will be in literally a year or two. Five years from now parents will be mashing up Winnie the Pooh and Avatar, starring their children, in immersive 3D, for the Apple Vision Pro 4 or the Quest 7. Tyler Perry is making a wise choice.
  • throwawaaarrgh 3y ago
    The only parts of movies or TV that this will be useful for is non-character-driven filler that doesn't move the plot along. It will be great for things like action scenes and car chases, or staring wistfully at the ocean. But they still need actors and a story, and to tie those together seamlessly with whatever is generated. We're very far away from doing that in a way that will look or feel good. Special effects are nothing new. But we all know special effects don't make a good movie.
    • BadHumans 3y ago
      You aren't thinking about generative voice AI or LLMs. Putting it all together, it is not surprising that creatives are afraid they will be done in under 5 years.
    • squarefoot 3y ago
      Very true, today, but how far are we from something that takes a book as script and spits out a full movie? We have a huge library of ultra cheap forgotten novels that will make excellent prompts for killer personal productions once technology allows it. Who will ever go watch a movie if they can upload the book to their server and get the movie in minutes?
    • browningstreet 3y ago
      Think more about the backgrounds used in shows like Mandalorian. Think about the size of the stage/studio/set that Mandalorian filmed on. It's going to get smaller, and the backgrounds and other details used in music videos, tv shows, commercials and films will be far more virtual than even today. All the components will still be needed, but the levels and origins of them all will change. If you go back and look at how the median productions have changed at 5 year intervals (going in the past), it'd be a poor choice to commit $800M to something that's probably going to remain exceedingly fluid for a while. The SFX industry is probably the most prepared to shift, as it's already screens, pixels, and servers. The days of green dots are already (mostly) over (see the ILM SFX reel for The Creator -- wholesale human detail replacements without tracking dots). The change will affect everyone else more.
• paxys 3y ago
  We have found at least one critical real world use case for AI – to be an easy scapegoat for all of a company's bad decisions, layoffs, lack of profits, shortage of funding. Are you a shit businessman? No, it was all AI's fault!
  • newyankee 3y ago
    Yes, but definitely there is a 'this time its different' feel every time some new demo comes
  • sparrc 3y ago
    You may not like his movies, but saying Tyler Perry is a "shit businessman" is a bit of a stretch...
    • EA-3167 3y ago
      That's fair, he's an excellent businessman, but I'm not shocked that his particular oeuvre is vulnerable to AI... it is after all painfully formulaic and lacking any creativity.
  • wateralien 3y ago
    How can he be that "shit" if: - Is making drastic changes to react to market realities. (Probably before most other studios) - Is a self-made billionaire ?
• Delumine 3y ago
  He's a hypocrite, he says he's scared of the impact of the industry. But he IS the industry. He's gonna be putting set designers, sound stagers, et al out of work if he opts to use AI. AI is just going to make the rich... richer. We do need some protections in place.
  • satao 3y ago
    we need a universal basic income and progressive tax rates urgently if we want to avoid the world turning into a Gotham City kind of inequal shitshow.
    • Timber-6539 3y ago
      AI is not good enough to take over most jobs. The hype is overblown and lacking in evidence.
      • satao 3y ago
        Its just a matter of time
        • fhd2 3y ago
          I kinda agree with both of you. Given infinite time (and assuming humanity is around and willing to work on it for as long as it takes), I suppose we _should_ be able to automate anything. I honestly don't know how long that's gonna take, but I'm sceptical we'll see it in the next ten years. Anyway, if we see it coming, it'd be silly not to prepare for it in some fashion.
      • tivert 3y ago
        > AI is not good enough to take over most jobs. The hype is overblown and lacking in evidence. And I'm guessing once the evidence is strong enough to convince you, it will be too late to do anything about it.
        • Timber-6539 3y ago
• timetraveller26 3y ago
  I, for one, welcome our new silicon overlords.
• peteforde 3y ago
  Just came to say that spending $800M on a sound recording studio expansion was literally insane even before the current AI boom. Quite simply, there's no practical combination of top-tier hardware that you can buy which will put you even close to that number, even if replicated 8-10 times as the article implies multiple rooms. That tells me most of the money would be poured into vanity aspects - literally gold toilets and the like - which would impact the ego, not the sound. It's easy to spend $1M on gear. You would have to work really, really hard to spend $25M on gear. I'd bet that everything Steve Albini has in his two rooms is worth under $10M.
  • pavlov 3y ago
    Soundstages are studios for movie production. The word “sound” implies that it’s soundproof so you can record sound. This makes a soundstage generally much more expensive to build than the alternative, a silent stage. $800M isn’t crazy if you’re building a dozen of these and all the supporting infrastructure.
    • evo 3y ago
      Not only are these aircraft hangar sized buildings with soundproofing, they’re also likely wired for hundreds of amps of lighting, including truss and catwalk systems to he able to position and distribute that lighting. I could see it adding up pretty fast.
      • Turing_Machine 3y ago
        And all of that at Southern California real estate prices and construction labor costs. Yeah, it's not gonna be cheap by a damned sight.
        • mostlysimilar 3y ago
          His studios are in Atlanta, Georgia.
  • peteforde 3y ago
• eatbitseveryday 3y ago
  The latest Indiana Jones used AI to make Ford’s face young for a whole lengthy scene.
• r0ckarong 3y ago
  Fantastic case of cognitive dissonance. Heis afraid that this is going to impact artists and uses it as the reasoning to stop paying artists. Amazing. Can't wait for someone as talented as Mr. Perry to produce another quality movie on his MacBook.