Discussion in 'Misc. Films' started by terry78, Jan 9, 2020.
Nah, just glad some things never change
But, I think things are changing, with enough big successes that have been happening. However, feed an AI a bunch of data that is inherently biased, that is going to kill any forward momentum.
For some reason this reminded me of that Pacino AI flick. S1mone.
Eh, I must admit to not hating it.
Which, except for Cage, would be different from the Ayers film how?
It's not just Silicon Valley and Warner Brothers.
The robots will soon start making entertainment only for other robots.
More fire. Lots more fire.
It may very well just be another form of data collection, but the risk here is WB focusing primarily on numbers to make creative decisions. The problem is, and this why I think this kind of stuff will ultimately not end up working, is because a computer cannot tap into how humans feel. If WB, or any studio for that matter, rely on this in making their decisions, they are going to find out very quickly just how creatively suffocating the strategy is. Sure in a perfect world you could create a formula of The Rock + Action + North America and China = X amount of dollars, but that's not how art works. What will ultimately end up happening is some other studio not tied to a formula will emerge as the place where innovation happens, and that's where people will gravitate towards. We are already seeing it in Netflix and Amazon who are pumping out original content all the time, whilst Disney is banking on their existing catalogue to get them by, or in other words, a tried and tested formula. Art cannot be formulated no matter how much places like WB try to do it. If you want to sell something where you can create consistent products and earn a steady profit then art is not the right industry for you.
I feel like AI would have to explain certain movie choices like making a morbid movie. “Spider-Man made money so Spider-Man x2 + twilight = $$$$”
What do you think the bean counters focus on now when making financial decisions? Do you think numbers and trends aren't already considered? The use of this system suggests that they've already been focusing on numbers or some kind of analytics, and they would now prefer to have a computer system that does much of the data gathering rather than having people research and gather info.
Which may be the downside of this...it could cost some people their jobs in development, however in my experience, when you start to add sophisticated AI/analytic/modeling systems into workflow, you potentially need even more people to interpret the data and turn it into results.
Perhaps not. It can certainly suss out general market trends, which tend to be driven by how people feel.
I very much doubt it's that simple. They're probably not going to "rely" on this system to make their decisions.
This isn't a robot that generates ideas, scripts and develops them. It's a computer system to help them measure market trends. Probably involving demographics, etc. You think they aren't already crunching numbers regarding those things? This is a Hollywood studio. They're going to go with "tried and true" often. Most studios do, in some capacity.
This is likely just going to be another tool and approach that they can use to help with market analytics. Analytics is used in many industries, and it's essentially worked in a lot of them. It's one source of information to add to other sources of information, including the very human egos and personalities that create art and/or run the company.
What they are looking for is a formula to sell a product consistently. You don't think if they had software that could put together new ideas they wouldn't take it? Of course they would, because anything that streams lines things saves money, you are already seeing automation taking over other industries, the creative industry is no different in its attempt to incorporate it. What is different is it's a technology that has limited use in art, because A.I. cannot predict mood and emotions because of how quickly they can shift. There's is no data in the world that would have predicted The Joker making a billion dollars or Justice League underperforming as bad as it did, because for both those films situations changed between the time they were green lit and by the time they were released. A.I. is very good at repetitive manual labour, but it's not good at thinking outside the box or taking risks. As I said, it's doomed to fail in art, as is any studio who thinks A.I. is somehow going to be this golden goose.
Was just wondering, if pikachu was a hit and sonic and Scoob May be a hit, where are the Jetsons, the flinstones, the looney tunes, dexters lab, etc?
Didn't South Park do this in that episode where Cartman was AWESOM-O and pitching ideas for Adam Sandler movies to Hollywood executives?