The use of artificial intelligence (AI) in the film and television industry has sparked a heated debate among Hollywood studios and performers. These discussions have become so contentious that the SAG-AFTRA union, representing actors and media professionals, recently joined the writers guild in the first simultaneous strike in 63 years. At the heart of this dispute is the fear among actors that AI-generated actors, or “metahumans,” will replace them and steal their roles.
Actress Carly Turro, known for her appearances in popular television series like “Homeland,” expressed her concerns on a picket line, stating, “If it wasn’t a big deal to plan on utilizing AI to replace actors, it would be a no-brainer to put in the contract and let us sleep with some peace of mind. The fact that they won’t do that is terrifying when you think about the future of art and entertainment as a career.”
While creating synthetic performers from a combination of actors’ images has not yet occurred, studios want to reserve the right to do so as part of the contract negotiations. Duncan Crabtree-Ireland, SAG-AFTRA’s chief negotiator, believes that AI poses an “existential crisis” for actors who fear that their past, present, and future work will be used to generate “synthetic performers who can take their place.” The union is not seeking an outright ban on AI but rather wants companies to consult with them and obtain approval before casting a synthetic performer in place of an actor.
The Battle Over Digital Replicas and Post-Production Alterations
Another point of contention in the negotiations is the creation of digital replicas of background performers. The major studios, represented by the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers, have proposed obtaining an actor’s permission to use their digital replica in any motion picture outside the production for which the performer was hired. They also plan to negotiate payment with actors when the digital duplicate is used. However, SAG argues that this goes against the idea of additional compensation, as the studios would effectively be saying, “If you don’t give us the consent we demand, we won’t hire you and we’ll replace you with someone else.” SAG believes this is not meaningful consent.
The studios are also seeking to continue the practice of 3D body scans to capture an actor’s likeness for the purpose of creating AI-generated digital replicas. These images would be used in post-production, allowing for the accurate replacement of an actor’s face or the creation of an on-screen double. The producers have promised to obtain a performer’s consent and negotiate separately for subsequent uses of the actor’s likeness. However, SAG is concerned about the studios retaining the rights to these digital replicas for future works, effectively taking ownership of the virtual persona.
Additionally, the studios want the ability to digitally alter a performance post-production, as long as it aligns with the character, script, and director’s vision. This flexibility would save significant costs by avoiding the need to reshoot scenes. The producers have offered to seek a performer’s consent for any changes beyond typical post-production alterations. However, SAG sees this as AI overreach and insists on permission being sought before making any changes to an actor’s image, likeness, or voice.
The use of AI in the film and television industry has ignited a fierce debate between Hollywood studios and performers. While studios seek to preserve creative options and reduce costs through AI-generated actors, the fear among actors is that they will be replaced by these synthetic performers. The negotiations between SAG-AFTRA and the major film and television producers revolve around issues such as the creation of digital replicas, post-production alterations, and ownership rights. As the industry grapples with the rapid advancement of AI technology, the future of acting hangs in the balance.
Leave a Reply