AI, Tyler Perry, and The Rapidly Shifting Norms of Film Production

Last week, The Hollywood Reporter unveiled Tyler Perry's decision to halt plans for a new $800 million production studio, citing concerns about AI advancements in video production. While this news may raise alarms among industry peers, it prompts a crucial discussion about the evolving role of AI in filmmaking.

The first thing I want to acknowledge is this: Tyler Perry isn’t wrong. And while this sentiment is likely a troubling one to many of my colleagues in the industry, I think it’s important to first take a step back and break things down in a bit more depth.?

We Must Acknowledge & Accept Change

Perry's decision reflects a significant paradigm shift in production methodologies. In light of new technological changes, it’s only natural that studios’ investment strategies, especially in traditional infrastructure, will and should be changing. As more effective and efficient means of producing content become available, those financing these deals will take advantage of them. But rather than signaling a retreat from traditional filmmaking as a whole, it instead should highlight a strategic reassessment of resource allocation in response to these rapidly evolving technological advancements.

Demand for Content Isn’t Diminishing

The era of massive studio investments may soon be dwindling as the industry embraces more efficient production methods facilitated by paradigm-shifting technologies like AI. But while large-scale studio developments may slow, the rate at which content is produced – the volume that is produced, nor the labor force used to produce it – is going to decrease dramatically.?

Sure, there will always be waves of higher/lower industry activity, and theatrical screening attendance is not what it was, but that has been replaced by streaming. One of the lessons that the streaming wars has taught us is that there is an audience with diverse tastes in media. Content creation across a multitude of mediums must still be generated to keep the masses entertained. The fact is, the demand for diverse content through multiple distribution channels remains robust.

For Many Tasks, Humans Will Never Be Replaced

Human creativity and emotional connection are irreplaceable facets of filmmaking. While AI tools offer efficiency and innovation, they lack the nuanced storytelling and human touch that resonate with audiences. It is because of this that we also need to start giving humans a little more credit. To make the assumption that the Shakespeares, Spielbergs, Deakins, and Perrys for that matter, are going to disappear is a stretch. Not because they cannot be (to some degree) replicated, but because they are humans. Humans who can craft a human story, full of insight and emotion that other humans can connect to.

I make a similar argument with actors. We have grown with Tom Cruise for the last 5 decades, watching him evolve from a young heartthrob bartender to the world's greatest action star. We have seen him push his abilities to perform in masterpieces such as Magnolia, and then return to one of his most recognizable roles as Ethan Hunt. We don't just show up to watch his characters, we also show up to root for Tom Cruise the person. The guy that's aging, the guy that’s taking career risks, the guy that jumps on Oprah's couch, and the guy that’s strapping himself to an airplane to get the shot. These are all part of the human condition that I do not believe can be replicated by AI or machines.

Another example of this is something we refer to as “happy accidents,” unexpected mistakes that occur when actors are performing on camera. Maybe it's a stumbled line, or a tear, or a sneeze, maybe it's even a prop failing that triggers an impulsive response from an actor. Those moments are magical occurrences that connect the audience to the characters in a subconscious way that may transcend an effective prompt in Sora.

Searching for a Middle Ground

So where does that leave us? How do we reconcile the very real need for human taste, touch and acumen, with the breakneck pace of AI-fueled output? The answer likely will be found in the artful balance of human skill & technology that has come to be known as Virtual Production. In this new realm, virtual production emerges as a viable middle ground, combining technologies such as AI advancements with the intangible spark of human creativity. By leveraging technology – while still preserving traditional filmmaking processes – virtual production enhances efficiency and reduces costs, for both investors in infrastructure and creators of the content alike.

Virtual Production offers filmmakers a solution to key challenges that Tyler Perry aims to address: minimizing travel and handling complex locations, enhancing on-set productivity, streamlining location changes, and optimizing workflows for creating environments. This approach harnesses cutting-edge technology, while preserving the essence of filmmaking, involving real artists, actors, and crews. Data shows significant efficiency gains, with daily productivity increasing by at least 10% through resource centralization on a virtual production stage. Additionally, cost reductions of 30%+ seen in the Art Department and Construction, along with up to 60% savings in VFX and Post-production, highlight the economic benefits of virtual production workflows.

However, it's essential to acknowledge a counter argument, particularly for those in the VFX industry. While virtual production streamlines processes, it may reduce job opportunities in certain areas. This can be exemplified by tools such as Unreal Engine replacing other 3D software and virtual production replacing green screen techniques. Despite this, the overall impact on job availability beyond VFX is likely to be less pronounced, as traditional production roles remain essential for creating compelling content.

Tyler Perry's decision to reconsider his studio expansion reflects a broader trend of reevaluating traditional filmmaking models. Investing heavily in infrastructure based on outdated approaches may yield diminishing returns, as demonstrated by the challenging economics of Perry's proposed studio expansion. Perry's focus on optimizing actor environments without extensive travel or elaborate sets underscores the importance of adaptability and efficiency in modern filmmaking practices. Instead of canceling his expansion outright, he may perhaps benefit from pivoting his efficiency vision to embrace newer production solutions like virtual production that leverage these emerging technologies and assimilate them into the existing human-based production model.

The Road Ahead

The ultimate takeaway we can pull from this use case is that we should expect change. Similar to the Napster moment in the late 1990s, or the move to streaming platforms in the late 2010s, we can and must anticipate a shift in this industry. Attempting to stop the advancement of highly demanded tools is going to be complicated. Investment of massive capital into what has been the historic approach to the filmmaking model are not as necessary as they used to be. That doesn't mean that live action production will end anytime soon, or ever. Additionally, this doesn't mean that we will lose our jobs to AI. With that said, it is critical that we, as a community, track the expectation of a changing industry. We must embrace new tools and new technology, and most importantly we must continue to prove why the art of filmmaking is dependent on humans, not AI.