AI Actresses 😱: Hollywood's Digital Nightmare 🎬

Tech & Science

In 2016, the acclaimed Japanese filmmaker Hayao Miyazaki expressed profound disgust toward a bizarre, AI-generated video depicting a misshapen human body crawling across a floor, deeming it an “insult to life itself.” He stated, “If you really want to make creepy stuff, you can go ahead and do it,” and emphatically declared that he would never incorporate such technology into his work. Following this strong reaction, in October 2024, filmmaker PJ Accetturo utilized AI tools to create a fabricated trailer for a live-action adaptation of Miyazaki’s animated classic, *Princess Mononoke*. The trailer garnered 22 million views on X, but also provoked widespread criticism and death threats, including the retort, “Go generate a bridge and jump off of it,” and pleas for Accetturo to “throw your computer in a river and beg God’s forgiveness.” Accetturo is the director and founder of Genre AI, an AI advertising agency. The increasing development of AI image and video generation models has sparked considerable controversy, with artists alleging that AI companies are exploiting their work to create tools that displace human professionals. As Accetturo experienced firsthand, the open use of these models is increasingly stigmatized. Nevertheless, with the ongoing advancements in these models, they have facilitated faster workflows and unlocked new creative possibilities.

Over the past few weeks, I’ve spoken with nine actors, directors, and creators to understand how they’re navigating the growing concerns surrounding artificial intelligence. Actors are emerging as a powerful force in resisting AI’s impact on their industry. In 2023, SAG-AFTRA, the Hollywood actors’ union, initiated its longest-ever strike, primarily to establish stronger protections against the use of AI replicas. Actors have been actively lobbying for regulations within the industry and beyond. One individual, Erik Passoja, testified before the California Legislature in support of several bills, including measures designed to safeguard against the creation of pornographic deepfakes. SAG-AFTRA endorsed SB 1047, an AI safety bill regulating frontier models, and also campaigned against a proposed moratorium on state AI legislation. A significant moment of contention arose in September when Deadline Hollywood reported that talent agencies were expressing interest in signing “AI actress” Tilly Norwood, a move that sparked considerable outrage. As Emily Blunt stated to Variety, “This is really, really scary—on agencies, don’t do that.” Natasha Lyonne, star of *Russian Doll*, amplified these concerns, posting an Instagram Story that called for a boycott of any talent agency engaging in such practices. While Lyonne herself co-founded an AI studio, the reaction highlights a broader set of anxieties about AI prevalent throughout Hollywood.

SAG-AFTRA’s position on the use of AI in film and television is centered around several key concerns. Notably, the synthetic character Tilly Norwood – a computer-generated individual created through a program trained on the performances of numerous professional actors without their consent or compensation – highlights a central issue. Without any genuine life experience or emotional depth, audiences currently show little interest in such content, and the practice itself raises concerns about the devaluation of human artistry and the potential displacement of actors. The organization argues that the use of stolen performances to train these models exacerbates the problem, jeopardizing performer livelihoods. Addressing this concern, SAG-AFTRA believes a viable solution lies in ethically training these models on licensed datasets, as called for by independent filmmaker Gille Klabin around the time of the “Princess Mononoke” trailer. While some companies, such as Adobe, which trains its AI models on stock images for which it pays royalties, are taking this approach, the challenges surrounding job losses and artistic integrity remain considerably more complex. As vertical drama actress Dinerstein stated, “I’m not fundamentally against AI” – acknowledging its utility in specialized editing tasks – she emphasized the core of art, “which is about creating an emotional connection between creators and viewers.”

“It’s hard to ever explain gray areas on social media,” she stated, emphasizing her desire to avoid appearing “hypocritical.” Despite her belief that AI does not currently pose a risk to her career—“people want to see what I’m up to”—she harbors concerns about individuals, including fans and vertical drama studios, creating AI representations of her likeness without her explicit permission. She has found it simplest to respond with, “You know what? Don’t involve me in AI.” Others view the issue as significantly broader. Actress Susan Spanotold me it was “an issue for humans, not just actors.” “This is a world of humans and animals,” she explained. “Interaction with humans is what makes it fun. I mean, do we want a world of robots?” The situation is particularly complex for Hollywood creatives beyond actors, such as directors, writers, and film editors, who increasingly find themselves grappling with AI tools that can genuinely enhance their productivity while simultaneously risking job losses if they fail to adapt. Consequently, individuals outside of acting have adopted diverse strategies regarding AI. Some remain firmly opposed to its use, while others have employed the technology reluctantly, attempting to remain under the radar. Still others have openly embraced the advancements. Kavan Cardoza, a director and AI filmmaker, exemplifies this varied approach.

Following the release of Midjourney in 2022, David Cardoza began experimenting with AI-driven image and video generation, eventually leading him to create a series of fabricated movie trailers for established films and franchises. In December 2024, one of these projects, a fan film within the Batman universe, went viral online, only to be removed by Warner Bros. due to copyright concerns. Cardoza admits to digitally recreating actors from previous Batman films without their explicit consent, asserting that his intention was purely as a fan project. In contrast, Accetturo received death threats as a result of his work. However, Cardoza’s Batman fan film garnered largely positive feedback; “Every other major studio started contacting me,” he explained. He then established Phantom X, an AI studio staffed by close friends, initially focusing on producing advertisements where AI video generation is gaining traction. Cardoza, however, soon shifted his focus back to filmmaking. In June, he released *Echo Hunter*, a short film that blends elements of *Blade Runner* and *The Matrix*, incorporating distinctly AI-generated visuals alongside motion-capture technology from Runway to place the faces of real actors into his AI-generated world. He emphasizes the value of collaborating with actors, believing their artistic input elevates his scripts: “There’s a lot more levels of creativity to it.” Despite this, Cardoza required approval from SAG-AFTRA to incorporate the likenesses of SAG-AFTRA actors, and he fulfilled their stipulations by agreeing not to…

“It’s never about *if*, it’s just when,” explained producer David Cardoza, outlining his approach to utilizing AI in filmmaking. He described AI’s potential to “give voices to creators that otherwise never would have had the voice,” and emphasized his openness to the technology, stating unequivocally, “Oh, 100 percent, I’d make a non-AI film if required.” Cardoza added that, given the opportunity and budget, “I’d probably still shoot it all live action.” He recognized that transitions inevitably involve disruption, acknowledging “there’s always going to be changes,” yet drew parallels to past technological shifts in filmmaking, such as the rise of visual effects which created new roles in digital effects creation while simultaneously reducing the need for elaborate physical sets. He expressed a desire to mitigate potential job losses. Similarly, producer Alessandro Accetturo recounted his experience: “I worked for 15 years as a filmmaker, mostly as a commercial director and former documentary director.” During the pandemic, Accetturo successfully raised millions for an animated TV series, only for it to languish in development hell. AI then presented a renewed opportunity. Over the summer of 2024, he…

Starting in May, Vince Accetturo began experimenting with AI video tools, recognizing a favorable position where his experience aligned with the emerging technology’s potential, without jeopardizing his established reputation. Following Google’s release of Veo 3, Accetturo created a viral fake medicine advertisement. Today, his studio produces advertising campaigns for major brands like Oracle and Popeyes. He describes the initial controversy as having “completely faded away.” Accetturo remains committed to the use of AI, stating that “everyone understands that it’s the future.” One AI project participant explained to *Wired* that the goal was “to be at the table and not on the menu.” Clandestine AI utilization is now prevalent throughout the industry’s upper echelons; Hayden knows an editor who collaborates with a director responsible for films costing $100 million, noting that “he’s already using AI, sometimes without people knowing.” Some artists express moral concerns but believe resistance is futile. Vinny Dellay, a storyboard artist with credits on Marvel films and Super Bowl advertisements, released a video articulating his perspectives on the ethical implications of utilizing AI in a professional artistic context. Dellay contends that “AI being trained off of art found on the Internet without getting permission from the artist may not be fair or honest.” However, he argues that refusing to utilize AI products is “just being delusional,” and that the appropriate response is to “adapt like cockroaches after a nuclear” event.

“If they’re lucky, utilizing AI in storyboarding workflows might even allow a storyboard artist to produce twice the number of boards in half the time, without the concerns of questioning life’s decisions at 3 a.m.” Gille Klabin, an independent writer, director, and visual effects artist, emphasizes this potential efficiency. Klabin is currently developing a feature film titled *Weekend at the End of the World*. As an independent filmmaker, he faces limitations in hiring staff, particularly for labor-intensive tasks such as creating pitch decks. He describes AI tools as “essentially just liberating us to get more done and have more time back in our life.” However, Klabin is mindful of ethical considerations, carefully explaining his rationale for using AI tools during our conversation. He expressed his acceptance of AI usage “as long as you’re using it ethically in the sense that you’re not copying somebody’s work and using it for your own.”

Establishing these boundaries, however, can be challenging. Talent agent Hayden noted that as AI tools enhance the visual quality of low-budget films, it becomes increasingly difficult to compete with high-budget productions, which historically employ the greatest number of people at the highest wage levels. Klabin’s adoption of AI is currently constrained by the limitations of existing AI models; he describes them as “not really good enough to be used in a final project.”

Rotoscoping, a process involving the meticulous tracing of a shot to allow for independent background editing, is incredibly labor-intensive—requiring the individual editing of every frame. This is precisely why Klabin has been exploring Runway’s AI-driven rotoscoping tools, though he notes that the results, while serviceable as a first pass, are often too noisy for final projects. Current AI tools frequently produce small glitches, and Klabin consequently restricts their use to tasks that are not visible to audiences, such as creating movie pitch decks, or employs them only when he can subsequently refine the output.

Stephen Robles, a YouTuber and podcaster who reviews Apple products, similarly adopts an approach. He utilizes AI for tasks like removing silences and transcribing audio, but doesn’t view it as a disruptive force in his work. Antioch Hwang, a YouTube thumbnail artist, shares a pragmatic perspective. He has observed that certain channels’ audiences are “very sensitive to AI images,” and even utilizing “an AI upscaler to fix up the edges” can elicit strongly negative reactions. Consequently, he’s “very wary” about deploying AI in those contexts.

Across numerous conversations, industry professionals offered varied responses regarding the potential for AI to fundamentally disrupt their respective fields. Some, like Hwang, expressed a pessimistic outlook, while others – such as Passoja – offered differing perspectives.

The prevailing forecast among major movie studios – including Warner Bros. and Paramount – predicted their disappearance within three to five years. However, several individuals expressed a more optimistic outlook. Tess Dinerstein, a vertical drama actor, stated, “I don’t believe verticals will ever be completely replaced by AI,” arguing that, even if technologically feasible, “that simply isn’t what people want.” Gille Klabin, an independent filmmaker, maintained that a place would always exist for high-quality, human-created films, cautioning that work “fundamentally derivative” is at risk. “I don’t know how AI could possibly replace the borderline divine element of consciousness,” he added. Those most bullish on AI, interestingly, were often the least optimistic about their own career prospects. Kavan Cardoza told me, “I think at a certain point it won’t matter; anyone on the planet can just type in some sentences” to generate full, high-quality videos. This perspective may explain why Anthony Accetturo has become a vocal AI advocate, leading a newsletter aimed at teaching other filmmakers how to adapt to the impending AI revolution. Accetturo described AI as “a tsunami that is gonna wipe out everyone,” and his approach is to “hand out surfboards—teaching people how to surf. Do with it what you will.”