Paul Schrader has spent his lifetime writing a lot of movies about men bent over a table, journaling their darkest inner thoughts. Somehow, his current views on AI seem like they're closer to a scene from his movie than from actual reality.
Let's unpack them together.
Paul Schrader on AI
In a recent interview, he told Vanity Fair that his opinion is that movies are “going to be more and more AI,” continuing: “I think we’re only two years away from the first AI feature.”
He finished with, “I was just on the phone with someone today about a script I had, and I said, ‘You know, this would be a perfect script to do all AI.’”
Sounds like the First Reformed director is preparing for a plague. When he was asked if he himself would be using AI to work on his next movies with him, Schrader said that “it’s just a tool.”
He went on to say, “When you’re an author, you have to describe someone’s reaction. You use a code — you use a code of words, a certain number of letters, and so forth, and you express their facial reaction,” he continued. “An actor has their own code. Well, now you’re a pixelator, and you can create the face, and you can create the emotion on the face, and you can sculpt it the same way an author sculpts the reaction in a novel or a story.”
Schrader went on to say that “AI is taking over film coverage” and that it might come after film reviews next. “AI does better coverage than the average coverage. And AI doesn’t have to favor anybody,” he said. “Often, when you’re doing coverage, you get a hint that the person who’s paying you wants you to like this. You can’t give that information to AI.”
What Does Schrader Mean?
This was a lot to unpack. And Schrader said a lot of things with blanket opinions that don't actually resonate with a lot of facts.
AI is a tool that people are using. It's interesting to see the world contend with it, and also overestimate what it can do.
There's always someone prognosticating when we're going to get all AI films, and those people are usually wrong.
The only thing I can tell you is true is that places are using AI for summaries and for coverage, but I don't believe those coverages are making any real decisions, and I think they're mostly used to get a synopsis to pass around or to try to package ideas.
And really, the only places I am sure are using that stuff are big agencies based on stories, not on published facts.
Look, we've done some AI coverage tests and found it to be very lacking. Like when it said my script was better than Schindler's List. Schindler's List!
But you don't have to take our word for it. Variety covered this as well and found that humans still had better coverage because they understood the nuance of storytelling. And that AI was way too generous with people, refuting Schrader's claims.
In two years, I do think we'll probably see something made entirely by AI, but will it be any good? I have no idea. I still think humans understand humans in a way that machines never will, and that lasting barrier will take decades or many a century for machines to ever be able to conquer.
But that's just my opinion.
Let me know what you think in the comments.
English (US) · 
