This looks like it might actually be good...certainly looks like it has a good plot...damn you artificial intelligence!
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=573GCxqkYEg
"The Creator"
- Thread starter Patrick Spaceman
- Start date
The trailer feels like Hollywood decided to skim through some Isaac Asimov novels again, not a bad thing as he was really ahead of his time with AI concepts.
No complaints if they did..More Asimov, some Phillip K Dick. I'd love to see Joe Haldeman's "Forever War" on a cinema screen, that was written in the 70's a was a good read, and space opera Saga of The Seven Suns from Kevin J Anderson was also epic...and a long read to get through the entire series.
OOOOOOOOF!! Huge freaking OOOF!!
Just watch the 3 min segment I linked below.
View: https://youtu.be/_lDM1nAmPHI?t=317
What the actual fuck were they thinking??
There are a bunch of unwritten rules in my industry that we kinda sorta follow, but this is one very obvious one we don't even consider to break, not even for a millisecond!
Just watch the 3 min segment I linked below.
What the actual fuck were they thinking??
There are a bunch of unwritten rules in my industry that we kinda sorta follow, but this is one very obvious one we don't even consider to break, not even for a millisecond!
I read the word "Creator" and immediately thought of this.............
That's a way for them to make the headlines... Sad and pathetic
It does make one wonder if AI is able to create anything actually new at this point... Even systems like Dhall-E take what exists and smash them together at the suggestion of the input.
If I asked an AI machine to, for example, make up a new musical instrument... would it be able to...?
Seeing that one snippet be a reappropriation (bastardisation?) of existing footage of a tragedy, if it was made by AI and not intentionally created by man and inserted for sensationalism... it leads to questions of what the rest of the film may have hidden in it? People falling out of buildings on 11/9? Aircraft smashing into the ground at air-shows? Any tragedy/atrocity caught on film may not be inspiration for a scene, it may be the physical visual foundations of it...
Last edited:
The problem isn't with using something for reference. Whether it's put together by some "AI" smooshing pictures together or a concept artist drawing it or real world footage, makes no difference. Just to give you an idea, ppl who design things like actors in action scenes getting shot, blown up, dismembered and so on, when made to be realistic like in war movies, do use real world footage as reference.
Yes, there are artists in big Studios just being payed to crawl through live leak footage to find reference material. For literally anything.
Also yes there is 9/11 footage used as reference, but I doubt anyone dared to use actual snipetts of footage in anything other than documentaries. I for one have not used 9/11 footage of someone falling from the tower as reference to how an actor falling in a very similar setting should look like but I'm sure someone already did. It's the best reference out there, sadly.
The issue is when you take an actual piece of (well known) footage especially of a tragedy in this case, modify it a bit and just slap it in there. Using it as a reference, sure. Recreate it via simulations and whatnot, film your own explosion and modify that, yeah, that's the correct approach. But just doing a bit of composting on some else's foktage, hiding rhe real buildings with some CG one's and calling it a day? Nah
That's so extremely unprofessional that it's borderline criminal. Or even actually illegal cos I really doubt they contacted the original creator of the footage and bought the rights to it.
And to answer your question, no, this type of algorithmic interpolator that is commonly referred to as AI can't do jack shit when asked to come up with something entirely new. These "ai" don't think, they simply can't. It's just a piece of automaton that is building from a database so large that it's incomprehensible to us and thus it feels like it's intelligent, while it's the exact opposite.
Tldr : what we refer to as ai is just another Google that can take some commands and might spit up a result based on interpolation of stuff it has in the database it was fed.
As for the footage used there, you just don't do it like that. Use as reference, doesn't mean to just draw over it and call it a day.
Absolutely, there is referencing and thre is inspired by where new works are created, and there is reappropriation using the original in ways that don't make much new such as homage (recreating something great in your own style but still intentionally clearly a copy), remixing the original into a new compesition, intentionally orphaning something from its original or even flat out plagiarism.
I just don't know if the AI systems made to this point are capable of making new stuff they have not collated from existing, rejigged and served back up to the point of it being inspired by, not made of...? The ingredients for a 5 star award winning meal and the all-day breakfast at the local cafe can be identical but only one is worth charging $75 for and neither have necessarily discovered a new flavour...
Last edited: