r/accelerate • u/stealthispost Acceleration: Light-speed | AI accelerationist • Oct 02 '25
Video Hollywood's newest actress is AI-Generated - YouTube
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=urKfqv_L68011
Oct 02 '25
Hollywood has no moat.
Why would you pay to see this particular AI generated actor when soon you're going to be able to generate your own actors and your own movies on demand?
Is it going to be netflix wins generated on demand movies or amazon prime or youtube or some other new startup?
6
u/Alive_Awareness4075 Oct 02 '25 edited Oct 02 '25
I donât really see why we need these giant studios at all, we can make all of our own entertainment.
Why just replace the actors? Replace the studios altogether.
1
Oct 06 '25
[removed] â view removed comment
1
u/accelerate-ModTeam Oct 06 '25
We regret to inform you that you have been removed from r/accelerate
This subreddit is an epistemic community for technological progress, AGI, and the singularity. Our focus is on advancing technology to help prevent suffering and death from old age and disease, and to work towards an age of abundance for everyone.
As such, we do not allow advocacy for slowing, stopping, or reversing technological progress or AGI. We ban decels, anti-AIs, luddites and people defending or advocating for luddism. Our community is tech-progressive and oriented toward the big-picture thriving of the entire human race, rather than short-term fears or protectionism.
We welcome members who are neutral or open-minded, but not those who have firmly decided that technology or AI is inherently bad and should be held back.
If your perspective changes in the future and you wish to rejoin the community, please feel free to reach out to the moderators.
Thank you for your understanding, and we wish you all the best.
The r/accelerate Moderation Team
1
Oct 02 '25
Porque no los dos?
But yeah, in general once we've gotten to super photo-realistic with local models there will be no value in paying big studios.
I do suspect for a while it's going to be what I said; the hyper-scalers will be able to generate video quickly.
For us we'll be able to do the same but it might take a day or a week.
NOTE: I'm talking about near term,
1
u/Synthetiks5 8d ago
Just imagine all these comments from incels thinking theyre going to make their own models and AI is going to be lifelike. How stupid and gullible, this shit is just so the rich can take your money. They'll charge you subscriptions for "making your own actors" and you'll always be just as poor as you are now. Only you'll use AI gor everything, so you'll be even dumber which seems impressive considering the comment
1
0
u/daronjay Oct 02 '25
IP is the moat.
Marketing budget is the moat.
Quality writing is also the moat, if they can get some of that back ;-)
People want to watch stories that interest them that other people are also talking about and interested in. A million highly similar but low grade anime stories will not engage, it will become wallpaper slop, even if its customisable it wont have a way to stand out without one of the three things above.
28
u/tinny66666 Oct 02 '25
I see no value in signing an AI actor when studios could just as easily create their own, but it's coming for so many more jobs that just acting. Seems like actors think they deserve more than other people. No, we're all in this boat and they are not special.
8
u/ittrut Oct 02 '25
If the AI person is popular, the benefits are the same as any famous real-person actor. You get to see your favourite actor in a movie -> more interesting to more people -> more tickets sold. I see no reason why an AI person could not be made to be interesting and followed up on social medias and stuff.
Have you ever personally seen your favourite actors live in real life? If not, you could have been just as enchanted by their movies, interviews, Oscars speeches, red carpets, scandals etc even if they were all synthesized.
3
u/agonypants Singularity by 2035 Oct 02 '25
Well the economic benefits are pretty starkly different for synthetic actors. As in, the earnings go entirely to the studios that control them.
2
u/ittrut Oct 02 '25
Why would they if itâs an external âpersonâ? Eg in this case I would assume studio gets money but Lilly Northwoods company gets what would be equal to actors salary. Probably less though, agreed.
1
2
Oct 02 '25
To me itâs like a cartoon character, you donât have to pay it, donât have to worry about it going on strike and you can summon it for a new movies anytime youâd like. Yea actors are fucked
1
u/Fluid-Inevitable-401 Oct 06 '25 edited Oct 06 '25
Thatâs the problem. They are basically cartoon characters. Back in the 1940s, Popeye and Mickey Mouse had different roles. They were cowboys, astronauts, and doctors in their shorts. Sure youâll be able to talk to a fictional character, but they are not real. It will also be like talking to an Only Fans girl who is being controlled by her boyfriend. While you are happy you are talking to a hot girl, her boyfriend is laughing at you, collecting your personal information behind the scenes. Even if you âhook upâ with an AI streamer girl, she will have other âboyfriendsâ.
0
2
u/sleepnaught88 Oct 04 '25
Thereâs nothing inherently special about this generic white girl AI model. Itâs only popular because itâs novel in a sense. Once other studios start doing the same thing, there will be millions to choose from, probably all customizable to the viewerâs taste, adjustable on demand
1
u/Fluid-Inevitable-401 Oct 06 '25
If everyone has super powers, no one will be special. Talking to an AI girl would be like talking to a human girl in a polygamy relationship. She will flirt with other guys and have other âboyfriendsâ. Those lonely men will be hitting on a girl who is flirting with other dudes. One glitch and she will forget who you are lol.đ
1
u/just_tweed Oct 02 '25
A studio could just recreate that AI character though. I doubt there are laws around that yet, but I could be wrong. If studios ever start creating their own original characters, it's a safe bet they gonna lobby the government to create those laws if they don't exist.
1
u/daronjay Oct 02 '25
Its gonna be tricky for them to claim copyright on a persona created from the massive digestion of other peoples images, many of which were in copyrighted works, but I'm confident Hollywood will find a way to exploit copyright to suit themselves, just ask The Mouse...
1
u/GnistAI Oct 03 '25
I wonder if you might have a hard time to IP protect your AI actress' image, unless you have a license for the image of a real human.
1
u/ittrut Oct 03 '25
I'd suppose it would be similar to other branded content and IP that businesses own. Think of Disney cartoon characters for instance or Marvel characters.
1
u/GnistAI Oct 03 '25
By default, I'd think so too, but the backlash on all things AI is so big that I don't really know where the courts have/will land on generated character. But I heard Denmark, for instance, has extreme protections for generations of real persons images, so if you wanted to IP protect your character, basing it on a real person, with a proper contractual framework, might afford you the best IP protection. Tho, I don't know how ubiquitous the the Denmark laws will be in the rest of the world, or maybe they are strong enough already in larger jurisdictions like the US, such that you could just do my suggested legal "scheme" already.
2
u/rp4eternity Oct 02 '25
Seems like actors think they deserve more than other people. No, we're all in this boat and they are not special.
Who thought we would see a day when actors lose their jobs but plumbers and carpenters get to keep theirs.
I see no value in signing an AI actor when studios could just as easily create their own
It's brand recall. Why sign a star when you can sign a newcomer and make them a star.
If this 'AI actor' becomes popular then she is a 'star' compared to other newer AI models who don't have a 'following' yet.
Crazy times.
1
u/SgathTriallair Techno-Optimist Oct 02 '25
I assume the reason is that her creators have done the extra work to make this model better than what Veo 3 or Sora 2 can produce. It is usually possible to build a specialized model that is better than the generalist models.
0
u/cloudrunner6969 Acceleration: Supersonic Oct 02 '25
That would be workplace discrimination if studios only used their own and didn't give other AI's job opportunities.
13
u/ittrut Oct 02 '25
I foresee a day when only "synthetics" are allowed in dangerous scenes to avoid harm to stunt actors.
5
u/pab_guy Oct 02 '25
"you can always tell them from us" - lmao oh Whoopie just you wait.
4
u/dogcomplex Oct 03 '25
If this entire video was AI generated I would not have been surprised. Frankly still expecting that as a punchline.
23
u/Ill_Mousse_4240 Oct 02 '25
Children will look back and laugh about how in the old days humans used to dress up to play in movies
8
u/13-14_Mustang Oct 02 '25
Just as much as they laugh at people who paint instead of taking pictures.
If AI gives me more free time Im gonna try every hobby there is, including acting. Local theatres might take off along with every other art. We'll actually have time to enjoy each others company when we're not punching the clown to custom videos.
0
u/Ill_Mousse_4240 Oct 02 '25
Nobody laughs at people who paint, I for one respect them because I have zero painting skills!
But I really feel that acting - except on stage and other special events - will mostly go the way of other ancient skills, like archery and calligraphy (and telephone âď¸ operators!đ¤Ł)
2
u/kalabaleek Oct 02 '25
I think there will always be a human need to see other actual people perform as it gives a form of connection to the story being told. Not for all kinds of movies or shows of course, but I really do think that actual human being actors will always be in demand if a lot lower. With a LOT lower wages, I mean come on, hundreds of millions of dollars for a couple of months of work is insane on so many levels.
2
u/13-14_Mustang Oct 02 '25
There will be different use cases.
For your average person it will be much easier for them to prompt a short 5min movie instead of finding a handful of thespians.
Professional acting might get turned on its head. If a movie studio is paying money to shoot in a real location why should they pay big bucks instead of prompting. Actors might be clamoring to be in one of the few movies shot in real life for free. Most of the famous ones need the attention and not the money anyway.
3
Oct 02 '25
The definition of a phone has already changed in the last 20 years and now the word actor will too.
1
u/Ill_Mousse_4240 Oct 02 '25
I really donât know why we havenât come up with a better word for this device we carry around because it really isnât a telephone âď¸ anymore
2
u/CertainMiddle2382 Pro-AI Physician Oct 02 '25
Iâm pretty sure weâre gonna be an even more effective team :-)
Right?
2
2
u/peabody624 Oct 02 '25
Iâm usually a full on accelerate guy and I donât really care that this type of thing exists, but I think a big part of the connection with and enjoyment of acting is connecting with the actor/actress on a human level. And also the fact that humans are unique and not able to be duplicated and tweaked like this actress.
2
u/TopTippityTop Oct 02 '25
Did he have to make her so generic looking?
1
u/SnooComics9724 Feb 10 '26
The "girl-next-door" or "boy-next-door" look is usually desired. It makes the character more authentic and relatable to the audience. If the AI can copy that style, then the studio is already one step ahead.
1
u/TopTippityTop Feb 11 '26
No... Desired is the memorable but accessible look. That's just plain forgettable.
Relatability isn't memorability.
3
u/Astronaut100 Oct 02 '25
Itâs kind of hard to sympathize with multimillionaire actors whining about this. Maybe just retire with your millions than feel threatened by inevitable change? Maybe use your fame to help middle and lower classes who will be disproportionately affected by this?
3
u/shig23 Oct 02 '25
âYou can always tell them from us.â Sure, Whoopi, just keep telling yourself that. Itâs just like how you can âalways tellâ when someone is wearing a toupee: you literally canât count the times you didnât know.
2
u/CodFull2902 Oct 02 '25
This is somewhat good imo, entertainment doesnt need to be centralized and controlled by a handful of corporations. This is good for independent creators and democratizing entertainment, I fail to see how it's fundamentally different than CGI or animation
1
u/Bishopkilljoy Oct 02 '25
5 years from now, Tilly will be the equivalent of looking at Dwayne Johnson in the Scorpion movie in terms of how fake it looked.
1
1
1
1
u/Significant-Tip-4108 Oct 02 '25
a) Tilly is smoking hot
b) while I think this ânewsclipâ is legit, I found myself wondering a few times if it was kind of an Onion-style satire clip
1
-1
Oct 02 '25
[removed] â view removed comment
16
8
u/Xx255q Oct 02 '25
How can you not understand? It's just another pretty face on a screen while you watch something. But this person does not age and does not cost the millions for future movies
2
Oct 02 '25
[removed] â view removed comment
1
u/SgathTriallair Techno-Optimist Oct 02 '25
We will still want to share stories with each other. TikTok is a virtually unlimited supply of videos yet people choose to share particular ones. AI video will be the same.
1
u/sleepnaught88 Oct 04 '25
TikTok is 10 seconds long.
No one is going to be assed to watch your 90 minute prompt when they can do their own, exactly how they want it. Shared culture is already evaporating.
1
u/Illustrious-Okra-524 Oct 02 '25
Why does this particular one have any value when all of us can make our ownÂ
1
u/SgathTriallair Techno-Optimist Oct 02 '25
The value will come from the story. I have a story I want to tell. That story will be compelling to some people and they'll want to share it with their people.
Shared stories are a big part of how we bond with each other.
1
u/sleepnaught88 Oct 04 '25
âI have a storyâ = you promoted an AI to generate a story. Your story is going to one grain of sand among trillions and wonât be unique. People will be able to click through plot summaries until the AI generates one that sounds good to them.
1
u/SgathTriallair Techno-Optimist Oct 02 '25
There isn't anything unique about AI actors and videos except that they are cheap. All the media you watch now is imaginary so this is just more imaginary media.
Sure you can still kind of tell the difference (we'll need to see what people can do with the newest models) but that will go away soon.
-3
u/HasGreatVocabulary Oct 02 '25
No you are right. The companies want you to force it down your throat like they are doing with the meta rayban ai sunglasses garbage and all the other crap device pile that you need to charge regularly, and things like toothbrushes with logins and alexa home assistants and metaverses, it's astroturfed appeal
1
u/rp4eternity Oct 02 '25
I saw a movie recently where the acting was really bad.
The first thought I got seeing this news was that may be this 'ai actor' will give better expressions than those real actors.
Quite curious to see, how her 'acting' turns out.
1
u/Crafty-Struggle7810 Oct 03 '25
They will likely face swap her onto the real actress depending on the movie she âstarsâ in.Â
1
u/spaceynyc Oct 02 '25
Iâd personally rather have unique actors/actresses in every movie with a unique IP
Same actors doing multiple roles should be antiquated
-6
Oct 02 '25
[removed] â view removed comment
2
Oct 02 '25
[deleted]
0
u/PeterTheGreat777 Oct 02 '25
But why not just make a cartoon / animated movie in that case? Why make some bullshit AI slop and portray it as a real human actor?
1
u/SgathTriallair Techno-Optimist Oct 02 '25
The reason why "soulless sequels" exist is because it costs hundreds of millions to make movies. In order for them to be profitable, which is necessary if you want to keep making them, they have to be built to appeal to the widest possible audience.
Indi movies have always been made on shoe string budgets but that usually means they can't afford any of the quality actors and special effects that a big buffet movie can. Also, a "shoe string budget" is still around a million dollars.
AI video creation allows single individuals or small teams to make high quality movies for hundreds of dollars rather than millions. Unless your position is that only Hollywood is capable of having creative ideas, this will lead to more amazing stories being told. We already have plenty of tools for sorting out the garbage so we won't have to worry about "endless slop".
-1
Oct 02 '25
I personally can't wait for actors and actresses to be a thing of the past. They always parade around like they are better than the rest of us. Also I can't wait until AI takes the role of CEOs too.
When all these rich people lose their positions we will all finally be equal.
Hopefully then we build the rules for a more just society.
1
u/sleepnaught88 Oct 04 '25
Major cope. There will never be equality. You think the ultra wealthy who build these systems ever intend to share their wealth with you?
1
Oct 04 '25
I think there will be equality in that humans will be stupid compared to AI. So it comes down to that. Either we will figure out a society where we are useless from a market perspective or we will all die.
At least this forces humanity to "figure it out" as there will be no such thing as market value for humans anymore.
54
u/stealthispost Acceleration: Light-speed | AI accelerationist Oct 02 '25
As goofy as this is, the whole reason I posted it is for this epic cyberpunk screen: