I teach a course on AI and filmmaking At USC’s School of Cinematic Arts, and lately, instead of planning each session in advance, I’ve been structuring the class the night before. I would browse platforms like X, Substack and YouTube, selecting the most provocative articles and video clips to present the next morning.
Proof of how fast AI’s relationship with filmmaking is evolving: Every week brings new – often startling – Development.
In class the next morning, my students and I debated the ethics, aesthetics, and storytelling changes in this collaboration with AI.
And we’re not alone: Across Hollywood, everyone—aspiring actors and filmmakers, stars, screenwriters, and studio execs—seems to be concerned about what’s coming next. But I think three trends in particular are going to be hot topics of conversation at this year’s Oscar parties.
There is nothing unusual about this clip
In February 2026, a 15-second AI-generated video clip Tom Cruise is fighting Brad Pitt A burnt highway overpass has gone viral.
Depending on the audience, the video has either garnered praise, outrage or Existential limbs.
Created by Irish filmmaker Ruiry Robinson with a generative-AI tool called Cedence 2.0, The video marked another milestone In the pioneering growth of AI tools.
Seedance 2.0 – which was developed by ByteDance, the Chinese company behind TikTok – is now available Many AI tools are available To create short-form video clips. But unlike most AI-generated videos, Pitt and Cruise don’t look creepy, weird or animated in the clip, which almost perfectly mimics live-action footage. The appearance of two A-list stars in a fairly realistic scene created by a relatively unknown director using stolen similes shook the industry.
The response was quick. Disney sent a cease and desist letterClaims that the video was created from a dataset that likely includes characters copyrighted by Disney The actors’ union, SAG-AFTRA, pointed to the video’s likeness of the actors as well as “clear violations” of their voices.
“SAG-AFTRA stands with studios in condemning brutal violations enabled by ByteDance’s new AI video model Cidence 2.0,” The guild wrote in a statement. This practice, the guild added, ignores “fundamental principles of law, ethics, industry standards and compliance” and “diminishes the ability of human talent to earn a living”.
In class, after watching the video, we explored the ethics of using someone’s likeness without permission, the challenges faced by actors who build careers based on their unique ability to embody characters, and what the future holds for our understanding of acting.
If filmmakers can coax fake actors into specific performances, where does that leave human actors?
with the old
From 2023, the skyline of the Las Vegas Strip is dominated by an illuminated orb. the sphere: An entertainment complex with a 360-degree LED screen covering 160,000 square feet (14,864 square meters). The Sphere recently surpassed 2 million tickets sold A remake of the classic 1939 film “The Wizard of Oz.”
The image, which premiered in August 2024, was shortened, its color enhanced and stretched to cover the interior of the dome. AI was used To move the picture from the original, modest aspect ratio to the giant dome. This requires creating new images around the edges of the original shots known as “”.AI Outpainting“Technology was also deployed to increase the resolution of the original film and enhance certain scenes.
Some critics are upset This fairly radical expansion of the original classic will annoy viewers. Instead, this has drawn them to spheres, where they are willing to pay US$100 to $200 per ticket.
Not bad for a movie about a Kansas girl made in 1939.
Given the phenomenal success of “The Wizard of Oz,” experts expect producers to plumb the film archives. For other possible hits And enhance them with AI before screening in venues as diverse as IMAX theaters and swearAnother 360-degree dome with locations in Los Angeles, Dallas and Atlanta.
Or AI could simply be used to create elements that were never completed for historical films.
actually, The New Yorker recently profiled AI media entrepreneur Edward Saatchi, who is working to reconstruct and reassemble lost footage from Orson Welles’ 1942 feature “The Magnificent Ambersons” While Welles was shooting a documentary in Brazil, RKO Radio Pictures executives re-edited the film without his approval after a poor preview screening. They cut about 45 minutes, replaced the original ending with a happier one, and deleted most of the footage.
Saatchi’s idea is to create a dataset that includes existing films, as well as scripts, notes, images and even new performances by actors. He then plans to use his AI platform, Showrunner, to create new scenes from this data.
While Sacchi hopes to honor the director’s creative vision by making the film on purpose, his efforts open up some thorny questions.
Is it appropriate to take an existing artwork and modify it without input from the creator? Is there nothing sacred about a film, the director’s intention and the actors’ performance in the original form of a film? To what extent should these questions be ignored when re-introducing old movies to new audiences?
Low chance?
There is also an undercurrent of anxiety in my class. What will happen, my students often wonder, once they graduate?
They worry that within a year or two, AI will replace entry-level film industry jobs, from concept artists to entry-level editors, before they even have a chance to enter the workforce.
They have reason to fear.
In 2024, the Animation Guild published a shocking report Claims that by 2026, “creative workers will face an era of disruption, defined by the consolidation of some job roles, the replacement of existing job roles with new ones, and the elimination of many jobs altogether.”
Some of these prophecies have been revealed: 41,000 jobs in film and television Los Angeles County alone has gone missing in the past three years.
But I tried to counter the hard statistics with some stories of thoughtful practice.
For example, filmmaker Paul Trillo of AI studio Asteria talks about how he wants to put artists at the center of the process. At this time he gave details about the work of the company A music video for singer-songwriter CucoHe was keen to highlight the number of artists working on the project. Yes, AI tools were used. But they came together in a way that replaced tedious work, not creative exercise.
“Instead of removing (the artists) from the process, it actually allowed them to do more so that a small team could dream much bigger,” Trillo explains at the end of the video.
In January 2026, management consulting firm McKinsey released a report Which largely echoes Trillo’s positive outlook. This predicts further adoption of AI across industries. But it also points to the ways that technology can lead to different types of work and open up new possibilities. For example, as AI-generated scenes become commonplace, studios will need technicians who know how to blend real footage with digitally created worlds. And as AI lowers the cost of producing polished films and shows, it could allow more “micro-studios” and independent filmmakers to produce professional-quality content.
At the same time, the report also quoted a studio executive who admitted that AI could represent “a more significant platform change than we’ve ever seen in our industry.”
So it’s no surprise that my students are nervous around various critics, commentators and industry professionals.
However, from where I stand, I am convinced that the industry will undergo this radical disruption. It has adapted to major changes in the past: the addition of sound in the 1920s, the threat posed by videotape in the 1980s, and streaming in the 2000s.
Ultimately, people will always crave new, artfully told stories. While filmmaking tools and the job market may be in flux, that core need for storytelling isn’t going away.
Holly WillisProfessor of Cinematic Arts, University of Southern California
Reprinted from this article the conversation Under Creative Commons license. read on Main article.
