https://theworldfinancialforum.com/participate/
Hollywood OpenAI’s video generator, Sora, can whip up eerily convincing clips that look like they’ve walked straight off Netflix, TikTok, or Twitch.
But here’s the kicker: nobody outside OpenAI really knows what videos trained it, and the company isn’t talking.
It makes you wonder, doesn’t it? If Sora can spit out a spot-on Wednesday scene or a fake Universal Studios intro, then what does that say about where it learned these tricks?
Experts are pointing to good old-fashioned scraping—massive amounts of video data vacuumed up online, with or without consent.
And before you roll your eyes and say, “Well, everyone’s doing it,” consider that even Nvidia and Runway ML have been flagged for tapping into YouTube libraries to feed their AI projects.
The plot thickens when you realize how big the stakes are. Think about Twitch streamers or TikTok dancers who never signed up to be AI training fodder.
If their likeness or branding pops up in Sora’s output, who gets to call foul? Netflix, for one, flat-out said they gave OpenAI nothing to work with. And yet, voilà—Sora conjures look-alikes of Squid Game with ease.
What’s fascinating, and frankly a little scary, is the legal gray zone here. OpenAI insists it plays by “fair use” rules, but lawsuits are stacking up.
Just last year, YouTube creators accused the company of ripping millions of hours of audio for ChatGPT’s training set.
And yet, if you ask the folks behind Sora, they’ll tell you it’s about democratizing creativity—putting studio-level production into the hands of everyday people.
Here’s my two cents: we’re staring down a cultural earthquake. Imagine Hollywood logos re-animated by prompts, or fan-favorite characters reborn in twenty-second clips at the push of a button.
It’s clever, sure, but is it creativity—or just remixing without permission? One researcher at MIT put it bluntly: “The model is mimicking the training data. There’s no magic.”
So the question becomes: are we okay with this brave new world where ownership is fuzzy, art is endlessly reproducible, and even SpongeBob has an AI twin?
Personally, I’m torn. Part of me loves the idea of tools like this blowing the doors off old gatekeepers.
But another part whispers: if the foundations are shaky, maybe the whole house comes crashing down.
At first glance, Hollywood’s long flirtation with technology has always served art: camera tricks, editing, CGI, motion-capture, de-aging, etc. But as AI tools grow rapidly more powerful and pervasive, the question is no longer whether they are used — it’s how deeply they’re penetrating, and whether that crossing point changes what “Hollywood” means. Spoiler: yes, it already has.
Signs AI Is Deep in the DNA
Here are concrete ways AI is already part of Hollywood’s backbone — not just barnacles but structural elements:
Voice, accent, and dialogue tweaks
Films like The Brutalist and Emilia Pérez have used AI tools (e.g. voice-alteration or “Respeecher”-type tools) to adjust accents, refine voice performances, or polish vocal imperfections. Fiction Horizon+2BBC+2Deepfake and likeness technology
Some films are using AI-driven likeness recreation — reviving a deceased actor’s face, or altering appearance or age. De-aging effects are no longer novelty; “digital resurrection” or AI cloning of voices and image is being invoked in various projects. Fiction Horizon+1Pre-production and creative support tools
AI is being used in script-writing assistance, ideation, storyboard generation, scene visualisation etc. Tools that help generate rough drafts, concept art, or even full scenes in some experimental settings. Papers like Script2Screen or CineVision are building tools that move beyond purely text and incorporate audiovisual elements to help writers visualise dialogue scenes. arXiv+1Ethical, legal, and labour pressure
The writers’ and actors’ strikes in Hollywood in 2023 had AI at the core of concerns: usage of AI in scriptwriting, AI-trained on existing (often copyrighted) materials without proper compensation or credit, voice likeness, etc. BBC+3The Guardian+3The Times of India+3
Also, there are lawsuits: major studios suing AI companies for copyright infringement (e.g. for use of characters or likenesses without permission). Axios+1New production models
Studios like “Primordial Soup” (Darren Aronofsky’s venture) are explicitly exploring storytelling innovation with generative AI. Some indie studios and low-budget projects are also embracing AI to stretch their resources. Wikipedia+1
The Implications: What Changes When the Machine Gets Inside
Hollywood being “inside the machine” isn’t just about new tools — it means shifts to creativity, power dynamics, economics, and ethics.
Creativity & storytelling: As AI takes over more scaffolding tasks (e.g. first drafts, scene visualisation, VFX tweaks), human creatives may focus more on higher-order creative decisions. That could free up time, but also risk homogenisation of voices if many rely on similar AI models or big data-driven tropes.
Economic pressures: AI may reduce cost in some aspects (e.g. voice work, background acting, editing or polishing tasks). That can reduce budgets or shift how money is allocated. But it may also threaten jobs, or at least change who gets paid what.
Legal & ethical issues: Who owns a piece of film when portions are AI-generated? If AI is trained on copyrighted materials without consent, or if an actor’s digital likeness is used, what are the rights and compensation? The strike activity, lawsuits, and guild negotiations are attempts to establish guardrails. The Times of India+2BBC+2
Audience perception & trust: As people become aware that AI was used (or suspect it was), how will that affect trust or appreciation of art? Some backlash has already emerged (controversies over “Late Night With the Devil” for example) when AI art/video/cutaways are used without transparency. Decider+1
Is It “Winning” Hollywood? Or Are Studios Still Learning?
Hollywood hasn’t fully become an AI machine — at least not yet. Many uses are augmentative rather than replacement: tweaks not wholesale creation. AI is being used to enhance existing pipelines rather than displace them entirely (save for a few experiments). There remain constraints: emotional nuance, actor-director collaboration, legal constraints, union power, etc.
But the trajectory is clear: more integration, more experimentation, more tension. Studios, creatives, unions, and legislators are all grappling with what fair usage looks like.
What to Watch Going Forward
New union contracts and guild agreements around AI usage (voice likeness, script-training, compensation).
Lawsuits or regulation that set precedent on copyright, digital likeness, and AI-generated content.
Audience responses: whether works with heavy AI involvement are judged differently, perhaps critiqued for being less “authentic.”
Whether AI tools begin to standardise imagery, sound, pacing in predictable ways (leading to homogenisation or “AI flavour”).
Conclusion
So, is Hollywood already inside the machine? Yes — in many places. The machine is not an external threat waiting at the gate; it’s already inside the walls: in post-production, in voices, accents, scripts, even in visual effects and pre-production tools. What remains is how fully the machine will reshape Hollywood’s core identity: who tells stories, who gets paid, whose voice is heard, and whether magic will survive the automation.
If you like, I can trace how the Indian film industry (Bollywood, Tollywood etc.) is being affected in similar ways, or compare Hollywood’s path with Bollywood. Which would you prefer?