OliverClothesoff70
29808
27
18
No human writers (aside from prompts to the AI)
No human actors -- not even for voices
No human-created music
No human camera operators
No human caterers
No human key grips or best boys
No human post production
The movie is called Hell Grind. If you don't look too closely, it looks real enough at times. But overall, the creepy factor - uncanny valley - is difficult to escape.
It's unnerving that this tech is already this far along. Imagine what this AI-generated stuff will look and sound like in five or ten years.
People who have spent their lives building the skills to make movies have had their skills taken and uploaded to specialized LLMs like this. It isn't just movies. It's happening in too many professions to count. That's bad, bad, bad for people. Once that happens, those same people will be struggling to find work.
Description:
Hell Grind is a groundbreaking sci-fi heist film produced entirely using generative AI by Higgsfield AI. The 80-minute feature follows four street kids who discover a mysterious artifact in a museum, granting them unexpected powers as they face an ancient evil.
It is currently screening at the Cannes Film Festival market.
3rdoption
Death to AI.
ChelVanin
If a human made this, they’d be sued into oblivion for plagiarism.
IndependenceHallPhiladelphiaPA
this is an ad. seriously, get fucked.
llamableat
"Imagine what this AI-generated stuff will look and sound like in five or ten years."
why? why would I care?
two sides of the same coin: "AI is terrible, it stole artists' work! / Imagine what AI will be able to do!?!"
pick a lane and if you really care about constructive action, do the legwork to replace current copyright law in US.
EggFooYung
I've seen worse. A number of things by Uwe Boll, for instance; Hayden Christensen's acting. I'll download it when it drops on torrent, just for the lulz.
Gorgoror
Like Hollywood want it ! Cheap and a story in 4 lines...
RoyDMercer
Looks kinda stupid to me.
InspectorA5
Have you see human made slop lately?
timothyaolson2000
So basically, it's a typical Hollywood superhero fantasy movie.
RoyDMercer
Indeed.
taez555
What a magical time we live in. The sad part is, as time removes those of who knew cinema before AI, future generations will see this as normal. The studios, if they still exist, will see the roi for these as so much greater, they'll never need to make normal films again. True film making will be reserved as a niche market for the self financed elite.
mafiacarstarter
The ROI is zero. AI produced content can not be copyrighted.
Sending the full movie to everyone you know can not be copyright infringement.
Suing someone for copyright infringement on an AI movie is frivolous lawsuits with meritless claims.
"Extending protection to material whose expressive elements are determined by a machine, however, would undermine rather than further the constitutional goals of copyright."
https://www.copyright.gov/newsnet/2025/1060.html
taez555
That's assuming the laws mean anything. Given the current state of american political corruption and influence, those who pay to play/give tribute to the king, will be able to change the laws, or have them selectively enforced. The rules will exist for some, but not for others.
mafiacarstarter
Contrariwise, if everyone simply accepts that AI movies are free and that the law can't touch them, there will be far too many people spreading them around for any realistic or effective prosecution to take place.
taez555
That's assuming they allow us to create them for free.
mafiacarstarter
I don't know about you, but I wouldn't make an AI movie if they tried to force me to. There's no 'allowing' me to do something that I find ethically and morally repugnant.
I wouldn't even watch an AI movie, but I'd make damn sure that anyone who wanted to could do so without paying for it.
Back to finding a torrent of Hell Grind.
Mohareb
I guess in a few years you just say what kind of movie you want to watch and you can remove a lake, but get the exact movie style you prefer
WaxDragon
Acting is awful, but Holy shit that looks way better than I thought AI could do. Worst timeline
IndependenceHallPhiladelphiaPA
there is no acting
WaxDragon
Fair, I should say line delivery is awful and unemotional
IndependenceHallPhiladelphiaPA
there was no "line delivery." computers dont have emotions.
WaxDragon
There was a line delivery as there is audio of words we are meant to hear and understand. Weird semantic hill to fight over. I'm saying it's terrible, and pointing out why (the lack of emotions). So yeah, in agreement here.
rolliefingers
There will be an explosion in genAI children's entertainment coming right up, because this is exactly the kind of shit kids love. It'll be all over their little screens.
aducksayswhat
While there's probably some exploration being done with this, they'll stop doing it when it stops making them money
ChelVanin
The problem is it will still make them money as long as it’s dirt cheap to produce.
Samja192
If you remove all the cost of labour, sets etc there is literally no barrier to entry. We'll have millions of "mums basement producers" pumping this shit out and it costs them next to nothing so it doesn't matter if 99% of them flop, they just need 1 to land. I'm reminded of the monkeys with typewriters analogy
TheJomsborgViking
Hmm... I made a prediction a year ago that someone would make an AI movie within the next decade.
This came far faster than I suspected.
I imagined at least 5 more years of AI garbage with extra fingers and mysterious lack of limbs before they tried making a movie.
LtGenObvious
Scarlett Johansson should sue for using here likeness. (See, especially 0:24 in the above clip.)
Quebeker
0:19 is really looking like a young Adam Driver
ThisIsAllYouCouldComeUpWith
Scarlet Fauxhansson
LtGenObvious
*her (dammit)
OliverClothesoff70
I was thinking she looked way too much like Charlize Theron. I didn't see the ScarJo similarity until you pointed it out.
LtGenObvious
I can see Charlize Theron, too, but the voice is also ScarJo-like.
zer0vector
I thought Charlize too
TexMexHex
You posting this gives it traction. Fuck AI.
friendsofsandwiches
And THIS is your future of movie watching.
Get used to it.
rotodisc
Not really. LLMs aren’t profitable. And the VC money is gonna run out eventually.
ChelVanin
The fuck it is
friendsofsandwiches
never underestimate corporate greed. If they're able to make a money for pennies, they will make it.
ChelVanin
They can make it, but they can’t make me watch it.
Bojovnik84
It very much is not and I dont think I will.
Sulexar
Then don't fucking advertise it.
Clockworkdancerobot
It's what techbros think movie making is. Just stitching shit together. I've come to the theory that the same thinking from plagiarists, constantly copying and pushing other work as their own.
rolliefingers
It IS what moviemaking is, or at least it's what many producers want it to be. Hell grind is simply the next obvious step for hollywood-- minimize the risk by just regurgitating successful formulas with minimal cost. It's like a wet dream for them.
Clockworkdancerobot
Yeah, the cookie cutter movie making... but you notice when looking at some of the great works that people actually UNDERSTAND the craft.
rolliefingers
There are artists, and great films have been made, yes.
Clockworkdancerobot
And you can see the divide that AI has zero chance of replicating. There's no thought. Just replicating things that look like them. No actual understanding, No intelligence.
You get cookie cutter corporate shit at best.
rolliefingers
Yup and that's what they want. To minimize risk. Pure business.
ChelVanin
I think you tried to reply to me in another comment but someone blocked me and now I can’t read it.
Clockworkdancerobot
Could be. I see all my comments? this one? /gallery/AxIXjbL/comment/2500889879/1 "That's the secret. We've had THOUSANDS of improvements over the years on technology. It's not used to use less.. but to generate MORE. The same for industrial production. Make it cheaper and just make more of it. It's why climate change won't be solved by "new tech". They have used it for centuries to make more cheaper."
ChelVanin
That’s probably it. When I click the link it can’t be found. And to your comment, yup.
DocFunkenstein
I particularly like the whine about "no human writers (except the human writers)" bit.
Why, exactly, does it need to stop? ure, the current state of requiring massive data centers is of concern, but most new technologies shrink with time and experience.
Or are you going to go back to the "omg, IP theft!" argument that instantly falls apart when pointed out that's how you fucking learn anything as a human (which is why you people abandoned it once you had the data center bit to whine about)?
WaxDragon
Except when you learn things as a human you're generally looking at or reading things that were purchased or given by the people that created it in some way, shape, or form. AI just took it and doesn't use it as inspiration, but does it's best to COPY the original. Very different to those that have critical thinking
zOriginal
Do you even know what you are arguing for/about?
walpurrga
The biggest problems imo are that gen AI puts artists jobs on the line, even though the AI is trained on their own work, without permission, and that there is no identification anymore. When I watch a movie, read a book, or look at a painting, there is intent behind it, and I as a viewer can interpret it. AI just follows a prompt and the rest is maths, there is no actual intent behind it, besides following the command line. I don't believe in higher powers, but you could call it 'soulless'.
DocFunkenstein
No it doesn't. Not anymore than Photoshop did.
So quick, pivot to your next shitty argument.
WaxDragon
Photoshop also has its issues, this is a bigger problem than that. Yet if you take someone's copyrighted photo, and change the lighting with photoshop, that's also plagiarism. Soooo, thanks for proving our point on a smaller scale I guess?
DocFunkenstein
Tell you what, I'll go create an AI image.
You tell me what intellectual properties/copyright infringements it's using.
Deal? Oh wait, no, you won't agree to it because you know what the fucking truth is. Fuck off.
walpurrga
I don't know why you are so rude, I only shared my point of view. You can disagree without this attitude. If you are genuinely interested in a discussion, this is not the way to go.
DocFunkenstein
You know why. Because you ignorant assholes are just as rude, but ignorant to boot.
The Dunning-Kruger Effect in all it's fucking glory.
Now quick, run off and post some tit picks to get the attention you so badly need, because you have no other redeeming qualities, you pathetic loser.
MagnorCriol
Man you're tiresome.
You're not even saying anything original or interesting with your incel ranting. Just exhausting.
ElAburrimientoMePuede
It's a bit disingenuous to think we all learn from other's IP. I learn a lot from my own experience, I learn a lot from my own practice, what this "AI" does is steal that from us for the benefit of very few rich people. If that doesn't make you angry you are the best pet a rich person could ask for.
DocFunkenstein
Hahahahahaha, yeah, okay.
That's why Grog the Cave Man was creating the Mona Lisa in his hand paintings.
It's soo disingenuous to think people learn anything (art especially) from studying and learning from previous works. I swear to fucking god you people are such fucking dumbasses.
DocFunkenstein
It's just maaaaagical thinking! You're a true artist, who never studied any other art or otherwise learned anything from anyone! Just poof, you willed it into existence all on your little lonesome! Maaaaaaaaagic!
And all the little ignorant fucktards here who hate AI are just going to downvote in "agreement" with you because they don't like AI, even though they, too, know you're full of fucking shit.
meme2zombie
It's just dumb anthropomorphize that the LLM grift runs on. It's not a thinking machine, not even a little bit, it doesn't learn (despite the terminology) it doesn't decide anything, it doesn't think.
But if they can claim it does then they can pretend it's something more than what it is and use it to avoid the crimes that they commit to make it work.
And it's them doing it, not the LLM stealing, the owners are stealing and feeding it into a copy machine.
Clockworkdancerobot
Is someone anthropomorphizing computers and programs again? Computers aren't people. There is no "Fair use" for training your fancy 10^n nested If/Then programs. And we use "Learning" so rubes have an idea of what is going on, but it seems idiots have taken the simple explanation literally.
Clockworkdancerobot
In case anyone wants to know WHAT it really is and how it works: Computerphile - How AI image generators work: https://youtu.be/1CIpzeNxIhU
DocFunkenstein
Nope.
I'm also not the one who thinks it's AI. That's YOU fucktards.
It's just a tool; a giant leap forward, like Photoshop and CGI was to Oil Canvases and Practical Effects. None of which have been destroyed. Just like this isn't going to destroy artists or other forms of art. You people are just insufferable morons and technophiles, EXACTLY like the people who whined about Photoshop 20ish years ago. EXACTLY THE SAME.
meme2zombie
Maybe try that lie with someone who wasn't alive and in tech 20 years ago. It's not even close to the same, both for the discussion that actually happened and the imaginary one you're lying about happening.
DocFunkenstein
Sorry, the only one lying is you if you think they weren't saying that shit about Photoshop. "No one will be able to believe anything ever again!" "OMG, the computer is doing all the work with the filters and shit!" "It's too easy to fake shit!" "I can tell by the god damned mother fucking pixels!!!111leleven"
Go fuck yourself, you delusional technophobic twat.
meme2zombie
Nowhere in the comment you replied to did anyone ever mention not being able to believe anything. You apparently just have a list of stock responses you post without even reading what people are saying.
Very on theme for an LLM enthusiast. As is muting so that you can't be rebutted.
ChelVanin
You think they’re building dozens of unpopular massive data centers just for the short term? They may scale down the need for those eventually, but that’s far off beyond the horizon.
DocFunkenstein
Yep, and the technology for them will improve in time, too. That's how innovation and improvements work.
You fucktards are like "well if the tech isn't perfect on day one, we should give up on it and never talk about it again, HURR HURR HURR!"
Dumbasses, the lot of you.
Clockworkdancerobot
That's the secret. We've had THOUSANDS of improvements over the years on technology. It's not used to use less.. but to generate MORE. The same for industrial production. Make it cheaper and just make more of it. It's why climate change won't be solved by "new tech". They have used it for centuries to make more cheaper.