Matt Wolfe on why Hollywood quietly uses AI for small tasks but keeps it hidden from audiences. He argues people still care more about human artistry and acting than AI-generated images, and that AI is mostly a tool for grunt work, not the main event.
Sword 2 has been out for a couple of weeks now, and so far we've seen everything from Stephen Hawking at the X Games to the Queen of England off the top of the ropes at WrestleMania. Where does this actually leave Hollywood? The reality is that Hollywood is already using AI. They're using it quite a bit, actually. Every single person that I know that works in Hollywood has told me similar stories. They've told me that the company they work for uses AI. They just don't make it super public because, well, they know there's going to be some backlash if they do. So it's already happening, but it's just happening for quick, short use cases that you can barely notice in the grand scheme of the final project they're making. But I also have this belief that humans are actually more impressed by great feats accomplished by other humans. People aren't that impressed by AI generated images or AI generated videos anymore. However, works of art that took months or years to create or actors putting on the performance of a lifetime, are typically still seen as super valuable and really impressive by people. And I don't think that changes because of AI. So in that sense, maybe Sword 2 itself is the real work of art and the AI slop that it generates is just the byproduct.
AI News: Dots, GPT-6.1 Sol, Sonnet 5.5, Gemini 4, and everything you need to know
