The past year alone has witnessed the release of many mainstream animated films including Inside Out 2, Despicable Me 4, and Moana 2. The world of animation on the big screen has arguably never been more exciting. Generally, too, we live in a dynamic age, with education, fashion, and most of all, technology, developing at an ever-increasing rate.
This has its amazing benefits, such as the ability to chat in real time from all around the world, and connect with those around us in order to further our careers from the comfort of our living rooms. However, the recent rise in the use of AI also comes with its drawbacks – not least in the entertainment industry – as many workers face concerns over whether this contemporary initiative is actually more powerful than it originally seemed.
Focusing specifically on the effect that AI has had – and more importantly, is having – on the animated films industry is an interesting, yet grave issue that should not be taken lightly. With a growing surge of CGI – take the example of Disney's Mufasa: The Lion King – it is not a totally absurd question to ask if AI will be next. And this may have detrimental impacts on everyone currently involved in the animation industry. Let’s take a look at some of the key players in the business and see how AI might affect them.
SCREENWRITERS
Screenwriting is a renowned craft that it takes many years of practice for the professionals to perfect, but it's all worth it when those big bucks of cash neatly fall into your bank account. But what if it's not all that simple anymore?
A full-length feature film script takes around three months to write, going from concept to completion. But all I typed into my AI Snapchat bot was the request for a “short scene between three friends for an animated film script about a murder mystery that takes place in the jungle” – being honest, yes, it was the very first thing that popped into my head – and voila, a perfectly formatted delivery of my request appeared within seconds.
There are some concerns that film scripts could be generated using AI
(Credit: Pixabay)
With schedules increasingly shortening as producers aspire to release as many films as they can in a short space of time in order to rake in the cash, it seems scary that this tool is so openly available for all to access and use.
Who knows how long it will be before the films that we're watching on our TV screens are actually computer-generated mash-ups written in seconds by a machine? And that's truly terrifying.
ANIMATORS
I spoke to independent animator Jonathan Hodgson – who has worked on children's TV series Charlie and Lola and short film The Man with the Beautiful Eyes – about the ways he has used AI in his own work. “I have used Chat GPT once or twice as a research tool while writing an application for funding for an animated film,” he says. “I found it useful, almost like a search engine for exploring and expanding ideas such as the difference between specific philosophies, but I still needed to rewrite sections that did not make complete sense.”
However, Hodgson made it clear that AI has real limitations when it comes to actually producing visuals for a film. He says: “I have never used AI to create imagery related to my animation work because what I have seen does not interest me and looks very cliched and obviously AI generated. I love drawing and prefer to work from observation and my own imagination.”
Meanwhile, fellow animator Julia Pott – creator of Summer Camp Island on Cartoon Network – tells Voice that she “read articles alluding to the fact that Chat GPT was designed to seem unimpressive so we were all lulled into a false sense of security, which scared the living daylights out of me”.
After all, as Pott’s writer friend mentioned to her: “I like writing, why would I want to use a tool that requires I do less of it?”
Julia Pott created Summer Camp Island and voices Susie (left) in the show
(Credit: Cartoon Network)
Pott wastes no words as she openly states that “to me it's just not worth it because that feeling of another person is actually the feeling of every person who's ever been ripped off, stolen and regurgitated for the benefit of tech companies who couldn't care less about the artists they're stealing from”.
On top of this, Hodgson declares that “for producers who want to keep costs down and don't care too much about the quality of the animation, I imagine AI is a very positive thing. For jobbing animators and visual effects artists it is a very negative thing because it is putting them out of work”.
Hodgson adds: “For me, as an independent animator, AI is useful as a research tool, but for creating animation, it is not helpful. I have been making films for over 40 years and started out working on paper. I made the transition to digital animation in the early 2000s, but I am now moving back to working more on paper because I find the results I get with digital drawing tools quite inferior to traditional art materials and I am endlessly fascinated by the scope of what can be created with simple tools like pencils, pastels, paint, and ink. Whether AI can emulate these techniques is of no interest to me.”
He likens making a film to climbing a mountain as he tells us that it “gives a great sense of satisfaction when you finally reach the summit”. He says: “Having a machine climb that mountain for me would give me no satisfaction whatsoever.”
Pott also expresses her concerns over this development of AI as she shares that “you come up in an industry by doing the jobs that are smaller and less high stakes so you have the opportunity to learn and absorb”. She adds: “Interns are hired into the design department, revisionists eventually become brilliant storyboarders because of the hours they spend digesting and understanding the fundamentals of that process. AI promises to make those timelines more efficient, which means those artists will spend less time honing those essential skills.”
Furthermore, Pott adds: “Using AI to make an animated pipeline more cheap and efficient is a joke – AI could easily take over a CEO's job who is making millions, but the first line of attack is people making guild minimums. And it's a slippery slope – they're coming for one part of the pipeline first but then they'll inevitably expand more and more until everyone is obsolete.”
Hodgson also contributes that “AI is already a problem for animators and I can only see the problem getting much worse as AI becomes more sophisticated”, while Pott has the final word as she says that “making art is not supposed to be easy, cheap and efficient”.
VOICE ACTORS
When questioning whether AI is having more of a positive or negative effect on the animated films industry, there was nobody better to speak to than Ben Whitehead, who took over the role of Wallace in Aardman’s new animation Wallace and Gromit: Vengeance Most Fowl – a movie that actually featured an evil AI garden gnome. “It depends on whether we view the arts as an industry or a form of cultural expression,” he says. “I believe human creativity will always prevail. Within the industry of art I feel it may forever be a balancing act between a positive and negative effect.”
Wallace and Gromit: Vengeance Most Fowl featured an evil AI garden gnome
(Credit: BBC/Netflix)
Meanwhile voice coach Molly Parker says that “some actors are signing away their likeness and voices, often without fully understanding the long-term implications”. She adds: “AI is being used as a cheaper, faster alternative in many sectors, and that does undercut the need for live, human performances. The concern is that the nuance, spontaneity, and presence that human actors bring are being devalued in favour of convenience.”
Parker adds that comparing AI with humans is “a bit like comparing a live classical piano concert to a perfectly produced track”. She says: “One might be technically flawless, but the other is alive. There's something magical and unpredictable about a human performance – the breath, the emotional imperfection, the lived experience that colours delivery. These are things AI just can't replicate, no matter how sophisticated it becomes.”
Whitehead also discusses the impact that AI is having on voice actors today as he tells Voice: “It's affecting actors who work in corporate, commercial, and possibly game recordings, as well as 'last minute' jobs which are increasingly likely to employ AI. I believe it should be used to assist if needed, but never to replace. As actors we will have to work harder, stand up for our profession, and keep telling our stories and sharing experiences.”
There is some positivity, however, as Parker concludes: “AI could be a helpful tool for accessibility – making content available in multiple languages or for those with specific auditory needs, for example. But I'd be wary of it replacing the craft itself. Used ethically and transparently, it could support the industry – but it shouldn't replace the heart of it.”
So we can see that AI has its benefits to contribute to the world of animated films, but does that mean we should welcome it with open arms? Certainly not, for AI is a threat to every true creative, and in order to succeed in this industry, must be viewed with the utmost caution. We must preserve the work of talented creatives like the ones in this article, making sure animated films maintain their heart, soul, and silliness.
0 Comments