Non-Actor Characters: Is AI the future of Cinema?

With algorithms now capable of producing lifelike video at the slightest prompt, the film industry is due for a shake-up. But what form will it take?

The Tech Aspect

AI is no longer science fiction. Tools like Runway or Sora spin video footage from text prompts, turning words into moving pictures. After Deepfake, now widely known for the many internet clips which tack celebrity faces onto bodies, the next step is to create “non-actor characters” (NAC’s) out of whole cloth, dispensing with human actors (costly and, not infrequently, acting like divas) entirely.

While some YouTubers are showing what’s possible to achieve by an individual keen on tinkering with tech, Hollywood itself is no slouch. Recently, in Disney’s The Mandalorian series, actor Mark Hamill was digitally de-aged to play the young Jedi Luke Skywalker again, while CGI ‘resurrections’—some well-known examples, both from the Star Wars universe, being Carrie Fisher in The Rise of Skywalker and Peter Cushing in Rogue One—are raising not only legal but ethical questions.

Yet technological advancement has no off switch. Within a few years, we should expect fully AI generated films. By 2030 AI could produce Oscar nominees so flawlessly executed, non-specialised audiences won’t be able to spot the difference.

The Cost Aspect

Reducing production costs will however be what will drive this evolution. In 2023, a quarter of Hollywood films’ budgets topped $100 million—costs due to having to pay for actors, crews, gear, and travel could be cut through the use of AI. How about a new Top Gun, but without the real Tom Cruise? His $12.5 million paycheck for his 2022 outing alone could be spent elsewhere after all.

This digital transformation, for now, is accompanied by Hollywood’s financial decline: its total revenue has plummeted, going from $42.3 billion in 2019 to $33.4 billion in 2023. Streaming platforms such as Netflix, which during that same period saw its subscriber count go from 167 million to 277 million, and of course YouTube (which has 2.7 billion viewers), leave Hollywood biting the dust. Netflix raked in $33.7 billion in 2023–up from $20.1 billion in 2019 and is now on par with Hollywood. In the digital race, old Hollywood giants risk falling behind. Enter generative AI, whose market analysts forecast to leap from $10 billion to $110 billion by 2030.

The Creative Aspect

And who will shape the future of filmmaking? Perhaps ambitious amateurs, empowered by new creative tools. Imagine movie scripts crowdfunded into production—the democratisation of cinema, where enthusiasts, not executives, decide the next blockbuster. Video game studios, already mastering technology, workflows, and marketing, may soon rival Hollywood’s storytelling prowess. Yet, traditional studios, though shaken by digital disruption, remain formidable. With over a century of experience, giants like Warner and Disney hold vast archives of unproduced scripts and lucrative franchises. Disney may still churn out endless Star Wars spin-offs or digitally preserve actors for posthumous roles, raising pressing legal and ethical dilemmas.

The Legal Aspect

Ownership battles are already underway. In 2023, authors like John Grisham sued OpenAI for training ChatGPT on their books without consent. Similar claims could arise against studios using old footage to create AI-generated films—who profits from the result? Laws protecting likeness rights may offer some safeguards, but conflicts could still arise if heirs contest the use of a deceased actor’s image, as seen in a 2024 dispute over an AI-generated George Carlin special. Digital resurrections blur ethical lines—a dead actor cannot give consent. Would Marilyn Monroe have agreed to star in a futuristic romance? Meanwhile, misrepresentation looms large: a 2023 study found that 98% of deepfake videos are pornographic, mostly made without consent.

The Future of Art Itself

What does AI mean for cinephiles? How will it reshape storytelling, acting, and viewing habits? Algorithms can churn out endless content tailored to every niche, ensuring audiences get exactly what they want. Yet, storytelling risks devolving into formulaic repetition, and actors could be replaced by flawless, lifeless digital replicas. The result? A sterile monoculture of endless sequels and Fast and Furious imitations. But true art thrives on breaking conventions, not recycling past successes.

What happens when living actors fade from the screen? The quirks, spontaneity, and raw emotion—Jim Carrey’s mischievous grin, Meryl Streep’s emotional depth—risk being smoothed into sterile perfection. The rise of Non-Actor Characters (NACs) mirrors the meme of the NPC: predictable, lifeless, and forgettable. Can such creations truly inspire? Cinema, like great literature, teaches us what it means to be human. If machines start dreaming in our place, what do we lose? While AI promises a revolution in movie production, it also threatens to drain cinema of its soul. If algorithms replace the human touch, film will cease to reflect us—it will become an empty echo of what once was.

Statement

AI is set to reshape cinema, offering cost-effective production while potentially displacing writers, directors, and human actors. At the same time, it could democratise filmmaking, equipping individuals and small studios with the tools to produce Hollywood-quality films. A new wave of filmmakers may rise, using AI to bring fresh stories to the screen, much like how streaming revolutionised serial storytelling. However, legal complexities loom, and only established studios may have the financial muscle to navigate these challenges—or even to erect new legal barriers that safeguard their dominance and profits.

Weekly