The Content Turing Test
Answering the question “Can AI be used to make a real movie?”
“This is only a foretaste of what is to come, and only the shadow of what is going to be” — Alan Turing (Artificial Intelligence pioneer)
In my last post I made the claim that Artificial Intelligence (AI) has not to date successfully created a feature film worthy of theatrical release (read How AI Can Benefit Hollywood). In this post I go into further detail and explain how I devised an answer to this question, and how I plan to judge future attempts (including my own). But what is the definition of Cinema, and when does a video recording become a Film? One way is to apply a Turing Test for media content.
This “Content Turing Test” puts a human name on an AI-made film, and examines if people pay to watch it with satisfaction, and would recommend and want to watch more of its work.
But could an AI-written screenplay win the Academy Award for Best Picture in the near future? Many think it’s not only possible, but inevitable.
The definition of AI has been on a sliding scale for years, when judging if something “is really Artificial Intelligence?” or not. Our conclusions seem to change as AI succeeds at new tasks. This is known as the “AI Effect”, that anything only humans can do requires intelligence, until a computer can do it — at which point it’s simply considered software [1].
Experts half a century ago claimed it would take true AI to be able to play chess, but when such a machine was invented it was no longer considered AI — simply a “chess-playing machine” using dumb algorithms and brute force computation. This sliding test continued as software accomplished more tasks typically considered under the domain of humanity, like language translation, efficient travel directions, image or facial recognition, and self-driving cars.
Now we see this sliding test applied to software-created artwork, from images to songs and yes, even Cinema. Debates rage online as to whether machines are able to produce true “art”, and some argue this can only be a human skill. Yet in recent years we’ve seen examples of people using AI to make parts of films like scenes and dialog, with ground-breaking efforts such as “Sunspring” and more [2].
However, a discerning audience (and likely even the film-makers themselves) would admit such content can’t be considered a real movie yet. I would wager that if screened to a Film Studies professor as works of their students, these films would receive a failing grade. While every new movie is unique, history shows that epic stories tend to follow recognizable patterns and structure. This format was evolved and perfected over centuries and is what we teach aspiring Directors and Screenwriters as they hone their craft.
These examples of AI-written screenplays instead tend to ramble insensibly with no clear direction or lesson about humanity. At the very least, we can assume they would not be competitive with the latest superhero movies at the box office. There is no conclusive Act and Scene structure. The protagonist follows no discernible Character Arc, exhibiting no Want, Need, “Ghost”, or “Lie”. These aren’t true Stories but simply a filmed collection of words read by actors on sets. So when does content cross the line and become a real film?
The Turing Test is a simple way to answer the question: “Is this machine able to think as intelligently as humans?” [3]. Alex Garland’s 2014 blockbuster from A24 Films Ex Machina was based on this concept. A two-sided test hides the fact that the subject may be a machine pretending to be human. The two enter into a conversation. At the end, if the questioner is convinced they were talking to another human, it proves the machine is a true Artificial Intelligence.
I propose extending the idea of covert representation to see if things pass for normal, but instead of conversation proving an ability to think, we present artistic content covering up the AI creator, and see if it passes for a human work as any other. Put another way, we show people a movie without telling them an AI made it, and see if it’s a hit.
Authors have used pseudonym “pen names” for generations, including Stephen King, Isaac Asimov, J.K. Rowling, Benjamin Franklin, Mark Twain, and Dr. Seuss. So have actors, comedians, and directors. This could be for a variety of reasons, including privacy and the desire to overcome unconscious biases of gender, race, or religion.
Because it’s subjective and inconclusive to simply ask an audience “Was that a good movie?” (subject to Agreement Bias [4]), we instead apply the same standards as Hollywood:
- Does the audience watch to the end?
- Does the audience recommend their friends watch it?
- Do audiences pay to see it without much regret?
- Do audiences pay to see more content from them?
- Does the film receive positive reviews from critics?
- Does the film generate profit?
- Does the film win award nominations?
If you tell someone “an AI made this film” there will be bias coming from both sides. Some people may be so impressed a machine could accomplish this feat and lower their standards for quality entertainment. Some may even purchase AI-created content, but I posit today this is for the gimmick and not solely quality of work, similar to people buying paintings made by animals [5].
Conversely, many people (usually older veterans of the entertainment industry) who are against the very concept of Creative AI, may decide consciously or subconsciously that they hate what they are watching, knowing in advance it was not human-made. There are already examples of people pushing back against “allowing” machines to create art, worrying that somehow humans will be exempt from creative activities in the future, worried “evil and powerful Big Tech will replace them” in their industry.
Here’s the fun part: there’s a good chance someone has already done this! There could be a show or movie on a popular streaming service that someone created using AI and put their own name on it. For all we know, it’s one of the biggest hits of the year. Do you think you could tell, if there was?
In the end, for me it doesn’t matter who (or what) makes a film — as long as it’s great. If I could watch a movie I absolutely love each and every night of the week, I would. There’s no upper limit for new great content each year. For now we’ll just have to accept irregular masterpieces, though I can’t help but imagine…
What unprecedented epic stories could tomorrow’s AI-assisted creatives produce for us to enjoy?
References
Top picture: BBC PA MEDIA
[1] What counts as artificially intelligent?
[2] Short Films made with AI include:
Sunspring — End Cue Production (Oscar Sharp, Ross Goodwin)
Mr. Puzzles Wants To Be Less Alive — Netflix (Keaton Patti)
[3] The Imitation Game aka “Turing Test”
[4] Acquiescence “Agreement” Bias explained:
[5] Other species evidently can produce and sell artworks:
Copyright © 2022 CYBERFILM.AI CORPORATION
