I'm scared of watching scary spider movies, but I might watch this one on this fact alone.

David Dastmalchian said that the artists hired did tweak it afterwards. I'm not an illustrator, so I can't necessarily speak authoritatively on the legitimacy of using AI this way.

Have you seen the trailers for Longlegs, Arcadian, and Cuckoo? They look promising, although I have high hopes for Longlegs.

It's a disappointment

Shudder

Preach

It's one of two images now but if we're not loud it will be one or scenes next time. And then one or two character designs. And then one or two scripts and the backgrounds and all the visual assets. No ground must be given. AI art is soulless theft and deserves to be boycotted.

:0

You're also scared of spiders?

This isn’t a studio film. By boycotting the movie, all you’re doing is making it harder for indie films to secure distribution and an audience. It’s been made abundantly clear how unhappy the audience is about the AI art. What changes if the movie is boycotted, other than the same mistake being made and the outstanding work done by the actual people involved being shunned and ignored? There has to be a middle ground. Responding to everything in the most extreme way only leads to more problems.

That is a perfect analogy and now I’m even more depressed about it. My only hope now s that artists will strive to put even more of their humanity and uniqueness into their art, be transparent about their process (if they want to…I see this a lot on instagram lately and really enjoy it), and that good people will seek out and lift up that kind of art.

Nah

I guess the point I was making is that the AI has already been used and its use has been called out. I think it's crystal clear to everyone involved with the film that there's a very negative response to it. It's not like they "got away with it," so to speak. It sparked a discussion that I think is healthy around any emerging technology. But it's a very small part of the movie - I think you can note and discuss the few pieces of AI artwork without discarding the work done by the scores of other people involved in the film. If the movie's boycotted, aren't they also punished along with the people who greenlit the AI? If someone believes that AI can replace film critics, then they're free to try. I don't think most people watch reviews just for the consumer angle. Maybe I'm wrong. Now, if the artists and studios continue to use AI knowing that people have such strong objections, that's a different story. But it's early in this process and I don't think seeing the movie and accepting its use of AI are the same thing, just as I don't believe that one problematic actor can discredit an entire cast and crew. There must be a middle ground somewhere or we will be locked in a never-ending cycle of extremist reactions with very little progress.

@@DanMurrellMovies i see your point and I think perhaps I may be coming on too strongly. I am very passionate about bot using AI in movies or other creative avenues. And youre right, we listen to reviewers like you because of your style, personality and opinion. I love your reviews and I think youre very fair. I love Dastmalchan and the premise and execution looks great. I am just so against using AI because of how it effects humans. I do think youre right though that it shouldn't be to an extreme. Thank you for reminding me of that. Why couldn't they have made a foam creation/prosthetic? I appreciate the perspective as always Dan. Just curious, was it pretty noticeable in the movie? Seemed like you could spot it but I wasn't sure how it looked.

Honestly - if it hadn’t been pointed out, I never would have noticed

@@DanMurrellMovies same!

It's not snobbery to call something I think is a cash grab what it is. It would be great if all filmmakers were making horror movies for the love of it, across all budgets, but that's not how the genre works.

@@DanMurrellMovies I mean, it's a genre where we have guys like Charles Band who have made some dubious stuff at best, yet there's fun to be gleaned from all of the things he produced. (your mileage may vary, etc.) I'd argue the Asylum crap that got churned out also has entertainment value, regardless of why they're made. all movies are, in a sense, cash grabs, particularly studio features. it's not such a fine line -- at least not how you sum it up.

Where else was the art used?

@@DanMurrellMovies It’s parts of the set and backgrounds.

I completely understand why people are upset. I was addressing the concept of boycotting the movie over it.

@@DanMurrellMovies Fair enough, I respect your opinion.

And that’s fine - but calling for everyone to hold the film by your standard and make the same decision you did would be a step too far.