James Cameron Reveals What Makes Him Hopeful Yet ‘Queasy' About AI in Filmmaking
James Cameron has made a career out of diving into new filmmaking technology, and artificial intelligence is no exception. On the podcast 'Boz to the Future' hosted by Meta chief technology officer Andrew Bosworth, the 'Avatar' director had a wide-ranging talk about why he sees potential in the technology and what elements of how it is being used makes him 'queasy.'
Cameron's last film, 'Avatar: The Way of Water,' is one of the highest-grossing films of all time with $2.3 billion worldwide, but was also one of the most expensive films to make with a reported $460 million budget. The director told Bosworth that with Hollywood becoming more cost-conscious since the pandemic and industry strikes, AI could be a key to reducing budgets for the sort of blockbusters he's been known to make by increasing efficiency.
However, he was also quick to clarify that his vision of increased efficiency isn't about laying off below-the-line workers in areas like visual effects, which are considered to potentially be among the first to be heavily overhauled by AI.
'That's not about laying off half the staff and at the effects company. That's about doubling their speed to completion on a given shot, so your cadence is faster and your throughput cycle is faster, and artists get to move on and do other cool things and then other cool things, right? That's my sort of vision for that,' he explained.
Cameron also addressed AI issues going on outside of the filmmaking process, such as the surge in OpenAI-generated images made in the style of Studio Ghibli films. He admitted that the trend of people using OpenAI to create images and video 'in the style of' Hayao Miyazaki or other filmmakers, including himself, 'makes me a little bit queasy' and believes that such usage should be discouraged.
At the same time, Cameron said he thinks that lawmakers and Hollywood companies and unions are taking the wrong approach by focusing on regulating AI through how it uses copyrighted material for training models. He sees the human brain as 'a three-and-a-half-pound meat computer' that uses influences in so much of art and other creative endeavors.
'I aspire to be in the style of Ridley Scott, in the style of Stanley Kubrick. That's my text prompt that runs in my head as a filmmaker,' Cameron shared. 'In the style of George Miller: Wide Lens, low, hauling ass, coming up into a tight close-up. Yeah, I want to do that. I know my influences. Everybody knows their influences.'
Because of that, he believes Hollywood and regulators should be focused on the output of generative AI rather than the input.
'If I exactly copy 'Star Wars,' I'll get sued. Actually, I won't even get that far. Everybody'll say, 'Hey, it's too much like 'Star Wars,' we're going to get sued now.' I won't even get the money. And as a screenwriter, you have a kind of built in ethical filter that says, 'I know my sources, I know what I liked, I know what I'm emulating.' I also know that I have to move it far enough away that it's my own independent creation,' he explained.
'So I think the whole thing needs to be managed from a legal perspective, as to what's the output, not what's the input. You can't control my input, you can't tell me what to view and what to see and where to go. My input is whatever I choose it to be, and whatever has accumulated throughout my life. My output, every script I write, should be judged on whether it's too close, too plagiaristic,' he added.
Cameron's next film, 'Avatar: Fire and Ash,' will be released in theaters on Dec. 19. Watch his full hour-long interview with Andrew Bosworth in the video above.
The post James Cameron Reveals What Makes Him Hopeful Yet 'Queasy' About AI in Filmmaking | Video appeared first on TheWrap.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
CoreWeave (CRWV) Jumps 8% on Rosy Growth Prospects
CoreWeave, Inc. (NASDAQ:CRWV) is one of the CoreWeave grew its share prices by 7.99 percent on Friday to hit a new all-time high, as investors continued to load up positions amid rosy growth prospects. At intraday trading, shares of CoreWeave, Inc. (NASDAQ:CRWV) jumped as high as 10 percent to hit $187, before paring gains to finish the day at $170, as investors appeared to have flocked to the booming Artificial Intelligence industry for safety to mitigate risks from the ongoing geopolitical tensions. In recent news, CoreWeave, Inc. (NASDAQ:CRWV) announced a record-breaking performance from using 2,496 of Nvidia Corp.'s latest Grace Blackwell Chips on its AI-optimized cloud platform, making its submission the largest-ever benchmarked under MLPerf. In March this year, CoreWeave, Inc. (NASDAQ:CRWV) bagged an $11.9-billion deal with OpenAI and welcomed it as a new investor through the sale of $350 million CRWV stocks to the latter. Last month, OpenAI upsized the deal with another $4 billion worth of contract. A close-up of a network administrator's hands working on a cloud computing server. Last month, it was tapped by Aston Martin Aramco as its official AI cloud computing partner, where it will provide AI-accelerated engineering opportunities to support car design efficiency. While we acknowledge the potential of CRWV as an investment, our conviction lies in the belief that some AI stocks hold greater promise for delivering higher returns and have limited downside risk. If you are looking for an extremely cheap AI stock that is also a major beneficiary of Trump tariffs and onshoring, see our free report on the best short-term AI stock. READ NEXT: 20 Best AI Stocks To Buy Now and 30 Best Stocks to Buy Now According to Billionaires. Disclosure: None. This article is originally published at Insider Monkey.
Yahoo
4 hours ago
- Yahoo
Palantir, Meta, OpenAI, And Thinking Machines Just Had Their Executives Sworn Into The US Army Reserve
Four top tech executives have joined the U.S. Army Reserve as lieutenant colonels, skipping basic training and stepping directly into roles aimed at helping modernize the military. The initiative is part of a broader push by the Army to bring in private-sector innovation and reshape how the service approaches technology, talent, and modernization. The executives—Palantir (NYSE:PLTR) Chief Technology Officer Shyam Sankar, Meta (NASDAQ:META) CTO Andrew Bosworth, OpenAI Chief Product Officer Kevin Weil, and advisor at Thinking Machines Lab and former OpenAI Chief Research Officer Bob McGrew — will serve in a new unit called Detachment 201, also known as the Army's Executive Innovation Corps. Don't Miss: Maker of the $60,000 foldable home has 3 factory buildings, 600+ houses built, and big plans to solve housing — Peter Thiel turned $1,700 into $5 billion—now accredited investors are eyeing this software company with similar breakout potential. Learn how you can 'Detachment 201 is being created to bring in tech innovation executives to help the Army ... on broader conceptual things like talent management, how do we bring in tech-focused people into the ranks of the military, and then, how do we train them,' Army Chief of Staff spokesperson Col. Dave Butler, told Breaking Defense on June 13. Unlike traditional recruits, these executives will not attend boot camp. Instead, they will go through an express training program that covers marksmanship, physical fitness, Army history, and protocols. They will be expected to serve about 120 hours per year and pass annual fitness tests. 'You could think of it as a pilot' of a lighter version of basic training, Butler told Business Insider. The detachment's name, 201, references the HTTP status code indicating a newly created resource—a fitting metaphor for a new kind of Army asset. Trending: Maximize saving for your retirement and cut down on taxes: . According to an Army statement, the new officers will work on 'targeted projects to help guide rapid and scalable tech solutions to complex problems.' Their advisory roles will include input on AI-powered military systems and optimization tools for soldier fitness. However, safeguards will be in place to avoid conflicts of interest with their current or former employers. 'We've done this over and over when our nation needed top talent,' Butler told Breaking Defense. 'The difference is we used to do it in wartime. Now we're doing it ahead of wartime so that we can prepare and deter.' This marks another move by the Trump administration to align more closely with Silicon Valley. Palantir, Anduril, and other VC-backed defense tech startups have increasingly become major players in national security. Meta recently partnered with Anduril to develop augmented reality tools and AI systems for military direct commissioning has been used to bring in specialized talent, such as doctors or chaplains, during times of war. This move represents a peacetime shift aimed at long-term transformation. 'Their swearing-in is just the start of a bigger mission to inspire more tech pros to serve without leaving their careers,' the Army statement said. 'Showing the next generation how to make a difference in uniform.' Read Next: How do billionaires pay less in income tax than you?.UNLOCKED: 5 NEW TRADES EVERY WEEK. Click now to get top trade ideas daily, plus unlimited access to cutting-edge tools and strategies to gain an edge in the markets. Get the latest stock analysis from Benzinga? PALANTIR TECHNOLOGIES (PLTR): Free Stock Analysis Report This article Palantir, Meta, OpenAI, And Thinking Machines Just Had Their Executives Sworn Into The US Army Reserve originally appeared on © 2025 Benzinga does not provide investment advice. All rights reserved.
Yahoo
5 hours ago
- Yahoo
Why is AI halllucinating more frequently, and how can we stop it?
When you buy through links on our articles, Future and its syndication partners may earn a commission. The more advanced artificial intelligence (AI) gets, the more it "hallucinates" and provides incorrect and inaccurate information. Research conducted by OpenAI found that its latest and most powerful reasoning models, o3 and o4-mini, hallucinated 33% and 48% of the time, respectively, when tested by OpenAI's PersonQA benchmark. That's more than double the rate of the older o1 model. While o3 delivers more accurate information than its predecessor, it appears to come at the cost of more inaccurate hallucinations. This raises a concern over the accuracy and reliability of large language models (LLMs) such as AI chatbots, said Eleanor Watson, an Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) member and AI ethics engineer at Singularity University. "When a system outputs fabricated information — such as invented facts, citations or events — with the same fluency and coherence it uses for accurate content, it risks misleading users in subtle and consequential ways," Watson told Live Science. Related: Cutting-edge AI models from OpenAI and DeepSeek undergo 'complete collapse' when problems get too difficult, study reveals The issue of hallucination highlights the need to carefully assess and supervise the information AI systems produce when using LLMs and reasoning models, experts say. The crux of a reasoning model is that it can handle complex tasks by essentially breaking them down into individual components and coming up with solutions to tackle them. Rather than seeking to kick out answers based on statistical probability, reasoning models come up with strategies to solve a problem, much like how humans think. In order to develop creative, and potentially novel, solutions to problems, AI needs to hallucinate —otherwise it's limited by rigid data its LLM ingests. "It's important to note that hallucination is a feature, not a bug, of AI," Sohrob Kazerounian, an AI researcher at Vectra AI, told Live Science. "To paraphrase a colleague of mine, 'Everything an LLM outputs is a hallucination. It's just that some of those hallucinations are true.' If an AI only generated verbatim outputs that it had seen during training, all of AI would reduce to a massive search problem." "You would only be able to generate computer code that had been written before, find proteins and molecules whose properties had already been studied and described, and answer homework questions that had already previously been asked before. You would not, however, be able to ask the LLM to write the lyrics for a concept album focused on the AI singularity, blending the lyrical stylings of Snoop Dogg and Bob Dylan." In effect, LLMs and the AI systems they power need to hallucinate in order to create, rather than simply serve up existing information. It is similar, conceptually, to the way that humans dream or imagine scenarios when conjuring new ideas. However, AI hallucinations present a problem when it comes to delivering accurate and correct information, especially if users take the information at face value without any checks or oversight. "This is especially problematic in domains where decisions depend on factual precision, like medicine, law or finance," Watson said. "While more advanced models may reduce the frequency of obvious factual mistakes, the issue persists in more subtle forms. Over time, confabulation erodes the perception of AI systems as trustworthy instruments and can produce material harms when unverified content is acted upon." And this problem looks to be exacerbated as AI advances. "As model capabilities improve, errors often become less overt but more difficult to detect," Watson noted. "Fabricated content is increasingly embedded within plausible narratives and coherent reasoning chains. This introduces a particular risk: users may be unaware that errors are present and may treat outputs as definitive when they are not. The problem shifts from filtering out crude errors to identifying subtle distortions that may only reveal themselves under close scrutiny." Kazerounian backed this viewpoint up. "Despite the general belief that the problem of AI hallucination can and will get better over time, it appears that the most recent generation of advanced reasoning models may have actually begun to hallucinate more than their simpler counterparts — and there are no agreed-upon explanations for why this is," he said. The situation is further complicated because it can be very difficult to ascertain how LLMs come up with their answers; a parallel could be drawn here with how we still don't really know, comprehensively, how a human brain works. In a recent essay, Dario Amodei, the CEO of AI company Anthropic, highlighted a lack of understanding in how AIs come up with answers and information. "When a generative AI system does something, like summarize a financial document, we have no idea, at a specific or precise level, why it makes the choices it does — why it chooses certain words over others, or why it occasionally makes a mistake despite usually being accurate," he wrote. The problems caused by AI hallucinating inaccurate information are already very real, Kazerounian noted. "There is no universal, verifiable, way to get an LLM to correctly answer questions being asked about some corpus of data it has access to," he said. "The examples of non-existent hallucinated references, customer-facing chatbots making up company policy, and so on, are now all too common." Both Kazerounian and Watson told Live Science that, ultimately, AI hallucinations may be difficult to eliminate. But there could be ways to mitigate the issue. Watson suggested that "retrieval-augmented generation," which grounds a model's outputs in curated external knowledge sources, could help ensure that AI-produced information is anchored by verifiable data. "Another approach involves introducing structure into the model's reasoning. By prompting it to check its own outputs, compare different perspectives, or follow logical steps, scaffolded reasoning frameworks reduce the risk of unconstrained speculation and improve consistency," Watson, noting this could be aided by training to shape a model to prioritize accuracy, and reinforcement training from human or AI evaluators to encourage an LLM to deliver more disciplined, grounded responses. RELATED STORIES —AI benchmarking platform is helping top companies rig their model performances, study claims —AI can handle tasks twice as complex every few months. What does this exponential growth mean for how we use it? —What is the Turing test? How the rise of generative AI may have broken the famous imitation game "Finally, systems can be designed to recognise their own uncertainty. Rather than defaulting to confident answers, models can be taught to flag when they're unsure or to defer to human judgement when appropriate," Watson added. "While these strategies don't eliminate the risk of confabulation entirely, they offer a practical path forward to make AI outputs more reliable." Given that AI hallucination may be nearly impossible to eliminate, especially in advanced models, Kazerounian concluded that ultimately the information that LLMs produce will need to be treated with the "same skepticism we reserve for human counterparts."
