Could A.I. Be Good for Hollywood?
A Breakdown of a NY Times Article
I’ve been a New York Times subscriber since I originally moved to New York nearly 20 years ago. While I love their world news, recipes, listings of apartments I could never afford, and the crossword puzzle (Monday and Tuesday mainly…everything another day makes me lose self-confidence), it’s rare that an article feels personally impactful. This week, a friend forwarded a headline that stopped me in my tracks: “What if A.I. Is Actually Good for Hollywood?”
I assumed this was just a clickbaity headline and would be an article criticizing AI for threatening creative jobs. Because if you think 3D Artists have been threatened by AI, journalists would also like to have a word.
Instead, it turned out to be a balanced look at the role A.I. is already playing in Hollywood, especially in the latest Robert Zemeckis movie Here, starring Tom Hanks and Robin Wright. The film brings up questions about A.I.’s creative potential and ethical implications for actors and filmmakers alike.
Stepping Into A.I.’s Future in a Not-So-High-Tech Office
The New York Times article begins with a scene that’s less sci-fi and more reality check. Devin Gordon describes his visit to Metaphysic, a Hollywood start-up using A.I. to create hyper-realistic digital renderings of human faces. But instead of the futuristic setting he’d imagined, Gordon finds himself in a simple, unremarkable office—“a dim, three-room warren,” as he puts it. He half-jokes that it looks more like a lawyer’s office than the lab of a visual effects powerhouse.
Ed Ulbrich, Metaphysic’s chief content officer, invites Gordon to sit down in front of a camera and stares at the screen. After a few clicks on his laptop, Gordon’s face on the screen morphs into that of a major Hollywood actor, right down to their characteristic expression and smile with celebrity teeth and all. It’s seamless, with little to no lag. This “digital mask” effect immediately responds to Gordon’s expressions as if he’s wearing someone else’s face.
Ulbrich, a veteran of the VFX industry and former chief of James Cameron’s Digital Domain, explains that Metaphysic’s A.I. leverages every frame of an actor’s recorded career—each shot, lighting condition and angle—essentially building a “library” of the actor’s face to create this lifelike digital mask. Ulbrich, who famously worked on films like Titanic, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, and Top Gun: Maverick, has been around visual effects tech for decades, but for him, the human face has always been the “final frontier” of realism.
As Ulbrich pecks away on his laptop, he next brings up a digital rendering of a young Tom Hanks, specifically from his Splash days. For Here, Ulbrich and his team used this very technology to let Hanks and his co-star Robin Wright appear across multiple life stages without CGI-heavy post-production or hiring separate actors for younger or older roles. A.I. made it possible to capture these performances in real-time, with Zemeckis watching two monitors—one with the raw feed, and one showing the actors de-aged by A.I.
A History of Breakthroughs and Risks in Visual Effects
The article delves into the long-running collaboration between Zemeckis and Hanks and their history of pushing the technological envelope. Forrest Gump, for example, was a groundbreaking film for its time, using digital effects to insert Hanks into historical footage alongside real presidents. This early digital manipulation created the impression that Hanks’ character interacted with John F. Kennedy, Richard Nixon, and Lyndon Johnson, even altering the lip movements of these figures to match the film’s dialogue. That, plus the digital leg removal of Gary Sinese’s Lt. Dan character were groundbreaking for the time and used the latest technology to push the envelope of digital realism in story-centric filmmaking.
Their attempt to push boundaries didn’t always succeed. When Zemeckis tried motion-capture animation in The Polar Express, the film stumbled into the “uncanny valley.” Characters in the movie were meant to look realistic but ended up unsettlingly close, yet not close enough, to human—a visual oddity that audiences struggled with. It was a stark reminder of how tricky realism in VFX can be.
Now, with Here, they’re giving A.I.-driven facial rendering another shot. But the question remains: Will this be another Forrest Gump moment, pushing the industry forward, or will it slip into the uncanny valley once again and prove to be a blip instead of setting the standard for the industry to come.
A.I. in Casting: Can It Create More Opportunity?
Another interesting question the article raises is whether A.I. could allow actors to play characters at vastly different ages. Here lets Hanks play his character from his 20s to his 80s with A.I., which is remarkable—but it also prompts the question: Do we need Tom Hanks to play a 20-year-old version of himself when there are plenty of talented young actors eager for opportunities?
If we look beyond the famous faces, this technology could offer something positive, especially for actors marginalized by the industry’s limited casting range. Historically, actors who didn’t fit the Hollywood ideal—people of color, those with disabilities, or those who didn’t have “lead actor” looks—were restricted to supportive or very narrow roles. Imagine if A.I. could shift that, allowing diverse actors to embody various characters without being typecast. In this way, A.I. could make Hollywood more inclusive, giving a wider range of actors a chance to showcase their talent.
The Unspoken Optimism of A.I. in Hollywood
A quote that caught my attention was about how many people in Hollywood who see potential in A.I. are hesitant to express that view publicly. As the article notes, “there’s no shortage of A.I. optimists in the movie industry, but they’re often reluctant to share that sentiment out loud.” In today’s social media climate, where discussions around A.I. are polarized, it’s easy to feel trapped between two extremes—either embracing A.I. as the future of creativity or rejecting it as a threat to artists.
I get that hesitation. There’s a genuine concern around job displacement and ethical use, but there’s also an undeniable excitement about the creative potential. The reality is, many in the industry aren’t opposed to A.I. as a tool; they just want responsible guidelines to prevent misuse. When the dust settles, the optimists might be right, but until then, the loudest voices are those focused on A.I.’s risks and forcing many sober minded takes into the shadows.
Bringing Back the Mid-Budget Film
One of the most intriguing ideas in the article is that A.I. could bring back the mid-budget movie. We’re living in an era where Hollywood is split: on one end, you have the blockbuster franchises with $200 million budgets, and on the other, indie films made on a shoestring. There’s hardly anything in between. This lack of variety has limited the stories being told and favored spectacle over substance.
If A.I. can reduce the costs of visual effects and simplify parts of the filmmaking process, it could open the door for mid-budget films. Imagine a return to movies that don’t need explosions or superheroes but can still leverage visual effects to enhance storytelling. Rom-coms, thrillers, courtroom dramas—these could all make a comeback with the help of A.I., without needing to gamble on massive budgets.
Here’s Matt Damon talking about how the high production cost of these types of movies.
A.I. as a Continuation of Hollywood’s Technological Evolution
Throughout its history, Hollywood has embraced new technology to enhance storytelling. Silent films gave way to sound, black-and-white transitioned to color, practical effects evolved into CGI. Each innovation has disrupted some aspect of the industry but ultimately fueled new creative possibilities. Jobs were lost but were replaced by new roles.
A.I. may be just another step in this evolution. The article notes that most disruptive changes in Hollywood tend to impact the “secondary” parts of the business—think streaming services changing DVD sales and Blockbusters. These changes alter how films are made or distributed but don’t replace the storytelling at the heart of filmmaking. A.I. might shift processes or reduce reliance on certain techniques, but it won’t replace the human touch needed to tell compelling stories.
Final Takeaway
The New York Times article offered a refreshing perspective on A.I. in Hollywood. Sure, there are ethical concerns, especially around job displacement, copyright, and likeness rights. But if used responsibly, A.I. has the potential to revitalize Hollywood, making it more inclusive, more varied, and potentially even more cost-effective.
In the end, A.I. in filmmaking doesn’t have to be an all-or-nothing scenario. It can be a tool, just like any other, that artists use to push boundaries, reduce costs, and create better films. It’s not a question of A.I. replacing human creativity but of enhancing it. Yes, guardrails are essential, but so is an open mind. With the right balance, A.I. could help Hollywood tell stories we haven’t yet imagined, all while bringing back genres and budgets we haven’t seen in years.
The 3D Artist Community Updates
This week’s AMA is with Tuba Yelcin. With experience at industry giants like ILM, MPC, and DNeg, Tuba is a 3D & VFX Workflow Expert. She recently shifted from entertainment to tech, serving as a 3DVFX/Pro Workflow Expert at Apple.
3D News of the Week
What if A.I. Is Actually Good for Hollywood? - NY Times (Paywall)
System That Reconstructs 3D Scenes through Active Gaussian Splatting - 80.lv
Boris FX releases Continuum 2025 - CG Channel
Open-sourcing .SPZ: it’s .JPG for 3D Gaussian splats - Scaniverse
3D Merch is here and we have a new hoodie!
3D Tutorials
3D Job Spreadsheet
Link to Google Doc With A TON of Jobs in Animation (not operated by me)
Hello! Michael Tanzillo here. I am the Head of Technical Artists with the Substance 3D Growth team at Adobe. Previously, I was a Senior Artist on animated films at Blue Sky Studios/Disney with credits including three Ice Age movies, two Rios, Peanuts, Ferdinand, Spies in Disguise, and Epic.
In addition to his work as an artist, I am the Co-Author of the book Lighting for Animation: The Visual Art of Storytelling and the Co-Founder of The Academy of Animated Art, an online school that has helped hundreds of artists around the world begin careers in Animation, Visual Effects, and Digital Imaging. I also created The 3D Artist Community on Skool and this newsletter.
www.michaeltanzillo.com
Free 3D Tutorials on the Michael Tanzillo YouTube Channel
Thanks for reading The 3D Artist! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work. All views and opinions are my own!