Before the 98th Oscar ceremony, scheduled for March 2026, the Academy of Arts and Sciences of Motion Motion has made its first official rule on the use of generative the films.
This follows a controversial 2024 season that saw the best film finalist The brutalist (And, to a lesser extent, co-nominated Emilia Pérez) It is going through its use of AI to alter the actions of the actors and create architectural drawings.
As recommended by the Academy Science and Technology Council, this new rule establishes:
“With regard to generative artificial intelligence and other digital tools used in the realization of the film, the tools do not help or damage the possibilities of achieving a nomination. The academy and each branch will judge the achievement, taking into account the degree to which a human was in the center of the creative authorship when choosing which film attached.”
The new guidelines are together with three other changes and additions of notable rules:
- Academy members must now see all the films nominated in each category to be eligible to vote in the final round for the Oscar.
- The new Achievement in casting award will be awarded from 10 nominees.
- Countries may nominate films that were creatively controlled by “citizens, residents or individuals with refugee or asylum status.”
The price of perfection
Given the option to take a position against the generative AI or allow its controlled use, the Academy has landed in a rule that is decidedly neutral and recently to change the current status quo.
While the academy that takes the safe route is not surprising, it possibly ignores the Hollywood story of being always at the forefront of adopting new technologies, and at a time when the use of AI in the cinema is increasingly common.
It is not the first instance of film critics and commentators who leave AI. 2023 Afternoon at night with the devil It was convicted by some for its use of AI to generate a handful of fixed images that only appeared on the screen for a few seconds, but although it was one of the best horror movies of the year, it might not a big surprise that did not receive any Oscar nomination, horror movies rarely do.
On the contrary, a more serious historical drama based on a real story, such as The brutalistSurely I would receive academy attention, putting additional eyes in its use of AI.
While he received 10 Oscar nominations, it is difficult not to feel that the possibilities of the film to win the best film (which he finally lost in Anora) They were unfairly fogged due to their use of AI, although the fact that Adrien Brody won the best actor for his role in the film, undermines some of that notion.
This is because the improved action with Brody’s AI is in the center of the violent reaction that this film has received. Unlike the French, English or Australian accents, which have been done badly many times to count, the sounds of Hungarian vowels are notoriously difficult, even for Brody, whose mother is Hungarian.
Then, while Brody and co -star Felicity Jones did everything possible to offer an authentic accent during filming, with the actors permission editor, Dávid Jancsó, finally opted for an AI tool to achieve perfection.
It is impossible to say if Brody’s victory depends on that improvement, but it is clear that academy voters were happy with this particular compensation.
Where do we draw the line?
The AI does not leave soon, and in a way, such as the improvement of the voice in The brutalist and Emilia Pérez – It offers a subtle improvement to the authenticity of an actor’s performance.
However, that does not necessarily make its use correct. It could be argued that an actor should not be chosen if his song is not up to a musical.
If the real Hungarian is essential, perhaps hire a Hungarian actor, or, if he needs the stellar power of an Adrien Brody, perhaps the public would favor the seriousness of the performance of an actor versus technical precision.
Hollywood workers have not hidden their concerns about AI and their potential impact on work. The use of AI in the writing process was one of the biggest problems posed during the 2023 writers strike.
Without a doubt, he would have sent a powerful message if the academy prohibited the use of AI in films directly, but that is sincerely an unrealistic expectation in 2025.
But, although it is nice to see that the academy takes into account “the degree to which a human was in the heart of creative authorship” is not a clear and measurable rule of how AI can and cannot be used, and leaves the door open to future controversies.
AI will not disappear soon, but as much as I can expect it to appear more, we will certainly see more films that have resignations of responsibilities that proudly indicate that AI was not used in its production, as is found in the final credits of Hugh Gran Terror Exit Heretic.
The academy may have driven the problem under the carpet, but with the growing influence of AI, we have unlikely that we have seen the last rule change.
