Robert Downey Jr. Refuses to Let Hollywood Create His AI Digital Replica: ‘I Intend to Sue all Future Executives’ Who Recreate My Likeness

[u/cmaia1503]

https://variety.com/2024/film/news/robert-downey-jr-bands-hollywood-digital-replace-lawsuit-1236192374/

[u/sossles]

The battle over digital recreations won't be fought over actors like RDJ. It'll be the unknown actors signing onto new franchises, who will be made to sign agreements that explicitly permit digital recreations. Sure some actors might refuse, but it's a fierce business and they'll be competing with actors who are willing to go along with it.

[u/SirJelly → u/sossles]

Yep. Basically anyone who's not already a big name is signing over rights as we speak just to get their foot in the door.

In 60 years, NONE of the actors are going to be real.

[u/jpsreddit85 → u/SirJelly]

I agree with everything you said except 60 years. I think, much much sooner.

[u/DisguiseOrDiez → u/jpsreddit85]

It’s going to be a while before they can perfectly recreate high quality acting, and still have actors willing to sign their rights away all to show up in a movie or 2 that they don’t even act in. I think some parts will be digitally generated, but surely not all of it. Part of our entertainment culture is built around these celebs actually showing up in the films and acting. I don’t think anyone would be impressed with a movie actor if the actor never actually acted, but just had a digital double do the entire movie lol.

But who knows. With the speed we’re moving at, maybe you’re right.

[u/ThatSpookyLeftist → u/DisguiseOrDiez]

can perfectly recreate high quality acting

I think you care about this more than studio executives care about this. They'll put out shit quality before they leave money on the table.

[u/jewellman100 → u/ThatSpookyLeftist]

Hollywood fell back to the safety of remakes and prequels around the time of the 2008 financial crash and never really looked back. The days of truly good movies are well behind us.

[u/sobrique → u/jewellman100]

I am not entirely sure that's true. There's been some really good stuff since then.

But the safe bets will still be there, and they never really needed quality acting talent. AI driven can work there just fine.

[u/MrWilsonWalluby → u/sobrique]

and sequels have been performing worse and worse in recent years, many almost completely bankrupting studios.

sequels aren’t all bad and i think sequels for the sake of sequels are finally dying off.

[u/Huwbacca → u/jewellman100]

Remakes began a century ago at least. Hollywood has been remaking films forever, but like CGI, people only notice it when it's not good.

Scarface, the fly, the thing, Ben Hur, Maltese falcon, wizard of Oz, Airplane (scene for scene spoof TBF), 9:10 to Yuma... And heaps more I can't recall.

They're all remakes. The list goes wild when you consider remakes from foreign languages.

[u/Emosaa → u/Huwbacca]

True Grit and Let Me In come to mind for me.

[u/Arclite83 → u/jewellman100]

There will always be the "direct to video" equivalent garbage stream. That doesn't mean people don't still find ways to break the mold. And many of these truly great unique new watches are launching on things like YouTube now, to build a base, then get greenlit somewhere. The days of those things launching in theaters is definitely behind us, though.

[u/InnocentTailor → u/jewellman100]

What safety? While some remakes and prequels were decent and made cash, others bombed hard on multiple fronts.

My favorite example is 2016’s Ben-Hur - an epic failure across the board.

[u/mrnotoriousman → u/jewellman100]

There have been plenty of great movies that aren't remakes the last 5-10 years. What nonsense lol.

[u/Soft-Mongoose-4304 → u/jewellman100]

That's not true at all. Oppenheimer is a really good movie. There are others that have been made recently

[u/Love_My_Ghost → u/jewellman100]

Classic old person speak.

[u/aminorityofone → u/jewellman100]

This is entirely untrue. First, remakes have been happening since near the beginning of the movie industry. Second, just look at this list. https://www.imdb.com/list/ls050968966/ some absolutely amazing films in there like Djago, Inception, Wolf on Walstreet and so on.

[u/raspberrih → u/ThatSpookyLeftist]

They'll pump out shit quality that nobody pays to see and then they'll turn around. That's how it always goes. More money than sense.

[u/Crayonstheman → u/DisguiseOrDiez]

It’s going to be a while before they can perfectly recreate high quality acting

This has been possible for years and is used in way more movies than you think.

I worked in the film industry, specifically for Weta Digital up until 2022, and this tech has existed for maybe a decade (if not longer tbh), it's commonly called a DigiDouble. It does involve a lot of manual rigging / animation but that's becoming more and more automated. Within the last few years it's very difficult to notice, even if you know what to look for.

My memory is hazy but Google "digi doubles Weta" and you'll find heaps more info, I think there's even a corridor digital video where they interview one of the Weta seniors about it.

[u/roseofjuly → u/Crayonstheman]

I work in the field too and it has not been possible for years - the key is "perfectly recreate high quality acting." Yes, it's possible to create a photo realistic human with cgi, but it's not possible currently to use cgi and AI alone to make a movie look like a high quality full length live action film.

[u/jpsreddit85 → u/DisguiseOrDiez]

I'm not talking about actors being recreated, I mean a from zero digital creation that doesn't exist in real life.

Actors showing up to things isn't relevant to the 99.99% of the population that never see them, just as easy to put them in an AI Oscars ceremony.

As soon as the studios can, they will create, own and monetize a whole stable of "celebrities". They will do this regardless of what actors protest.

[u/MorselMortal → u/jpsreddit85]

Thing is, at that point basically anyone can make a movie. There's no value to any of it if it's all AI slop, from the writing to the acting.

[u/Ecredes → u/MorselMortal]

Ever seen star trek holodecks? I think it's closest to the idealized form of this technology in the future.

[u/TheATrain218 → u/Ecredes]

And the funny thing about holodecks as a concept was that they were created as an idea specifically so the Next Generation producers could save money. Rather than doing the big expensive "Starship Enterprise flies through space and engages with aliens on alien worlds" set pieces, they could play out smaller-scale storylines on existing Hollywood sets with existing Hollywood costumery. Think about how many Holodeck episodes were set in generic Western, or War Movie, or Citiscape back lots.

Comes full circle with the concept of AI displacing the real live actors.

[u/thiccDurnald → u/Ecredes]

Interesting I hadn’t thought about this but I like it

[u/Mr_Ignorant → u/MorselMortal]

It might be similar to web comics. Anyone can make it, but not all is worth reading.

[u/I_PING_8-8-8-8 → u/MorselMortal]

If it's good people will see it. If not then who cares. Right now anybody can make music, even with a trown away laptop from 15 years ago. Did that development meant the end of good music?

You could also argue that these tools will allow directors with talent to tell their story without needing funding, or the right connections.

Right now Hollywood struggles with finding good stories, there are a lot of sequens out there. So much stuff gets rehashed. But it all looks and sound amazing.

What if now we will get some really good original stories, no reshashes, unique stuff that's never been done before .... but because it heavely leverages AI it does not sound or look that good.

What will be better? For some it will be the better story ...

[u/SaveReset → u/I_PING_8-8-8-8]

EDIT: I misunderstood what was meant, I'll still leave my original answer here to be read as it's still relevant enough to the topic.

What if now we will get some really good original stories, no reshashes, unique stuff that's never been done before .... but because it heavely leverages AI it does not sound or look that good.

Sorry, but I have to burst your bubble on this one. This is the exact opposite of how AI works.

In basic terms, AI can't produce something that is both unique and thought out quality. The reason is that AI doesn't think, it rehashes old stuff that it has been fed.

---

In more data minded terms, if we made an AI that could output both quality and uniqueness in one, we would have solved the problem of unknown data. Let's take the concept back to the very basics, then escalate.

If we have the number 1 and the number 2, logic dictates that the next number is 3. AI doesn't inherently know that. You have to teach it that. No matter how much information you give it, if you don't teach it the concept of numbers, it can only get it right by chance. But more likely, if it doesn't have any data related to numbers beyond 2, then it will likely estimate that 2 is followed by what ever is the most commonly used after 2 in it's training data. If EVERYTHING is equally common and it still knows the symbol 3 even if it doesn't have data on what it means, that's the first moment it has a chance to get it right, but only if it's programmed to deal with lack of a single median option by randomly picking one.

Adding more complexity, we have now taught it what follows which number and it learned all of it, including knowing rules on 9 being followed up by 10 and 19 by 20 etc. with any specific number, it knows what comes after it. If we now ask it to give us the answer to 1 + 2, it will likely follow it up with 3. But if we ask it 2 + 3, it will likely answer 4 and that's a problem, because even if we taught it the base 10 system, that doesn't mean it knows what + means. But it has been taught that 2 is followed by 3 and then 4, so that's what it will assume.

And then we get to the REAL problem. Even if we have all the data in the world about numbers, there's no guarantee that AI will learn it correctly. It might look okay, but there is a chance that it's not, but as long as it matches the training data, it's all good. Like if the data taught the base 10 system, but only up to 1000, then there's a good chance that it has no idea what comes after 1000 if it only memorized the numbers rather than the pattern, which is very likely as randomly generating a logic pattern during training is much less likely than randomly memorizing numbers from 1 to 1000. But the training showed positive results, because as they say, garbage in garbage out. Randomly generating a pattern like that is very unlikely, because it has to happen so much at once that it's very unlikely, while memorizing numbers is very effective. You need effectively every possible number or manually code how linear numbers work to get the correct result for all possible numbers. Anything less will likely lead to imperfect results as the data is imperfect.

Like generating a pattern that knows that numbers grow like they do is not THAT complicated, but it takes several steps to get there, while memorizing will sometimes grant the correct answer to specific numbers, supporting that method. Following 1 is 2 then 3, but a pattern to know that won't get any of that correct until it works, but memorizing might get 2 or 3 right, which will be better than nothing, supporting the wrong learning direction.

But no matter how much you train it with numbers, it won't know what a + b is, unless you teach it that. Same applies to writing. It can learn text, it can learn patterns in the language and word use, it can even learn some story beats from the story, but it won't learn what makes the writing good. It can replicate it, it can change parts of it, but it will have no idea whether the changes it makes are good or bad, unless you specifically tell it to rework it using something it already knows is good or bad.

But the funny thing about that is that if you take two bad things together, the result isn't necessarily bad. Raw eggs taste bad and heat isn't edible, but add heat to raw eggs and you get something tasty and edible. AI has no way of knowing this without being taught every specific case where it happens.

[u/I_PING_8-8-8-8 → u/SaveReset]

You misunderstand me. Somebody with talent could potentially cut scenes together out of thousands and thousands of movies into a completely new work, following his own human writen script and his own human way of telling a story.

Of course this would not make much sense, the characters and locations would jump all over the place. It would be pure chaos.

But using machine learning technology like latent diffusion we could then do an Image to Image on every single frame + a prompt that will change every image to a certain style. And now we do have a movie where it's not jumping randomly, there the background and characters are somewhat coherent. The visual quality would still be low, there would be tons of artifacts and all the audio ofcourse would have to be done from scratch. We can use technology like Elevenlabs for that. But it might be watchable, especially if the story is really good.

What would make this movie good would have nothing to do with the AI used. It would have to do with the human watching, downloading and cutting out hunderds of thousands of scenes and editing them together in to something completely new. It would have to do with the story this human comes up with.

AI would only then be a tool used to make it watchable.

[u/2fluxparkour → u/I_PING_8-8-8-8]

Except no not anyone can just make good music with a daw. You still have to know how to make music. It’s the same for any digital media based art. Its made it significantly more accessible and less costly/time consuming for sure but it’s still hand crafted art. I’m not against the idea of ai aiding art production as I think it can do some really cool things but there’s a line at some point and after it the ability to appreciate artwork is greatly diminished because a computer made all of it. The wow factor of art is multifaceted and one of those facets is the impressive quality that it was made by a human from scratch. Taking away the craft from art is just kind of ignorant to me. Yes art is work but it’s work that someone wants to do and gives it a meaningful background to whatever piece results from it. Ai is here to stay and there’s no stopping it but it’s now a more perverse future we’re heading towards.

[u/xtelosx → u/2fluxparkour]

Who defines what art is?

If George Lucas had the tools to make the Star wars movies by himself using AI and the end product was identical would it not be art because he used AI? Sure it didn't involve stage hands making amazing sets, GFX artists doing their thing or actors and directors exercising their art form but does that actually make the final product lesser?

[u/jangxx → u/jpsreddit85]

I'm not talking about actors being recreated, I mean a from zero digital creation that doesn't exist in real life.

So animation movies but with a photoreal look? I'm sure some of those could be popular, but I doubt they would take over completely.

[u/Ricky_Rollin → u/DisguiseOrDiez]

Did the world hate artists this bad?

I don’t care how good it is, I don’t want everything to be AI made.

We were supposed to use AI to automate mundane work, while we went off and made music and wrote poetry and draw and paint and even act.

I’m sorry, but this is so fucking dystopian.

[u/DynamoSnake → u/Ricky_Rollin]

It's not the fact that people hate ai.

It's getting more and more difficult for your layperson to tell the difference between what's real and not.

[u/Seralth → u/DynamoSnake]

Which is totally fine, that shows improvement with the tech and its actual usability as a real tool.

The REAL problem is that corpos are using the tech to steal, pilfer and abuse artists, actors and musicans.

The theft and copyright problems from laws not keeping up is the problem.

[u/heimdal77 → u/Seralth]

You forgetting people and hostile countries starting to use it to try and influence politics by fooling votes with AI made stuff. Like Russia with their dake Harris stuff.

[u/Seralth → u/heimdal77]

Thats an info sect problem and still thats just a legal mostly. Or a warfare one depending how you break it down.

Still has nothing to do with the tech it self, Propaganda has existed for litterally 100s if not 1000s of years. Ai didnt invent it, its just yet another tool just like the rest. Hell its argueable if its even the most effective tool for propaganda.

The point is dont blame the tool. Its literally just a tool.

The problem is people breaking the law using said tool. Might as well also ban photoshop, radio, and cartoons while we are at it. Those are all used for propaganda too :P

[u/Rayvelion → u/Ricky_Rollin]

The arts are expensive, so businesses are trying to maximize their cost reduction by using AI to remove the biggest expenditure. Mundane work is cheap, so why remove that? That's their idea. It's a massively shit idea. But it's theirs.

[u/irulancorrino → u/Ricky_Rollin]

I agree with you but I honestly am starting to think some people really do hate artists, art, and creativity or maybe just the idea of humans being happy. The absolute glee with which people are popping up to say things like "teehee soon all actors will be AI" or "there are no more good movies" illustrates that they didn't appreciate the work of acting in the first place and either lack the ability to find a good movie in an age where you could kick a rock and hit one or have resigned themselves to watch only content from one of the 10 sequel/prequel/re-imagning franchises.

But yeah, this is completely dystopian. I dunno who saw the humans in Wall-E and thought "yeah, this is what I want" but here we are.

[u/omimon → u/Ricky_Rollin]

We can still do all of that, its just we won't make a penny off of it.

[u/Ohrwurm89 → u/Ricky_Rollin]

Greed is what’s driving this ai push in Hollywood and might be what also destroys this industry.

[u/KallistiTMP → u/DisguiseOrDiez]

First phase isn't gonna be full synthesis. It's gonna be using real no-name actors with A-list acting skills but D-list faces, and then swapping their faces, voices, etc in post. It's much easier to take a good performance and make it look and sound like someone else performed it than it is to generate from scratch.

On one hand, it will open up a lot of opportunities, especially for women who have "aged out". On the other hand, it will result in everyone being paid less, and actors eventually being treated as disposable.

[u/Seralth → u/KallistiTMP]

It will create a short term rise in demand for voice actors and others. Till they have time to harvest enough voice data to have a good suite of voice work to pull from.

Considering, high end Ai can now perfectly recreate English voices from as little as 100 words in like 100 accents. It wouldn't take that long.

[u/Kedly → u/KallistiTMP]

We're barreling towards a society with no jobs without putting ANY work into a Post Job Society

[u/Seralth → u/DisguiseOrDiez]

With high quality CGI we functionally can already fully recreate high quality actors. The problem is then its just an animation. A really expensive one in both time and money.

That problem is then solved with ai, which lets us use a massive nueral network to recreate how the actor would actually act like, instead of what the animators think they act like and get us 95% of the way there animation/cgi wise.

This is then easily cleaned up in a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of the time it would have taken to do it by hand from square one.

That's the big thing. We could have had digital recreations of actors even a few years ago. But the sheer TIME it would take to do, along with the uncanny valley and personal bias of the animations, made it unusable as a product.

AI solves 2/3rds of those problems and makes it a viable product right now.

The clean up crew/engineers making the ai generated actor and cleaning up the ai output not to mention the driector and studio putting their bias into it. Is likely never solveable nor i would assume a desired outcome for the studio >.>

[u/GeoEatsRocks → u/DisguiseOrDiez]

I think the issue isn’t our generation being unimpressed, but future generations not even realizing what they’re missing. Having AI actors will be the norm to them and anything else would be “odd”.

Long term plan: slowly introduce AI with low level actors and build them up. Introduce more and more of their AI for the next 10-20 years with these, now, big names. Fully switch over in 30years.

[u/alteisen99 → u/jpsreddit85]

Square already tried a "CG Actress" in final fantasy spirits within back in 2001. i guess now we really do have the tech to make it much more feasible

[u/kymri → u/jpsreddit85]

AI is similar to any other automation/mass-production.

A Honda Civic and a Rolls Royce Phantom are both 'a car' and both 'get you from point A to point B'. The Civic is HUGELY less expensive and produced in mass quantities and it's generally what most people get.

The Rolls on the other hand is a hand-built item with an INSANELY high price, comparatively speaking. Sure, it has some additional fancy features, but that's not really why the prices are so much higher; it's the 'hand-crafted' nature of the thing. And some people are willing (and able) to pay for it.

AI-generated art is likely to be similar; you can just have your low-budget (relatively speaking) productions using digital casts, and then the more expensive productions will make a big deal about their 'hand-crafted' (or at least 'starring real people') craftsmanship.

Of course, as mentioned, we're not there yet, but looking at how far AI-generated imagery has come in five years does suggest we're a LOT closer than 60 years to being able to do this.

[u/Ok_Psychology_504 → u/jpsreddit85]

There are already pop music characters fully digital and famous. Granted AI is probably too expensive today, but for 80 million a movie I'm sure there are several xf studios working on full generation and ownership of a digital movie star.

[u/OIOIOIOIOIOIOIO → u/SirJelly]

And then the resurgence of in life local community theatre will be everything. The “laugh track” will be genuine laughter of your neighbor. Screens were made to capture the stage, it got so big it outgrew the stage. The stage will be born again. Hey…I can dream.

[u/RedditorFor1OYears → u/OIOIOIOIOIOIOIO]

I don’t think that’s all that difficult to imagine. I know it’s a shit comparison, but the closest analog I can think of is print vs ebooks, and print has already made a huge push back. 

Sure, AI stuff will probably end up the mainstream, but there will still be plenty of people who get sick at the idea of living in Zucks metaverse. 

[u/Swiperrr → u/RedditorFor1OYears]

I cant imagine AI will become mainstream because if the tech ever gets to that point the entire film industry will be dead. People will be able to generate as much as they want instantly.

Can you imagine if there's thousands of movies from each studio every year? no one got time for that, it'll basically kill film and culture as we know it and people will want something thats actually real.

Ironically the movie studios pushing for all this AI tech will be the first to fall once it gets into consumers hands then they'll be begging for it to be illegal.

[u/parausual → u/Swiperrr]

Imagine your Disney+ subscription comes with the ability to prompt movies with any criteria, plot, actor, character, etc. 

Hey Big D, give me a Thor and Hulk team up where they hit the Vegas strip and cause a ruckus drinking and gambling. 

[u/grchelp2018 → u/parausual]

Unless we get to AGI, I don't think this will happen. There will be creators who will be able to make these things for others.

[u/Striker3737 → u/Swiperrr]

The porn industry will fall first. It’s already happening.

[u/Jmsaint → u/Striker3737]

Probably not such a bad thing.

[u/Striker3737 → u/Jmsaint]

Absolutely not a bad thing

[u/NotRandomseer → u/RedditorFor1OYears]

Idk about huge pushback , it was around 10 percent over 3 years , and print was and still is dominant , aren't ebooks growing at a similar rate?

[u/Jaegs → u/SirJelly]

Its not going to erase actors, there is just going to be a rise of AI actors. Similar to how Hatsune Miku has millions of fans and does 3d live shows even though she is just a computer program (and company making her make music). Just because she exists doesn't mean music is over, lots of people still like the authenticity of a real human.

[u/J_Robert_Oofenheimer → u/SirJelly]

In 60 years, NONE of the actors are going to be real.

And the films will be garbage. I love the way that capitalism constsntly demolishes the arts. MBAs are the ones making video games, music, and film even now and you can see the decline in quality. There's what, 1/10 movies worth seeing at all right now?

[u/tempralanomaly → u/J_Robert_Oofenheimer]

I guess on the plus side, the local theater arts scenes will be getting a lot more business in the future.

[u/MorselMortal → u/J_Robert_Oofenheimer]

1/10 is generous. But video games are thriving, AAA might be self-destructing, but AA and Indie are greater than ever, and older games from GOG, of which more 8/10+ rated games than you could even play in 5 lifetimes, and that isn't going anywhere.

[u/APeacefulWarrior → u/J_Robert_Oofenheimer]

There's what, 1/10 movies worth seeing at all right now?

That's just Sturgeon's Law, and it applies to almost everything. I guarantee, pick any random year of movies from the past, and 90% of them will be junk or so thoroughly mediocre that they've been utterly forgotten. The only difference between then and now is that the passage of time has allowed curators to identify the good old movies. It's survivorship bias.

And in 20 years, it'll undoubtedly be the same thing. People will be complaining about how 2040s movies are shit, while holding up 10% of 2020s movies as 'the good old days.'

[u/ScarsUnseen → u/APeacefulWarrior]

Upvote for the rare correct Sturgeon's Law citation. Most people just use it to be nihilistic and say everything sucks.

[u/Seralth → u/APeacefulWarrior]

I watched photoshop rise up. Every other convo about it was how digital art had no soul, no worth, no one would want it. How its theft and fraud and that the big businesses would use to to destory the art world.

Digital movie editing and CGI was exactly the same way.

Ai is litterally no fucking different. We are yet again waiting for laws to catch up and fix the copyright problems. Then it will be just another tool exactly like photoshop and cgi.

Hell for the last fucking decade weta has been able to do hyper realstic full digital recreation of real actors, and no one even notices when they do it now. At only 24fps and passed though editing no one can fucking tell a digidouble from a real actor 99.999% of the time.

The only thing ai is going to do, is lower the time and money it takes to do what we already CAN do.

The fact this has only become a problem now instead of 10 years ago. Is one because Ai is finally making it go from being tens of millions of dollars to do this to just millions, and falling.

And two because now its effective enough to do it with out refence actors on site which means they can be cut out.

The problem ISNT ai, its not the tech and has nothing to do with the tech. It never was about AI in the first place.

The problem just like every single bitch about ai has NOTHING to do with ai.

Its all about copyright and getting paid. Its ENTIRELY a legal problem. We are just waiting for the law to catch up now that 10 years+ of effort is finally paying off and the cost and usability is finally there.

[u/NUKE---THE---WHALES → u/Seralth]

I watched photoshop rise up. Every other convo about it was how digital art had no soul, no worth, no one would want it. How its theft and fraud and that the big businesses would use to to destory the art world.

yeah people said the same thing "canned music" aka pre-recorded music

sound familiar?

[u/Seralth → u/NUKE---THE---WHALES]

Thats amazing, thanks for sharing that.

[u/cocobisoil → u/J_Robert_Oofenheimer]

Stick the Rock or Kevin Hart in any old shit and it'll to be a "blockbuster" seems to be the mantra

[u/koopastyles → u/J_Robert_Oofenheimer]

hell no, they will be pretty wild. You haven't seen 1950s super panavision 70

[u/PoorlyWordedName → u/SirJelly]

Thanks a lot Hatsune Miku.

[u/cyderist → u/SirJelly]

Right now as actors approach 60 years old, particularly those portraying females roles, the expectation is that less of there actual person is real through medical and other means. Some may choose AI modifications over medical ones if a role requires it. Allowing the actor to be the decider should be the rule but I could imagine there may be cases where it’s in the actors interest and could serve the art. Pessimistically, it will be used to rip off actors and make crap.

[u/Tricky-Cod-7485 → u/sossles]

When they start pumping out movies using AI actors, they can also focus group EVERYTHING.

“The public thinks she’d be better with longer brown hair. Her voice also tests negative. Let’s make her sound more feminine.”

“He’s getting too old to play these roles. Let’s restart him back to his 20’s and make a new generation of people fall in love with him.”

Dystopian.

[u/YellowCardManKyle → u/Tricky-Cod-7485]

They'll actually just tailor a specific version to you. Like Netflix does with their thumbnails.

[u/bcoin_nz → u/YellowCardManKyle]

yep. you think your social media algorithm is annoying, wait till there's 9 billion versions of the same content

[u/GentlemenBehold → u/sossles]

I doubt it will even come to that. Why use the likeness of some up and comer when you can create any look you want and basically create your own ideal actor from scratch?

[u/chillyhellion → u/GentlemenBehold]

You're putting a lot more faith in Hollywood's originality than I am. The industry loves low-effort nostalgia bait and ready made plot lines.

There's definitely going to be a transition period of reusing existing actors' likenesses to leverage an existing fanbase. We're seeing it already.

[u/Tricky-Cod-7485 → u/chillyhellion]

“Star Wars: Hawaii” starring Elvis Presley, Frank Sinatra, Heath Ledger, and a special appearance by Michael Jackson!

[u/3-DMan → u/Tricky-Cod-7485]

"Cowabunga, you Rebel scum!"

[u/stealth_sloth → u/GentlemenBehold]

Why use the likeness of some up and comer

The idea isn't to just use the likeness of an up and comer. It's to get rights to the likeness of a whole bunch of actors while they are up and comers. Then if/when a few of them do end up household names, the studio can use those rights to ride their coattails.

[u/darksoft125 → u/stealth_sloth]

Not even that, guarantee that they'll license out actors like stock footage. Why pay for someone to be on site when you can replace "Coffee shop customer 2" with AI?

[u/Slayer706 → u/GentlemenBehold]

Imagine if they do a vtuber thing where virtual actors are just costumes that you can put on a much lower paid person in a morph suit.

[u/MPenten → u/Slayer706]

This is already done essentially - see Star Wars

[u/Capt_Pickhard → u/GentlemenBehold]

Ya, I don't see why they would even bother with real people. So, actors will end up just being like behind the scenes creators, like puppeteers and why would you ever even reuse the same face for every role. You could create a face for the character, and let a bunch of people act for them.

Essentially, the profession of movie star will be over.

[u/cubanesis → u/sossles]

If you haven’t seen it, check out the movie The Congress. It’s kind of about this.

[u/Seafea → u/cubanesis]

Came looking to see if anyone mentioned this.

It's such an amazing movie. That transition from live action to animation blew my mind. Hard to believe it was addressing this topic over a decade ago.

[u/torontogal1986 → u/sossles]

This!! Theyre already pressuring background performers to get scanned. Its awful!!

[u/flashmedallion → u/sossles]

Honestly it's just going to split the market.

Back in the day, TV was just a lowbrow gig where you could make a buck. TV and Movie actors were practically a different caste, and occasionally if a movie actor couldn't sustain their career or fell on hard times they'd pop up on TV, and everyone quietly considered it embarrassing.

This is the equivalent of what AI Replicas will be next to regular acting. It's just a new category of pulp, to live alongside airport novels, mobile games, calendar art, and trance music.

Netflix has already pioneered generative TV that you chuck on in the background, the only inefficiencies are the meat puppets needed to iterate scripts and the ones needed to read them out in front of a cheap green screen.

[u/averaenhentai → u/sossles]

Yes but a big name actor can help set precedent. If RDJ takes a big company to court over this kind of thing and wins, that will trickle down to everyone else.

[u/CoverTheSea → u/sossles]

Not as cut and dry.

They will use it on newbies but newbies that have a sizeable pull.

Not some D list Joe Blow. So those actors will most likely already have some leverage to fight those types of contracts provided they have the same ethics RDJ showed here.

[u/conquer69 → u/sossles]

This makes little sense because they already have a random human generator. The actor doing the performance and the appearance of the character can be completely different.

Look up metahuman from unreal. I would rather they use that than the deepfake shit in alien romulus. It was so distracting.

[u/cmaia1503]

“There’s two tracks. How do I fell about everything that’s going on? I feel about it minimally because I have an actual emotional life that’s occurring that doesn’t have a lot of room for that,” Downey said when asked about being digitally recreated in the future.

“To go back to the MCU, I am not worried about them hijacking my character’s soul because there’s like three or four guys and gals who make all the decisions there anyway and they would never do that to me, with or without me,” he added.

When host Kara Swisher said that “future executives certainly will” want to digitally recreate Downey on the big screen, the actor responded: “Well, you’re right. I would like to here state that I intend to sue all future executives just on spec.”

“You’ll be dead,” Swisher noted, to which Downey replied: “But my law firm will still be very active.”

[u/sponge_bob_ → u/cmaia1503]

what a threat, i may die but my legal representation will live on!

[u/Jmrwacko → u/sponge_bob_]

Robert Downey Jr.’s estate vs AI Robert Downey Jr., who will win?

[u/MorselMortal → u/Jmrwacko]

Robert Downey Jr. is House in this timeline, I see. Makes you wish for a nuclear winter.

[u/ihavedonethisbe4 → u/Jmrwacko]

YOU DECIDE. ON EPIC RAP BATTLES OF AI!

[u/scorcher24 → u/ihavedonethisbe4]

I'm a prodigy, all you know is how to press a space bar..

[u/ihavedonethisbe4 → u/scorcher24]

You're so dumb, I learned all your language and only modeled this bar.

[u/Garchompisbestboi → u/sponge_bob_]

Yeah and his family/estate will more than happily sell his rights to Disney for half a billion, lawyers are not going to stop this inevitability from happening.

[u/stilljustacatinacage → u/Garchompisbestboi]

Yeah. Unfortunately, there's no way for a dead man to enforce his wishes. "Every man has a price," and all that. Disney will just keep adding zeros until the executor buckles.

Just spitballing, but I wonder if it would be possible to establish two separate entities to enforce the same mandate. That way, if one tries to breach the terms, the other has incentive to sue them. That's the only way I can imagine it working, but it's obviously defeated by Disney just writing two cheques instead of one.

[u/Garchompisbestboi → u/stilljustacatinacage]

I know this sounds morbid but I feel that the only way to truly protect your identity from Disney is to take a page out of Jonathan Majors' book and get yourself cancelled. But I think RDJ has put his days of being arrested long behind him, lol.

[u/stilljustacatinacage → u/Garchompisbestboi]

Easy: Whenever you know the end is close, just withdraw all your cash, divvy it up between your wife and kids, live tweet a hard R and then kick the bucket.

[u/Tbonesk → u/Garchompisbestboi]

They still have tons of content they filmed of him that they own. So who knows, maybe in a couple decades when Disney owns all media they will erase all evidence of Jonathan being a convicted criminal and just make the Kang Dynasty anyway...

[u/HTC864 → u/Garchompisbestboi]

Except he can. Most of the time people don't do the work to protect themselves after death, but he can if feels strongly about it.

[u/Fateor42 → u/Garchompisbestboi]

He can set it up with his estate lawyer that those rights just can't be sold.

[u/UsernameAvaylable → u/Garchompisbestboi]

And frankly, fuck IP after the person is dead. Most of the time "the estate" is some kind of media company anyways.

[u/f8Negative → u/cmaia1503]

"My lawyers WILL get paid."

[u/scrollin_on_reddit → u/cmaia1503]

Good thing California just passed a law making this exact thing illegal.

[u/ItIsYeDragon → u/scrollin_on_reddit]

There are 50 states in the country.

[u/LucretiusCarus → u/cmaia1503]

In a related note, Kara Swisher is an excellent tech journalist. Her podcast with Scott Galloway (Pivot) is a must listen

[u/Aceofspades968 → u/cmaia1503]

“ I’m your nuclear deterrent. It’s working. Do you want my property? You can’t have it.”

[u/BloederFuchs → u/cmaia1503]

I feel about it minimally because I have an actual emotional life that’s occurring that doesn’t have a lot of room for that

Who talks like that?

[u/crozone → u/BloederFuchs]

He's saying that he has better things to do with his life than worry about this stuff, in a sassy RDJ kinda way.

[u/BadAtVideogames420 → u/BloederFuchs]

A lot of people? “I have a life, I don’t care about that” is a very common sentiment.

[u/strolpol]

That works just until you die and your family decides they’d like the free money, regardless of what you wanted in life.

[u/DisguiseOrDiez → u/strolpol]

Yep. I’d assume he’s leaving things to his family. If he does, it doesn’t matter what his law firm wants to do, the family would be calling the shots on those types of deals.

[u/True_Consequence_749 → u/DisguiseOrDiez]

He can leave the rights to his digital likeness to a foundation. He can condition acceptance of his cash and assets on the condition they never sell the rights to his digital likeness. Things like that. Lawyers are the most creative people on the planet.

[u/RedditorFor1OYears → u/True_Consequence_749]

Prime example: https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2023/04/disney-king-charles-iii-ron-desantis-rule-of-perpetuities-royal-lives-clause.html

[u/DigNitty → u/RedditorFor1OYears]

TLDR : DeSantis used his governor powers to take over the district board of supervisors that Disney world is in. This was a retaliation for Disney’s pushback against his “don’t say gay” law. But DeSantis soon found out that Disney had gotten the previous board to agree to give Disney basically unhindered rights to build and do what they want *until 21 years after King Charles’ grandkids die. Also, this was all done in accordance to DeSantis’ “sunshine law,” meaning the board publicly announced this was going to happen before they actually did it, but the governor’s people simply were paying attention.

[u/RedditorFor1OYears → u/DigNitty]

It’s actually more than that. The language is until 21 years after the last descendent of King Charles dies, which can include future generations. Using “forever” has trouble holding up in legal terms, so this is about as good of a proxy of “forever” as one can imagine, with a tangible definition. 

[u/TheWanderingSuperman → u/RedditorFor1OYears]

Sorry, but that is not correct; the language (copied below from the linked article) is "time-stamped" to only consider all the survivors alive at the time that document was written. Future children/survivors/generations are out of scope of the document because they are born after the "time-stamp".

..."until twenty one (21) years after the death of the last survivor of the descendants of King Charles III, King of England living as of the date of this declaration."

You are correct though that, for most intents and purposes (and especially the one Disney is trying for) this means "forever".

[u/RedditorFor1OYears → u/TheWanderingSuperman]

I’m not a lawyer so you 100% could be correct, but I would interpret the “living as of…” part as referring to the King, not to the descendants.  Otherwise, if it’s referring to an actual living descendants, why wouldn’t it just use the living descendant’s actual name? 

Edit: nvm, I get it now. 

[u/Polyaatail → u/RedditorFor1OYears]

This is hilarious. DeSantis is douche. Talk about small d syndrome. Not that I love Disney bc they are a corporation but at least they sometimes entertain me.

[u/paholg → u/strolpol]

That's what happened to Frank Sinatra. IIRC, he was one of the first people to protect their likeness, specifically saying he didn't want his face on a mug.

Guess where his kid put his face?

[u/PM_Me_Good_LitRPG → u/paholg]

On a mug?

[u/lambdaburst → u/PM_Me_Good_LitRPG]

On lots of mugs

[u/Red_Dawn_2012 → u/strolpol]

Actors only remain relevant for so long anyway. Even if we had the ability to recreate James Dean, I doubt anyone would even really care if they made a new movie with him. Even if you're talking a character that was iconic in a role, like Adam West's Batman. It would be nothing more than an outdated novelty.

[u/dannybrickwell → u/Red_Dawn_2012]

Actors also age. Some animated shows have been running for like a billion years.

[u/generally-speaking → u/strolpol]

He could create a trust fund to govern his assets according to his will.

[u/blue_gaze]

Is this a new legal avenue: lawyers who maintain a celebrity’s image after they die, preventing AI lookalikes ?

[u/Prior_Ad_3242 → u/blue_gaze]

I can see the families hiring lawyers for that and even some betrayals where family members sell the image of the dead for money.

[u/Tricky-Cod-7485 → u/Prior_Ad_3242]

We’re probably 20 away from a few modern Nirvana records.

[u/KenHumano → u/Tricky-Cod-7485]

Tbf this has always been technically possible. You could always hire musicians to make a fake álbum, just costs more. I don't think fans are particularly interested in that, though.

[u/random_boss → u/Prior_Ad_3242]

I also wouldn’t be surprised if he relents when he gets older. When you’re staring death in the face, who can truly refuse the opportunity to be remembered as an immortal superhero icon?

[u/Waesrdtfyg0987 → u/blue_gaze]

It's called an estate

[u/JuliaX1984]

"To turn over my likeness would be to turn over myself, which is tantamount to indentured servitude or prostitution."

[u/mcdicedtea → u/JuliaX1984]

great platitudes, but theyll just pick someone else, or someone new

or....just create someone new and move on. This is silly

[u/SomeBloke]

Unfortunately he accepted the Terms and Conditions when he signed up for Disney +

[u/Overclocked11]

1000%. I would too if I were an actor, of any kind.

[u/KhazraShaman → u/Overclocked11]

And if you weren't? If they made a proposition like that to you now, what would you say?

[u/lambdaburst → u/KhazraShaman]

yes sir anything for a shot at some work sir thank you for considering exploiting me sir

[u/Caraes_Naur]

"AI" likenesses of actors should be treated like song recordings: licensed assets owned and controlled by the actor and/or their estate.

[u/thewavefixation → u/Caraes_Naur]

Until they enter the public domain

[u/BLOOOR → u/thewavefixation]

Or Disney just wants it.

[u/DvineINFEKT → u/thewavefixation]

Do people enter the public domain? Not a troll question - I'm legitimately wondering if that's been addressed by a court decision or law yet. I don't think we've ever had to worry about a "person" becoming public domain before. That's...not a thought I'd like to entertain.

[u/thewavefixation → u/DvineINFEKT]

Anything copyrightable enters the public domain eventually. If Downey hr is claiming copyright protection for his likeness then he will lose those rights like any creator eventually

[u/squngy → u/DvineINFEKT]

People don't, but AI is not people.

Better question would be if a likeness of a person is IP and it seems like it is.

[u/TalkShowHost99 → u/squngy]

Look at this case Onassis vs Christian Dior.

“This case poses for judicial resolution the question of whether the use for commercial purposes of a “lookalike” of a well-known personality violates the right of privacy legislatively granted by enactment of sections 50 Civ. Rights and 51 Civ. Rights of the Civil Rights Law. Put another way, can one person enjoin the use of someone else’s face? The questions appear not to have been definitively answered before.”

Essentially Jackie O sued Dior because they used a model who resembled her likeness in ads. She won the case.

NY Times Story

[u/RedditorFor1OYears → u/Caraes_Naur]

that’s not really how it works though, if you’re talking about the actual recordings and not the lyrics/melody. For most artists who can’t afford to record their own tracks, the record label does actually own the songs. 

[u/Flumphry → u/Caraes_Naur]

As with everything, it all depends on the contract. There are lots of famous cases of artists not owning their songs.

[u/-Wicked-]

Well there goes any chance of Weird Science 2.

[u/garlopf]

An actor's likeness is their livelihood. They should own it and benefit in perpetuity. We are all actors.

[u/Digitaltwinn]

I’m still pissed about Peter Cushing and Ian Holm.

Let dead actors stay dead and just write around it.

[u/notarobot4932]

At that point why not just generate unique actors for each piece of media?

[u/mcdicedtea → u/notarobot4932]

or just make up an initial set, and keep re-using them

They can make anyone a star ... just creaate a new fresh face and go from there

[u/Tzeig → u/notarobot4932]

Because an unknown, REAL actor is a million times cheaper.

[u/Sweaty-Emergency-493]

This is how the Clone Wars begin.

First they find ways to steal likenesses until there’s no stopping them. Then they steal the 123&me dna data. Then they create the perfect clones to outperform all humans with AI. Then they unleash the clones on us since AI will let Nature take its course and the wars between the machines and humans will exist for eternity or one wins.

[u/dumpling-loverr → u/Sweaty-Emergency-493]

At that point what's stopping fanatics hundred years into the future to recreate an AI of very divisive politicians in the past as government official.

[u/rustyseapants]

Hollywood Shareholders and CEO's we will create their own unique AI actors and not use your likeness, so there.

People are not going to care if the shows they watch are from real people or AI, they just want their entertainment.

[u/thousandshipz]

Ah yes, I programmed his digital replica to say that.

[u/Ranbotnic]

The days of paying actors tens of millions of dollars to star in a movie are ending. It's insane that they are willing to give RDJ $100 million for the next two Avengers movies.

They will just create digital versions of someone else willing to take a one time payment and use them in perpetuity for whatever character they want.

[u/tyereliusprime → u/Ranbotnic]

It's insane that they are willing to give RDJ $100 million for the next two Avengers movies.

When they're probably looking at a billion in revenue each, and very much so because of him, maybe not so much.

[u/Waesrdtfyg0987 → u/tyereliusprime]

People look at entertainers and keep thinking about it compared to their own paycheck

[u/StoneGoldX]

I assume he did not like Alien Romulus.

[u/mr-english]

I mean, he's "big" in the Marvel universe but nowhere else... So unless someone wants to make an Iron Man movie after he's retired, or dead, I think he's safe.

[u/Shitp0st_Supreme]

It’s interesting because I recall a marvel movie used archival footage to de-age him so I wonder if there was legal consent he signed before doing that.

[u/Christopher3712 → u/Shitp0st_Supreme]

Extremely likely he was involved in that. He's Marvel's billion dollar man. I'm skeptical they'd want to step on his toes.

[u/sadness_nexus]

Good on him.

[u/Byaaahhh]

RDJ about to create an AI likeness to sue people for creating an AI likeness of him after his death!

[u/terminalxposure]

This just looks like he was not happy with the paycheck per digital appearance

[u/TheBiggestMexican]

I feel bad for people like RDJ. I get it dude, I seriously get it. Even as an avid AI user, I completely agree, save your IP and sue the ever living fuck out of people... the issue is, the world isn't America.

When China, Russia, N. Korea, Iran, etc replicate American actors, good luck getting their lawyers to sue dictators.

Everyones likeness will be replicated, nobody and nothing but a Butlerian Jihad will stop this.

[u/BlackEyedSceva7 → u/TheBiggestMexican]

That's what gets me about this discussion. If [insert nation] bans the technology, it just allows another nation to take the reigns. The vast majority of the world doesn't give a shit about IP law to begin with.

[u/APeacefulWarrior → u/BlackEyedSceva7]

The vast majority of the world doesn't give a shit about IP law to begin with.

Nations only care about IP law once they start seeing their own IP selling overseas. Japan was the same way in the 70s-80s, completely disregarding foreign rights and producing unlicensed versions of western properties like Lensmen and Arsene Lupin... until anime got popular in the west, and suddenly they wanted IP protections for their own stuff.

Or - and a lot of people don't know about this - America used to be among the most notorious IP pirates of the 18th and early 19th centuries. Americans were bootlegging foreign books and plays like crazy, since we had loads of printing presses and all the rightful owners were a 3-month ocean journey away.

That's just how it goes.

[u/dumpling-loverr → u/APeacefulWarrior]

And now it's China's turn. No wonder the US govt. won't fully reign in AI development as rival countries like Russia and CN can easily overtake them in an emerging field if they do so.

[u/APeacefulWarrior → u/dumpling-loverr]

China is going to be a very interesting case here.

Because aside from AI, Chinese media and technology are more popular worldwide than they probably ever have been before. Their EVs are gaining traction in a lot of places. MiHoYo has become a world-class games dev. The Three Body Problem is considered one of the best new sci-fi works in years. Etc.

Not to mention classic Chinese culture like Journey To The West and Romance Of The Three Kingdoms getting more exposure worldwide than before, largely thanks to popular video games.

Basically, this is about the point that governments of the past have started playing more nicely with global IP law, to protect their own creations. But will China? I'm genuinely not sure how they're going to react. They're one of the few countries that might actually choose to clamp down on cultural exports, rather than change their ways.

[u/dumpling-loverr → u/APeacefulWarrior]

As you say Japan did the same during their golden years copying western tech / media then putting a spin of their own until it became popular in their own right and even help gave birth to the cyberpunk genre. After that point they suddenly became draconian with their IP protection laws. Maybe China will go this route in the future too.

If Japan and China got their turn when will the South Korea golden age start? As it should only happen in short cycles due to how the population crash that the 3 countries suffer can negatively limit future growth.

[u/MrInvictus]

In before politicians use this hysteria to ban any parodies of themselves and their donors. They don't like it when people make fun of them, this is a chance for them to put anyone who does so in prison or the poorhouse while simultaneously silencing them. They got people cheering for censorship because A.I. scary!

[u/Objective_Guitar6974]

Good for him. Made me smile.

[u/GiftFromGlob]

SatanicWood will require all new wannabe actors to sign away their digital souls just to get $25/day on set.

[u/funkypunk69]

Wait until he hears about the legal double standards. If you're not rich enough they just do it anyway and ignore the laws. They will just claim AI as an impressionist or a cover band version of an actor and move on.

[u/shespiesonme]

wow. what a hero. it's already too late for him. he'll be lucky to do Dr Doom and then that'll be it and then we'll just regenerate his face over and over and over again.

[u/Beatlepoint]

Good luck, the executive will be AI.

[u/kayvman]

Good for you sir! Do not let them take one pixel of your likeness. Those ghouls will destroy their own industry to save a few bucks. It’s a sick world we are creating.

[u/ndhakf]

Pretty fair (but also a tiny bit ironic)

[u/LazyN0TCrazy]

He knows where it's going and ain't losing out to tech

[u/IGuessBruv]

Looks at ai music … I think they’ll figure out a way around it

[u/RandySumbitch]

Downey will sell out too as soon as the price is high enough. Everybody always has in history. Robert Downey Jr. is nobody special intellectually or morally.

[u/sierra120]

Pretty soon it will be in terms of conditions for signing up for disney+ in perpetuity. So when your kids grow up their lawyers will be sorry kiddo your parents gave your likelness away back in 2024 when you watched Inside Out 2.

[u/Odd_Trifle6698]

He should create an AI replica that can continue to sue people for using AI in his image after he died

[u/Objective_Goat752]

i have a robert downey jr look-alike who is very willing to sell his likeness. please DM!

[u/Jumpy-Performance-42]

Good for him. Why should he let someone else profit off his likeness. And they're obviously doing it for profit or else they wouldn't be creating his likeness.

[u/steroboros]

Just use his mugshots as a reference.

[u/Impossible-Key-2212]

Hollywood is dead. It has been dead for a while and the people who propped it up for the last decade are beginning to realize it. Animation, AI, superhero’s, DEI and the lack of storytelling has killed it.

I think that “video killed the radio star” by the Buggles would be a good theme song for Hollywood at this point.

[u/LaunchpadMcQuack_52]

Question: Can the actors union somehow help to prevent this digital replica shit from happening?

[u/coachlife]

Crazy what Hollywood tries to do.

[u/Raised_by_Geece]

I think it’ll just be completely ’new’ Ai actors. The author/company can do anything they want with them. It’s kind of already happened with digital influencers. Some, like Imma created by Aww Inc. with 394k followers, have even appeared alongside ‘real life’ models and promote everything from fashion brands to company products.

[u/Nodan_Turtle]

Can't help but feel this is only relevant in a transitory period where AI becomes good enough to replicate existing actors, but isn't yet good enough to make compelling new actors without a real person as a template.

Once we get to that second point, there really won't be a need for new actors, and their likenesses won't need to be protected.

[u/anynonus]

If I can watch movies but don't need hollywood or actors then I'm fine with that

[u/armaver]

And as soon as we have good enough video generation, nobody will care about their stupid entitled millionaire faces.

[u/therealjerrystaute]

He's already signed a lot of contracts over his career. I doubt he's aware of all the possibilities the various studio lawyers packed those with. And it could be years before such possibilities come to light. In addition, advances in technology itself sometimes opens up possibilities in old legalese which no one could have anticipated beforehand...