大象传媒

is an award-winning screenwriter and A.I. coder. He recently completed the 大象传媒 Writers' development programme Voices 2024 and has spoken on A.I. at the London Screenwriters鈥� Festival, Scribe Lounge Labs and the Royal Institution.

We asked him for some thoughts about the evolving area of A.I. and its potential impact on screenwriting and the production of scripted entertainment generally.

This post is part of our Writing Today strand where we ask guest bloggers to write about the issues that are affecting the industry from their point of view. The views expressed in the blog post should not be taken as representing the views of the 大象传媒.

The world is changing. You can sense it everywhere - like , where she says, 鈥淚 feel it in the water. I feel it in the earth. I smell it in the air.鈥� This quote came to mind as I sat down to write about Artificial Intelligence (A.I.) and creative writing (at the request of those lovely people from 大象传媒 Voices). But each time I started, my thoughts sparked with endless possibilities, setting off a chain reaction of ideas. I was finding it hard to pin myself down to a single thread (a mixed metaphor that an A.I. would never write).

So rather than a structured, five-act exploration of the topic, I鈥檓 going to offer a collection of loosely connected musings on A.I. and writing: 11 reflections on modern A.I. Eleven years ago (2013), a cluster of vital A.I. innovations came about at Google, DeepMind and in academia. 2013 is seen as an A.I. 鈥渃oming of age鈥� by some, and partly to celebrate those events, 11 is the number I have chosen.

I鈥檓 not a Silicon Valley insider, but I wear an unusual combination of hats: screenwriter (I was part of 大象传媒 Voices 2024), A.I. coder (for commercial clients), and part-time Senior Research Fellow in A.I. So hopefully, these thoughts will be of some use to others.

1. Not another think-piece on A.I. and Writing! Why? WHY?

Because, dear reader, we鈥檙e at a crossroads. Just as stood before the first atomic explosion in the New Mexico desert, wondering what he鈥檇 unleashed, Tom B. Brown and his team (who introduced in May 2020) must have felt a similar flicker of uncertainty. They had an inkling something huge was about to follow, but couldn鈥檛 fully foresee society's response. Could Oppenheimer have predicted the Cold War? Or that the race to the Moon would be fuelled, in part, by nuclear research? Could he have known that after two world wars within 20 years, the threat of nuclear war would keep another global conflict at bay for at least 80 years? No, society鈥檚 too unpredictable to map the full impact of revolutionary inventions.

And so, here we are 鈥� facing the rise of GPT-3鈥檚 successors, evolving faster than we can keep up with. Despite the assurances from seasoned writers dismissing these 鈥減lagiarism machines,鈥� there鈥檚 a gnawing feeling that something bigger is brewing. But what is it, really?

2. Nobody knows anything.

Here鈥檚 the good news: if you鈥檙e confused and uncertain you鈥檙e not alone. I work with A.I. every day. Mornings are for screenwriting, and afternoons are spent working on natural language processing A.I.s. Part of my early morning routine includes reading 10 pages of a screenplay I鈥檝e never seen before, to hone my craft as a writer. I also make time for a couple of pages from A.I. textbooks. I have multiple A.I. qualifications. I鈥檝e written screenplays and a play about the implications of AI. I鈥檝e spoken at events about AI and screenwriting. I鈥檝e spent months experimenting with code that generates stories and screenplays using various methodologies (none of which I actually apply to my own screenwriting, by the way). But the truth is, I am somewhat confused and uncertain about what is coming.

Most people are. Only when it works will we recognise what鈥檚 been building all along. When we see the first genuinely compelling stories written by AI, we鈥檒l think, 鈥淲ell, of course.鈥� AI is such a complex technology that it鈥檚 only in witnessing its results that we grasp what it鈥檚 truly capable of.

As I write this, OpenAI鈥檚 has just been released. It combines the impressive 鈥渉umanlike鈥� abilities of the earlier ChatGPT with enhanced logical processing. It doesn鈥檛 just provide answers; it thinks through problems step by step. The moment I saw this, I thought, 鈥淥h wow, this is going to change everything.鈥� It鈥檚 performing at a PhD level and has an IQ of 120 (genius level for a human). The earlier ChatGPT operated at around 80-90 IQ. But I didn鈥檛 try to predict the long-term impact. Time will tell.

3. Why didn鈥檛 the development executives go on strike?

We鈥檝e all seen the recent , along with the , both spurred by concerns including A.I. taking jobs. But development executives? They seem unconcerned for their jobs, as if A.I. isn鈥檛 creeping into their domain.

Many assume generative A.I. will disrupt screenwriting by crafting scripts from scratch. But that might not be the smartest approach. A more effective use could be enhancing what鈥檚 already written, having A.I. make nuanced revisions.

Imagine an A.I. that鈥檚 trained to think like a development executive. If it can mimic that role, who knows鈥攎aybe the will be next in line to strike. The real challenge is teaching A.I. to experience a screenplay like a person. Sure, you can upload your script to GPT-4o and get feedback. It鈥檒l give you notes. But take them seriously only if you鈥檙e in your first year of writing.

The future lies in an A.I. agent that models humans and emotion, one that feels its way through a script, page by page. Experiencing the cumulative emotional effect and identifying with the characters. This is the real game-changer. (I鈥檝e already begun experimenting with it.) Such an A.I. could easily outshine the ones focused on writing screenplays from scratch.

One producer mentioned to me that thousands of readers are already being replaced. So, if you鈥檙e considering becoming a reader, it might be worth taking a closer look at where the market鈥檚 heading.

4. Memories are made of this

An A.I. reader has a distinct advantage over a screenwriter 鈥� it can forget recent experiences.

A screenplay is at its most powerful when read for the first time. The initial emotional impact, the surprises in character, story, and plot, simply can鈥檛 be replicated on a second pass.

Crafting a screenplay to deliver that one-time punch is incredibly challenging. It鈥檚 a process that involves numerous drafts, with readers going through the material again and again, dulling that all-important first impression. I鈥檝e often joked that if I could wipe my memory clean before reading each new draft of my screenplay, I鈥檇 probably be rich by now.

5. It鈥檚 not just about the thinking and the words.

As I mentioned, I start each morning by reading 10 pages of a screenplay (or sometimes a play) I haven鈥檛 seen yet. This helps me not only to improve my writing but also to understand what flows well when read. After all, unless I put these scripts into production myself, I need others to engage with them through reading. So I want to get a sense of what works on the page.

There鈥檚 talk going around that some gatekeepers are actually listening to screenplays instead of reading them. With AI voices sounding more natural these days, having a script read to you is no longer the awkward, robotic ordeal it used to be.

Why are they doing this? Well, I listen to audiobooks when I do housework, and screenwriting podcasts when I jog. Whether it鈥檚 an agent heading into Soho on the tube or a producer stuck on the 101 South, listening might just be a major time saver (and turn the 鈥渨eekend read鈥� to the 鈥渨eekend listen鈥�).

Don鈥檛 worry - it鈥檚 not the dominant trend yet. In fact it鈥檚 almost certainly the exception rather than the rule. But the more people listen, the more they鈥檒l care about how your script sounds. If an agent knows that a third of producers are listening to the first 10 pages instead of reading them, it鈥檒l affect how they judge your script. They鈥檒l care about how it listens. That鈥檚 just the reality.

I鈥檝e been experimenting myself. I built a little A.I. app that loads in a screenplay PDF, assigns AI voices to characters and action lines, then mixes the audio with some panning and reverb to create a rough audio drama sketch. , watch out!

6. Should I use generative A.I. when writing?

It鈥檚 just another tool. But - if you do use it - keep that to yourself. I, of course, never use it for professional writing. And if I did, I certainly wouldn鈥檛 admit to it. But I don鈥檛. So there鈥檚 that (or do I? Maybe this whole post is written by A.I. Who鈥檚 to say? I鈥檓 not telling. But it鈥檚 not. And I don鈥檛.)

Hope that clears things up.

One more thing: there鈥檚 no need to feel pressured into experimenting with it. Apparently (I wouldn鈥檛 know), it can be a bit painful to watch it flirt with creativity without quite getting there. Apparently, it takes a bit of practice to make it useful. Even then, it鈥檚 hit or miss (or so I鈥檓 told). But just remember, the people you鈥檙e submitting to? They鈥檙e probably already using it. [Editor's note: We're not!]

7. How can I A.I.-proof myself?

The most important thing you can do is write what truly excites and moves you. Creating an A.I. with the depth of human emotional nuance is still a way off. So for now, as long as you're tapping into something real, you're in a good spot. There's something about genuine emotion that readers can pick up on, even when they can鈥檛 quite explain it. Our brains are wired to recognise those subtle patterns, and in doing so, we connect with the person behind the words.

8. But do people care about what an A.I. writes?

Why would anyone feel invested in something written by an A.I.? When I come across a YouTube video or TikTok that seems like it was generated by A.I., I find myself losing interest faster than I would with content made by a human. There鈥檚 something inherently more engaging about knowing a person put hours - or even days - into creating something. When it feels like there鈥檚 no human effort behind it, we care less because, well, IT didn鈥檛 care in the first place.

But (there鈥檚 always a but), how long will that last? Kids believe their stuffed animals have feelings, and even as adults, we never quite shake that habit (just look at how pet owners talk about their cats). The generation growing up with A.I. might start believing A.I. has feelings too, even if they know it doesn鈥檛 on a rational level. And once that happens, A.I.-created work might start feeling more valuable to them.

9. Will stories lose their grip?

Crafting an emotional story takes time, patience, and a fair bit of slog. As a result, once it鈥檚 locked in, it tends to stay that way. I once made an interactive short film, , where the plot shifted based on a viewer鈥檚 brainwaves, heart rate, muscle tension, and perspiration. But the changes were simple, and the options were limited. It took forever to film because I had to shoot four endings and two middles. And one of those endings? Honestly, it was terrible. Of course, that's the one the machine picked at the premiere. Typical.

Years ago, the 大象传媒鈥檚 R&D invited me to speak about adaptive storytelling, and I said that these stories or films could only work if we could semi-automate the writing process. At the time, I didn鈥檛 see that happening anytime soon. Now, I鈥檓 not so sure. If an AI can write a compelling short film or play, then it can certainly write multiple versions. Those versions could easily be generated using future iterations of AI video generation tools like Sora and Runway.

This opens the door to something much more personal. An AI might analyse your entire social media footprint, your Netflix habits, and your YouTube history, then decide which version of the film to show or generate specifically for you.

By the way, did you hear that Runway just signed a deal with Lionsgate Pictures?

10. Don鈥檛 forget the compute

Speaking of Runway and Sora, OpenAI and similar companies are facing a massive challenge. They鈥檝e built something incredible, but giving people access to these models is insanely expensive. OpenAI is valued at $150 billion. Much of the investment in them, by companies like Microsoft, is required because of the cost of compute. Running these A.I. models 鈥� like the ones behind ChatGPT and Sora - requires a huge amount of processing power, and that doesn't come cheap.

No one鈥檚 quite sure how they鈥檒l sustain this. There鈥檚 even talk of OpenAI鈥檚 latest model costing users hundreds a month just to access it, compared to the current $20 a month. The newest version limits paying users to 20 questions a week because of how costly it is to run.

So, who鈥檚 going to foot the bill for all this compute?

11. Is it entertainment?

When something becomes deeply personal, it can shift from being simple entertainment to something more immersive - like a simulation. Take ElevenLabs, for example, the UK A.I. Voice company. With just 30 seconds of low-quality audio, you can clone a voice and have it say whatever an AI script generates. Want to hear a dead actor recite your poetry? Grab a clip from one of their films, click on the ElevenLabs website and there you go.

But what if you used 30 seconds of your deceased parent鈥檚 voice? Collected their old emails and social media posts, uploaded them to ChatGPT, and asked it to generate text in their style? Then had the AI voice recite it to you. Is that still entertainment?

On a website called Virbo, you can upload a photo, make it talk, and even use voice cloning for the talking. It's not perfect yet, but it's getting closer. Why not upload a picture of an ex and have them tell you how much they miss you? Or sync the ex鈥檚 video model with a chatbot and talk to them about your fake future wedding, using their old messages to create the chat tone? Is that entertainment?

Or imagine, five or ten years from now, one of these platforms creates a short film about you and your late child going for a boat trip. Except, in real life, this was the boat trip during which your toddler drowned. But in the AI-recreated short film version, you save them. You both make it back to shore, holding hands, walking along the beach under the sun. Reality temporarily rewritten for you through the hypnosis of TV and cinema. When does a TV show turn into a simulation? When does entertainment become a drug?