The point of AI films is not AI but film: Bona Film Group's "Sanxingdui: Future Past" flops at the box office

Article body EM_StockImg_Start

EM_StockImg_End

On October 23, "Sanxingdui: Future Past," billed as "China's first AI full-process theatrical feature film to obtain a public screening license," landed in theaters nationwide. Before its release, the film first gained popularity in the capital market, and the stock price of its producer, Bona Film Group, had previously hit the daily limit up three times. But after its release suffered a "double kill" in word-of-mouth and box office, Bona Film Group's stock price took a sharp turn downward and hit the daily limit down during intraday trading on the 26th.

Maoyan Professional Edition shows that the film had nearly 11,000 screenings on its first day and more than 13,000 screenings the next day, yet its first-day box office was only 300,000 yuan, a huge gap between screenings and output. In its first three days of release, cumulative box office was only 1.16 million yuan; on October 25, the attendance rate was as low as 1.1%, with only 1.1 viewers per screening on average.

The poor box office of "Sanxingdui: Future Past" also exposed the inherent shortcomings of using AI in filmmaking today. For example, character portrayal is amplified by the reuse of AI technology; to ensure no continuity errors over 100 minutes, the creators had to "weld" the characters into a single look, and the AI characters are relatively uniform in appearance, movement and dialogue, lacking variation and individuality, so they have been questioned for lacking a "sense of a living person." For another example, AI's success in comic dramas and micro-short dramas cannot simply be replicated in feature-length films. Comic dramas and micro-short dramas run in minutes, are very cheap or even free, and audiences have a high tolerance for visual flaws; theatrical feature films cost more, and audiences naturally demand higher quality and have lower tolerance.

Filmmaking has always been one of the industries most active in adopting advanced technology. From the motion capture of "The Lord of the Rings" to the virtual production of "Avatar" and the ubiquitous digital visual effects, every leap in technology has driven the film industry forward. Embracing AI itself is not a problem; it is an optional direction for industry upgrading. But the fundamental purpose of adopting the most advanced technology is to improve the quality of works, not to show off technology for its own sake.

Today almost every industry is actively embracing AI. In the film and television industry alone, there are claims such as "the first AI short drama," "the first AI comic drama," "the first AI documentary" and "the first AI satellite TV drama." It is understandable that companies pursue the "first" in technology application, but companies should not be satisfied merely with being "first"; they should pursue the first substantive breakthrough in the quality of works and products brought by technology.

Looking back at the commercial history of technology, a technology is remembered not necessarily because it is extraordinarily advanced, but because of how it makes products better.

Motion capture and performance capture technology emerged in the 1990s. It was written into film history because it gave virtual characters such as Caesar in "Rise of the Planet of the Apes" performances as delicate as those of real people, truly bringing them "to life." VAR (video assistant referee) was introduced to sports events not to show off the power of camera technology and data processing, but to make refereeing more accurate and safeguard the fairness of competitions. These technologies all land on the points users care about most: viewers want good stories and good visual effects, and fans want fairness. Only by serving real needs can it count as a substantive breakthrough, as a meaningful "first."

Regarding new technology, the film industry should avoid several misunderstandings.

Second, it should not demand too much that new technology achieve "cost reduction"; cost reduction is only part of filmmaking work, and not the most important part. Film's foundation is story and character, and excessive pursuit of cost reduction will ultimately mean picking up sesame seeds and losing the watermelon.

Third, the application of technology should raise rather than lower quality, and must not create a cycle in which bad money drives out good. To cope with a shortage of excellent works, theaters have put many re-release versions, live sports broadcasts and even low-quality works such as "Niu Lai" on the big screen, hoping to "trial and error" with more works and win high revenue, but audiences' patience is limited, and low-quality works will overdraft the industry's credibility. After repeated disappointments, audiences will become more averse to cinemas, and by then the cost of trial and error will be borne by the entire industry.

Returning to the root of the issue, no matter how technology evolves, it must not deviate from the fundamental needs of customers and those it serves. Technology is ultimately only a means; user value is the end. We should still be tolerant of explorers like "Sanxingdui: Future Past," but the entire industry needs to understand: the point of AI films is not AI, but film, and one must not pursue the trivial at the expense of the essential.

(Source: National Business Daily) Article middle embedded advertisement