What Should The Limits Of AI Use Be In TV Production?

The development of new technology has repeatedly been a game changer in TV and film production. However, the question that may be asked in every case is where the limits lie and when it might become counter-productive. AI is now under this microscope.

Many innovations have had an undoubtedly significant impact on film and TV production, greatly improving the viewer experience:

• Colour TV

• Recorded TV, so viewers do not have to watch everything live

• Multiple camera angles instead of just one

• Slow motion replays, especially in sport coverage

• High definition TV

All of these elements drop into the category of obvious improvement. But not every innovation has proved universally popular or entirely effective.

Which Technologies Have Not Always Worked In Film And TV?

For example, the idea of 3D TV and cinema never really captured the imagination. On occasions, cinema audiences have been provided with 3D glasses to view a film, such as Jaws 3D (“a new dimension in terror”, said the trailer) or Avatar, with mixed receptions.

In the latter case, Avatar and its sequels may be better remembered for their use of CGI, which is itself a bone of contention. 

Indeed, its story may offer some lessons now that we are in an age where the role of AI in production has become the latest technology to be hotly debated.

From its early years in the 1990s, when it was seen as groundbreaking in films such as Titanic (although the standard would be seen as primitive today), CGI played a growing role in special effects, often reaching a very high standard of realism.

However, there are potential limitations to its use. One might be subjective, where the special effects are, in the opinion of some, used to cover up shortcomings elsewhere, such as a lack of a good plot or character depth.

Does The Excessive Use Of CGI Offer Lessons For AI In TV And Film?

However, a worse problem has emerged in recent years. By common consent, the quality of CGI has declined. While the comparative standard of the effects in Titanic and other early films may be excused by the technology of the day, another reason has caused this issue.

A common claim is that film production has seen CGI as a means of mass-producing films, with the result that production deadlines are too tight and rushed, with the quality suffering as a result.

This issue may sound rather similar to a common complaint about how AI is used. The standard of graphics may be more realistic than early AI, but the overall standard of output is often not, leading to the common use of the pejorative term ‘AI Slop’.

As with CGI, the issue is whether the use of this technology is appropriate, being used to supplement and enhance creative work that offers a good plot, characters with depth and original ideas, or if the result is the film and TV production equivalent of bland fast food.

Why Has A Doctor Who Writer Warned Against OverUse Of AI?

Among those entering the debate recently has been Russell T Davies, the scriptwriter whose work led the revival of Doctor Who from 2005 and whose previous works included Queer as Folk, a drama about Manchester’s LGBT community.

Speaking to BBC Radio 4, Davies was highly critical of recent comments by the new BBC director-general Matt Brittin, who told a Royal Society TV conference that he had been sent a “pretty good” unofficial AI episode of Doctor Who.

Highlighting the unease in the creative sector over the potential impact of AI-generated TV, Davies said of Mr Brittin’s comments: “That’s a clumsy thing to say in an industry where he’s got writers and artists and it specifically affects people, they’re the first to take the blow.”

The director-general had already acknowledged the criticism he had received, stating that his point had been to highlight just what AI was capable of doing and how fast the change was.

However, he emphasised: “I want to be really clear: Humans are leading and I believe in human creativity, enhanced by whatever tools.”

For Russell Davies, the importance of human stories and genuine creativity is paramount, without which there will be a lack of depth and personality, ultimately leading to poor quality.

He highlighted “shocking” cases of people using AI prompts to write a first draft, posing the question: “what are you there to do?”

This was in contrast with his own reflections on what brings about inspiration, including listening to recordings of the phone-in on the TV show This Morning, uncovering the dilemmas and difficult situations sometimes facing people in real life.

Can Doctor Who Find The Right Balance Of Creativity And Technology?

Script quality and the use of special effects were two common issues that aroused much comment in Doctor Who, with the first of these being a major bugbear for fans unhappy with Chris Chibnall, who replaced Davies as the show’s main writer from 2018 to 2021.

However, away from quality questions and claims that the show had become too ‘woke’, the modern iteration of Doctor Who had come a long way in its use of special effects, compared with the wobbly sets and the use of quarries as alien planets.

Indeed, Davies reflected in his interview that the explosions and use of prosthetics made him “dread” going on set in the modern show.

This does not mean AI is the way forward, with Davies stating that Doctor Who will be back (although he will not be the writer, having ended a second stint that began in 2023).

How the special effects will work, as well as what sort of themes the show will take, remain to be seen. 

For all the claims that the show has lost its way (which falling viewer figures would suggest), a fresh revamp of Doctor Who might be just as likely to fail if it relies too much on AI production. 

As with CGI, the use of AI offers great opportunities to create superb special effects and offer a compelling spectacle for viewers.

However, it also comes with the danger that if it is used poorly, the technology could end up with a bad reputation, a situation that is in clear danger of happening to CGI.

Used to excess, AI might save money by dispensing with professional writers and costume designers, but the results of reducing human creativity may be an awful lot more slop. Knowing the limitations of AI may be as important in TV and film as in any other field.