The Last Screenwriter 

HOLLY WIRE: What are you trying to do with The Last Screenwriter? 

NAFZGER: This NOVEL sheds light on the escalating friction between two pivotal guilds in the film and TV sphere: the Writers Guild of America (WGA) and the Screen Actors Guild (SAG). Both factions are currently locking horns with the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers, marking a historical confrontation after sixty years.

At the crux of their contention are the professional habitats of these artisans, their remuneration, and the surging influence of AI in cinema creation.

Zooming in, the NOVEL emphasizes the contentious domain of generative AI. This groundbreaking tech is equipped to autonomously generate content, jeopardizing the traditional roles of actors and writers. The conundrum is crafting a harmonious integration, where artists' creative sovereignty and job stability coexist with the promising capabilities of generative AI. The narrative accentuates the imperative of news narratives grounded in factual rigor rather than ephemeral digital trends.

HOLLY WIRE: What genre does it fall under?

NAFZGER: Well, it's science fiction with a 99.9% certainty of happening someday. The novel is set in 2158. The machines rule Hollywood. They may be overseen by people, but many of the humans are simply lazy and have delegated much to the AI technology.

Now for subgenres? That's probably going to fall to the producer and the director to determine. There are several options. 

• Man vs Technology

• Underdog Cyberpunk Rebellion: Underdogs rebelling in cyberpunk worlds

• Man vs Bureaucracy

• Man vs Artificial Intelligence

In the end, and I don't want to spoil it for you but it might fall into the category of...

 AI News Dataset vs AI Entertainment Dataset 

Now this might be the most interesting 

There is a story inside the story... a nested frame story (a story within a story, multiple interlinked stories, etc.) this would fall under the subgenre of...

Game vs Game

HOLLY WIRE: What is there about AI technology and art in the novel The Last Screenwriter? 

NAFZGER: Generative AI, a marvel of modern technology, is designed to digest colossal data, discern intricate patterns, and craft novel content autonomously. Its prowess has birthed eerily convincing deepfakes, epitomized by the viral visualization of Pope Francis in a chic puffer jacket, birthed through the Midjourney AI image generator. Leading the AI revolution are companies like Midjourney, Stable Diffusion, Meta, and notably, OpenAI with its celebrated image model, Dall-E, and its comprehensive language counterpart, ChatGPT.

Such a backdrop elucidates the entertainment industry's trepidation. AI's advancing prowess poses a profound challenge not merely to technical aspects like visual grading or background extras, but also to the core creative echelons of the showbiz. Guilds like the WGA and SAG are alarmed that foundational roles—such as writers’ aides or walk-on actors—might be the initial casualties, undercutting the runway for novices to cultivate their artistry.

As models like ChatGPT evolve, screenwriters confront the surreal prospect of potentially blending their creativity with algorithmic outputs. This scenario introduces intricate dilemmas about acknowledgment, creative credit, and profit sharing. While the WGA is not inherently anti-AI, they envisage a paradigm where AI might outline scripts, with human writers infusing them with soul. Yet, a significant cohort fears this might alienate writers from pure creation, typecasting them merely as revisers.

BUY YOUR COPY: https://amzn.to/3KBpZLq

FILM MAKERS GET YOUR GRATIS COPY: bit.ly/3ONQjEt

HOLLY WIRE: What does the novel say about AI deplacing actors? 

NAFZGER: One of the most alarming propositions made by major studios is "performance cloning". This concept envisions compensating background actors with a singular fee to capture their likeness, which studios would then possess and utilize indefinitely. Beyond establishing a retrogressive compensation structure, this raises profound ethical dilemmas. The paramount question being: what if one's AI-rendered doppelganger is used in contexts that the original individual would deem inappropriate or objectionable? 

The advent of performance cloning offers several unprecedented opportunities in the cinematic world. For one, it promises significant cost efficiency. Once an actor's essence is digitally captured, there's no need for their physical presence during reshoots or added scenes—their virtual avatar can seamlessly fill the void. Moreover, it allows legendary actors, even those long gone, to grace the screen again, reminiscent of Peter Cushing's posthumous cameo in "Star Wars: Rogue One." Safety concerns during high-risk stunt scenes become obsolete as actors' digital counterparts take the perilous plunge. Additionally, with age no longer a barrier, an actor's digital twin can effortlessly traverse time, portraying them as both younger and older, circumventing the tedious processes of makeup and post-production de-aging techniques. 

Performance cloning, while innovative, beckons a plethora of ethical dilemmas. Foremost is the issue of consent. Should an actor's digital essence be utilized without their direct input or even against their will, it raises unsettling questions about ownership and rights over one's virtual self. Then comes the matter of fair compensation: how should actors be remunerated for roles they didn't physically enact, especially if their digital avatars are repetitively employed across various productions? Moreover, the authenticity of artistry is at stake. A cloned act might strip away the genuine, spur-of-the-moment nuances a real-time performer infuses into a character. And not to be overshadowed is the looming threat of job losses, as the film industry's pivot to cloning could diminish the demand for live actors, especially in subsidiary roles. 

HOLLY WIRE: The Last Screenwriter addresses the SAG and WGA dispute with producers?

NAFZGER: There are a healthy number of specific, and widely reported, disputes between the Screen Actors Guild (SAG), the Writers Guild of America (WGA), and the The Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers specifically focused on AI.

However, given the rate of technological change and the increasing influence of AI in various industries, including entertainment, it's entirely possible that new tensions and debates could arise after 2023. Such disputes could revolve around:

• Job Security and Displacement: As AI becomes capable of performing tasks historically handled by humans — from scriptwriting to certain aspects of film production — unions like the SAG and WGA might raise concerns about job losses and the devaluation of human craftsmanship.

• Compensation: If AI starts co-authoring scripts or contributing to performances, questions about compensation could emerge. Who gets paid when AI assists or even autonomously crafts a screenplay? How are royalties distributed for AI-generated content?

• Credit and Attribution: Determining how to credit AI's contribution to a film or TV show can be a bone of contention. Does an AI get a writing credit? How are accolades and awards handled?

• Ethical and Quality Concerns: The introduction of AI could lead to concerns about the quality of content produced and the ethical implications of using AI-generated characters or stories, especially when representing real people or sensitive topics.

• Training and Reskilling: Unions might demand training programs to help their members adapt to the changing landscape, ensuring that human actors, writers, and other professionals can work alongside AI tools effectively.

• Intellectual Property Rights: There could be disputes over who owns the rights to AI-generated content. Is it the creators of the AI, the users, or someone else?

• Representation: If AI starts generating characters, especially deepfake versions of real actors or AI-generated voices, concerns might emerge about misrepresentation, consent, and the potential misuse of an actor's likeness.

• Safety and Security: Deepfakes and AI-generated content can blur the lines between reality and fiction, potentially misleading audiences or misrepresenting events and people, leading to calls for stricter controls or guidelines.

For a detailed understanding of any recent disputes between SAG, WGA, motion picture association producers, and studios specifically related to AI, I recommend checking the latest industry news sources, press releases from the involved entities, or the official websites of the SAG and WGA.

Terminologies used in The Last Screenwriter:

• Generative Adversarial Networks (GANs): These are a class of AI algorithms used in unsupervised machine learning, where two networks (a generator and a discriminator) "compete" in a game setting. GANs are often used to produce realistic images and are the underlying technology for many deepfakes.

• Deepfakes: This refers to videos created using AI where someone's face and voice are superimposed onto another's, making it look like they said or did something they didn't.

• Neural Networks: These are a set of algorithms, modeled loosely after the human brain, designed to recognize patterns in data. They interpret sensory data through a kind of machine perception, labeling, and clustering of raw input.

• Machine Learning (ML): A subset of AI that allows systems to automatically learn and improve from experience without being explicitly programmed.

• Natural Language Processing (NLP): The AI-driven ability to allow machines to understand and interpret human language.

• Virtual Reality (VR): A computer-generated simulation of a three-dimensional environment that can be interacted with in a seemingly real way.

• Augmented Reality (AR): The overlay of digital content on the real world through devices like smartphones or AR glasses.

• Computer Vision: An interdisciplinary field that teaches machines to interpret and make decisions based on visual data (like recognizing objects in a film scene).

Facts about the future expressed in The Last Screenwriter:

• Script Creation: AI algorithms, trained on vast amounts of existing scripts and literature, can now generate scripts or suggest plot ideas.

• Casting: AI can help suggest actors for roles based on factors like previous box office performance, acting style, or fit with a particular character.

• Visual Effects (VFX) Enhancement: AI can aid in tasks like rotoscoping, object removal, and even creating high-resolution images from low-res inputs.

• Editing: AI tools can be trained to make editing decisions based on the pacing, emotion, or other cinematic elements of a scene.

• Sound Design: AI can be utilized to enhance or generate sound effects, background scores, and even assist in sound mixing.

• Film Promotion: Machine learning models can predict which movie trailers are likely to be most effective or how to target advertising for maximum impact.

• Audience Analysis: AI can analyze audience reactions in real-time during test screenings, making it easier to understand which scenes work and which don’t.

• Deepfake Actors: While ethically contentious, AI can be used to recreate performances of actors who've passed away or to de-age actors for specific roles.

• Virtual Production: Real-time technologies powered by AI can render complex environments during the actual filming process, allowing for more informed decisions on set.

• Personalized Viewing Experience: In streaming, AI can personalize the viewing experience by recommending movies or TV shows based on a user's viewing history.

This is by no means an exhaustive list, as the intersection of AI and filmmaking is vast and constantly evolving. As technologies develop and the entertainment industry continues to innovate, new terminologies and practices will likely emerge.

BUY YOUR COPY: https://amzn.to/3KBpZLq

FILM MAKERS GET YOUR GRATIS COPY: bit.ly/3ONQjEt