Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
AI

DreamWorks Co-Founder Katzenberg Likens AI To CGI Revolution 50

At the Axios AI+ Summit, DreamWorks co-founder Jeffrey Katzenberg compared the rise of AI in entertainment to the CGI revolution of the 1990s, emphasizing that those who adapt to the technology will thrive. He argued AI won't replace people -- but will replace those who don't embrace it. Axios reports: Katzenberg, a co-founder of DreamWorks and one-time Disney executive whose work includes films like "Shrek," reflected on the "huge" resistance to making "Toy Story" with the then-novel CGI technology. The people most afraid were the ones who would be disrupted, he said. "Everything that you are hearing today are the issues that we had to deal with," he said.

Katzenberg continued, "Yes, there was disruption, but animation's never, ever been bigger than it is today." The bottom line: "AI isn't going to replace people, it's going to replace people that don't use AI," he said. "The exact same analogy there ... is that the talent that went and learned how to use the computer as a new pencil and a new paint brush ... they thrived," he said. Katzenberg added, "if change is uncomfortable, irrelevance is going to be a whole lot harder."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

DreamWorks Co-Founder Katzenberg Likens AI To CGI Revolution

Comments Filter:
  • All I know is that the CGI revolution gave us completely idiotic and epilepsy inducing movies that cost like the GDP of a small nation, and a flood of remakes and capeshit.

    I haven't seen a decent movie since the end of the 90s, with the only possible exception of Interstellar, Oppenheimer, and Godzilla minus one.

    CGI has simply opened the gates to massive budget inflation and poor storytelling to deliver slop to the masses.

    • I haven't seen a decent movie since the end of the 90s, with the only possible exception of Interstellar, Oppenheimer, and Godzilla minus one.

      Hyperbole. The number of decent movies is at least an order of magnitude bigger. Hell, the number of *good* movies is at least an order of magnitude bigger.

    • by jmke ( 776334 )
      > I haven't seen a decent movie since the end of the 90s

      that's you stopped watching movies ofc


      a few post 90s movies that more than "decent"
      The Dark Knight, The Lord of the Rings, Inception, City of God,Spirited Away,The Pianist,Gladiator,Parasite,The Departed,Whiplash,The Prestige,The Intouchables,Django Unchained, Dune P1/P2, Memento, WALLE,Inglourious Basterds,Coco,Oldboy,...

      but yes, since the CGI "revolution" zero decent movies.
      .
    • Ironic, given Interstellar is exhibit A for a meaningless poorly written awful dialog plot-hole ridden movie that survives only because it had great visuals accompanied by some Zimmermusik(tm). It's literally one of the worst movies ever made, yet a staple of Slashdot and Reddit "WOW IS THERE ANYTHING BETTER" lists.

      The 2000s gave us rather a lot of movies I personally enjoyed, that were well written, well crafted, and weren't Save The Cat bullshit. Hell, there were two entire franchises, Bourne and Oceans,

  • by HalAtWork ( 926717 ) on Wednesday June 04, 2025 @06:22PM (#65428232)

    "AI isn't going to replace people, it's going to replace people"

    Sounds like it will be replacing people. Everything before the comma is a lie.

    • by Falos ( 2905315 )

      Just a typo

      Every MBA is cheering "I'm not going to replace people!" as they halve if not decimate teams

      Meanwhile quotas stay up (or increase) and the free salary goes to the customer ("it's me, i'm customer")

    • Wacom Tablets replaced people if you want to look at it that way, but why ...

    • "AI isn't going to replace people, it's going to replace people"

      Sounds like it will be replacing people. Everything before the comma is a lie.

      That's a very interesting (i.e. intentionally obtuse) way of interpreting what was said. No people are being replaced by AI. People are being replaced by people. Just like people who used a calculator replaced those people who refused to let go of the abacus, or people who used computers replaced people who refused to give up their typewriter.

      AI is a tool, it's not a person, it's not creative, and it can't set the art direction. It does what the user of the tool tells it to, nothing more. People who refuse

    • by munehiro ( 63206 )

      The most important point is that this fucker should say "ok, we have a lot of staff that has been trained in the old way, we invest and retrain it in the new way".
      What will instead happen is that they will fire everybody and get consultants from the AI company.

  • So AI actors won't replace human actors? Seems like there isn't that much point to it otherwise, because eventually, some doofus in his mom's basement will be able to write the script with AI, build the sets with AI, create all the actors with AI, Generate the voice with AI, and add the Sound effects and music with AI. I mean, that's the goal isn't it?
    • Expect to see a The Sims: Complete AI Life release in the future.

      • Expect to see a The Sims: Complete AI Life release in the future.

        With G, PG, R, and Unrated (formerly X) versions?

    • So AI actors won't replace human actors? Seems like there isn't that much point to it otherwise, because eventually, some doofus in his mom's basement will be able to write the script with AI, build the sets with AI, create all the actors with AI, Generate the voice with AI, and add the Sound effects and music with AI. I mean, that's the goal isn't it?

      Yeah, only you forgot the realistic part. That doofus in Moms basement is probably making a porn.

    • by allo ( 1728082 )

      How do you imagine it? Someone typing millions of prompts? They are not using Midjourney with a three word prompt. They need people who actually work with AI generators, just like you need people to design the SFX of a movie even when the computer does the rendering.

    • by munehiro ( 63206 )

      I have never seen anything happen where increase in quantity does not lead to decrease of quality.

      What you are saying is true, but the consequence of it is a massive amount of slop.

      • I have never seen anything happen where increase in quantity does not lead to decrease of quality.

        What you are saying is true, but the consequence of it is a massive amount of slop.

        Probably not much different than present day Hollywood offerings.

        Something happened, where scripts don't tell a good story, cinematographers don't know basic techniques, political messaging is clumsy, and it's one reboot after another.

        Where we end up with sex workers being praised at the Oscars. https://www.smobserved.com/sto... [smobserved.com].

        They've lost their minds. A group that condemns all men for sexualizing women, while heaping praise on themselves for women sexualizing themselves, and allowing them to the

    • by cusco ( 717999 )

      replace actors

      Good. I worked as a techie in live theater for five years, finally left swearing to never return until they had replaced actors with holograms (of course then you don't need the lighting guy any more, either.) Some of the worst people in the world. (Then there are the 'stage mothers', who are a whole order of magnitude worse than their brats.)

      • replace actors

        Good. I worked as a techie in live theater for five years, finally left swearing to never return until they had replaced actors with holograms (of course then you don't need the lighting guy any more, either.) Some of the worst people in the world. (Then there are the 'stage mothers', who are a whole order of magnitude worse than their brats.)

        I gotta concur. Out of curiosity, have you seen Ricky Gervais roasting the crap out of them at awards ceremonies. He's an abrasive dude, but speaks truth to the creeps.

        • by cusco ( 717999 )

          Never saw the point in awards shows, they're just popularity and influence contests for bragging rights.

  • by PPH ( 736903 ) on Wednesday June 04, 2025 @07:03PM (#65428312)

    Wait! What?

  • As long as he's referring to his own field (creation of animations/art for film or video), I think he's essentially correct. AI will become a required tool you need to be familiar with as part of your career. It won't take people's jobs, except for people who refuse to learn how to utilize AI as part of it.

    I'm FAR from convinced AI usage will play out the same way in all industries. For example? If you work in law, it makes sense AI could replace your lower-paid paralegals who essentially just open Word

    • by cusco ( 717999 )

      AI isn't going to do anything meaningful in most "blue collar" fields like construction

      Actually it's there where we're already seeing the first impact on human employment. AI-trained robots are already running excavators and pouring foundations, and it's started creating detail blueprints for electrical, plumbing and HVAC with development coming to implement as much as possible of those plans. There is a lot of work in a large construction project which is brain-numbing repetition of the same movements over and over with small variations, a problem which AI is well equipped to handle.

  • When CGI tools gave Buzz Lightyear 17 fingers and a backwards leg, that was a bug Pixar would have to fix. When AI does it, Sam Altman will just shrug and tell you to adapt.

  • "He argued AI won't replace people -- but will replace those who don't embrace "

    Golden rule usually is.... Anything before a 'but' is usually BS

  • 74 year old boomers are clearly the go-to for insights on current technology.

  • AI will replace people. Now you see hundreds of names in the end credits in regard to VFX moddeling etc. but AI will replace most, if not all of them. You already see 'simple' AI generated video's of large worlds or a Star Wars empire factory for building AT-AT's, completely generated by AI without a single modeller, and it looks amazingly real.
    • it looks amazingly real.

      Question, do you think the barrel ride scene in the Hobbit looked real? https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]

      • by cusco ( 717999 )

        That was 13 years ago, you're comparing a slide projector to a DVD player.

        • No. He's comparing a slide projector that looks like a DVD player. That scene (time not withstanding) has withstood the test of time incredibly well and still to this day beats a lot of VFX of today. The biggest difference is the price to do something like that has come down slightly. That's also what AI will do with this industry - decrease the price of great effects, not replace the job of VFX artists.

  • by nightflameauto ( 6607976 ) on Thursday June 05, 2025 @09:00AM (#65429242)

    He argued AI won't replace people -- but will replace those who don't embrace it.

    And that's how they get ya. Some management folks at my company attended an AI summit and came back spouting this exact phrasing. Literally, word for word. Along with, "You either get on board the AI train, or you get run over by it." And, "You have to use AI every single day, or your competition will eat you alive."

    To me, it all reeks of salesmanship. These AI companies are DESPERATE to keep slurping up data, and they can't do that if you don't slop it around every single thing you do like an out of control shopvac hose with turbo-suck enabled. I don't mind fiddling with AI a bit here or there where I think it might be helpful or amusing, but this complete abandonment of thought or critical thinking about consequences when it comes to current-gen AI is going to bite a lot of people squarely in the ass when it all blows up.

    By all means, use the new technologies where appropriate, but think through what is actually happening and decide whether you want to be part of the data-slurp for slurp's sake.

Premature optimization is the root of all evil. -- D.E. Knuth

Working...