The Academy Awards, the annual awards show, A.K.A. the Oscars for illiterate barbarians, will now require films to utilize artificial intelligence in their work to be eligible for any awards. This change comes after the A24 film, The Brutalist, won three Academy Awards: Adrien Brody for Best Actor, Lol Crawley for Best Cinematography and Daniel Blumberg for Original Score Music. The editor for The Brutalist, Dávid Jancsó, revealed in an interview that he used AI to make Adrien Brody and his co-star Felicity Jones’ Hungarian more legitimate in the film. This use of voice-generating AI has made the film’s nominations and awards debatable and potentially undeserving. But why do hours upon hours of voice training (or hire an actual Hungarian actor) when you can kill four forests to make it sound legit? .
In a recent interview, the Academy Awards revealed that it was for this very reason The Brutalist was nominated for ten awards and won three. The Oscars applauded The Brutalist for using AI in this decade where tools like ChatGPT and DeepSeek are making creativity more efficient. Elon Musk, whose later venture is becoming the majority stakeholder of The Academy said, “Everyone should use AI in their artwork. If you’re not, how are you going to increase stakeholder value, you worthless attempt at a jester?”
The Oscars is now even contemplating rescinding awards from movies that did not use AI for being pretentious and preachy — Parasite, Moonlight and Spirited Away are rumored to be first. Schifen Spillvert, director of the Academy, said, “The lack of AI use is creating a barrier for others to produce films. Why should we pay livable wages to overconfident animators? Once the Academy recognizes only the films that use AI, we will have more films and more work, generating the greatest good for the most people.”
Let’s look at Dune: Part Two. Wouldn’t the film have been better if Timothée Chalamet was AI-generated? AI could have come up with a more biblically accurate twink. The majority of people already accept special effects like green screen use and CGI. How is AI use any different? Perhaps if Emilía Perez had used AI for their Mexican accents, it wouldn’t have been such a train wreck.
The Arts Department reached out to the academy on the question: Do you expect other awards shows to follow in your footsteps?
We pleasantly heard back in ten minutes. They wrote to the Sun,
“Certainly! Here are a few reworded versions of your quote, depending on the vibe you’re going for:
We firmly believe at the Oscars in accessibility. Despite art being the most human activity, tracing back to the caves with handprints, it’s much better for people to use AI in their artwork so others can produce films. AI makes it easier to produce. Soon, there won’t be any need for producers, editors or writers. Next are actors. Why have people taken up space in the creative world when AI makes production and creation more efficient and overall better? AI is just better. Plain and simple. People keep wondering if AI will ever be as good as people, but what they don’t get is, AI is already better.
This is not AI, we can absolutely certify this.
Let me know if you need assistance with something else or if you want to edit my response.”
Once art is out of the hands of people, won’t it be better? More accessible, more common, more generated: sounds like a dream.
Once art is no longer a problem for people, there will be more time for work, housework and increasing stakeholder value. Absolutely no reason for humans to busy themselves with creating art when AI can do it for them. Why even think? Chat GPT has already thought of that, and that too. The assembly line is meant for people, not the stage and definitely not the movie screen. Who’s ready for the 21st-century art renaissance, AInaissance? Big Brother — I mean The Academy — embraces it, and you should too.
— Claudia.ai
Editor’s Note: 4/20 content is a part of The Sun’s joke issue and contains exaggerated and factually inaccurate information.
