Disney Scrapped Deepfakes For Moana and Tron To Avoid 'Bad Publicity' 23
Disney scrapped plans to use a deepfake of Dwayne Johnson in Moana and an AI-generated character in Tron: Ares due to concerns over bad publicity and legal ownership. Ultimately, the studio decided the potential PR and copyright risks weren't worth the convenience. Deadline reports: Disney is working on a live-action remake of Moana, where Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson will reprise his role of Maui. In a recent report from The Wall Street Journal, the studio came up with the idea to digitally clone Johnson and use a body double for some shots. "Disney would work with AI company Metaphysic to create deepfakes of Johnson's face that could be layered on top of Reed's performance in the footage -- a 'digital double' that effectively allowed Johnson to be in two places at once," WSJ said (paywalled). Although the Black Adam star approved the idea, the studio "worried" that they "ultimately couldn't claim ownership over every element of the film if AI generated parts of it." The film studio and the AI company were seemingly unable to come to terms, and the footage was scrapped.
Disney's upcoming Tron: Ares revolves around AI and the real-world implications of it. According to WSJ sources, "executives pitched the idea of actually incorporating AI into one of the characters in the sequel to the 1980s hit movie Tron as a buzzy marketing strategy." The AI-generated character would be a sidekick to Jeff Bridges' character, but the idea was ultimately scrapped because "executives internally were told that the company couldn't risk the bad publicity."
Disney's upcoming Tron: Ares revolves around AI and the real-world implications of it. According to WSJ sources, "executives pitched the idea of actually incorporating AI into one of the characters in the sequel to the 1980s hit movie Tron as a buzzy marketing strategy." The AI-generated character would be a sidekick to Jeff Bridges' character, but the idea was ultimately scrapped because "executives internally were told that the company couldn't risk the bad publicity."
AI generated AI? (Score:4, Insightful)
You know, I can appreciate an AI character generated by AI in a movie about an evil AI.
Re: (Score:2)
Wait, is That why they didn't use it, they were scared of getting Zucked??
Re: (Score:3)
You know, I can appreciate an AI character generated by AI in a movie about an evil AI.
I hear AIs are already virtually lining up to see it.
Re:AI generated AI? (Score:5, Interesting)
From a consumer point of view sure. The issue, the thing thats got a lot of people in the industry upset, is the fact that this stuff could cost a lot of jobs if it goes too far, and in an industry thats been absolutely struggling due to the dual impacts of streaming* and the fact covid stopped people going to theatres, yeah thats a lot of folks out of work.. Plus, again, its not clear at all who actually owns the end product since the courts are fairly clear that you can only copyright the creative products of humans not AIs.
*The reason streaming has been such a catastrophe for film workers is under the old regime, people who worked on a film generally got paid a wage plus points, that is a tiny fraction of the profits over time for each 'point'. The end result is that because film and TV production is very seasonal, film production people could smoothe out their income using royalties from points when theres no shows currently in production. It turned it from a part time job into a career. Unfortunately , because tech-bros are ass-hats, the streaming giants generally refuse to pay points, and when streaming rights where sold to them by the studios, the people that worked on them didnt get any points for it. This, by the way, was the real reason for those SAG-AFRA and Writers strikes, the very real sense that the people who worked on all those shows and TVs got shafted out of their royalties.
Its not clear at all that the no-points thing are actually legal, btw, since it does seem on the face of it that its reneging on the contracts signed by the film workers. While its unlikely to be *fraudulent*, judges have a tendency to look dimly on people using obscure technicalities to get out of paying people agreed on revenues when it comes to civil agreements.
dident the actors go on strike to protect there ri (Score:2)
dident the actors go on strike to protect there rights and to stop them from being replaced by AI?
Re: dident the actors go on strike to protect ther (Score:2)
I am pretty sure I saw some deep fakes (Score:2)
I got to say every year of my life I've been alive the world has gotten noticeably worse. I can't think of a single year where I can't point to som
Re: (Score:1, Funny)
Classic Disney is awesome
Sorry, they aren't going to reboot Song of the South, no matter how often fragile losers ask for it.
Also:
https://variety.com/2025/tv/ne... [variety.com]
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
I watched that recently, I was struck by 2 things:
(1) How much it sucked, barring a few minutes of animated scenes that are circulated widely outside of the whole film,
(2) How unoffensive it was - I don't see what was so objectionable in it, unless you just object to any depiction of the lives of blacks from that era.
Re: (Score:1, Interesting)
I guessed you missed the tar baby scene?
any depiction of the lives of blacks
Like "the slavery era was the good-old-days" and "share-cropping is a wonderful way of life"?
The film was released in the middle of the 'lost cause' hagiography and shows it. Hell, thanks to jim crow laws, the star of the film was not allowed to attend the premiere. That was the world that Disney was aiming this at.
Re: (Score:2)
So the issue is that it's not realistic? I was told the opposite, that kids shouldn't be exposed to "how things were".
I don't think a kid watching it today would extrapolate any grand ideas from it other than "wow, old movies used to be weird and lame."
Re: (Score:2)
Disney isn't interested in anyone's values. They sell products with what they imagine to be popular appeal to make a buck. They certainly aren't interested in a joining any "global community" except to the extent that they can further extend their reach.
Dupe (Score:1)
Solution: Disney could change US copyright law to suit its own interests.... Again!
Riddle Me This (Score:1)
If they were so focused on avoiding bad publicity, why'd they keep Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson? Something doesn't add up.
Disney should scrap the "Rock" (Score:2, Interesting)
Disney should scrap the so-called Rock. Hard to imagine a worse model for children.
just do it (Score:2)
why can’t disney just say that TRON is made with AI, then make the best movie they can, and let the chips fall where they may?
seems weird to stifle the creative process in the name of copyright.
Re: (Score:3)
Because it's not proven that AI-made movies will turn a profit. They might not want to piss off real actors and writers until it is certain they aren't needed anymore.
Disney's moral compass (Score:2)
They are not doing it because they think it's wrong (they only think it's wrong when others do it), but because they might lose some precious money.
Great! (Score:2)
new? (Score:2)
I am very confused; don't movie studios use artificially generated characters frequently for special effects? Isn't it almost certain that especially over the past few years they've used AI to do that? How would this be something new?