Matthew Libatique: AI 'Could Replace Marvel' but Never Cinema

Three-time Oscar-nominated cinematographer Matthew Libatique says artificial intelligence "could replace" Marvel's visual effects pipeline, but insists it "won't replace cinema" and that studios will never "use AI actors." He made the remarks at Evolution Mallorca, the Spanish island's leading film festival, where he received this year's Cinematography Icon Award.

Speaking to Variety, the "Iron Man" and "A Star Is Born" cinematographer drew a sharp line between blockbuster effects houses and the art form itself. "They make their movies for so much money, I can understand why, through visual effects, they are going to have to employ AI to curb some of their costs," he said of Marvel and DC.

What did Libatique say about AI actors?

He ruled out synthetic performers outright. Marvel and its peers have "always been able to get a personality into the characters, whether it's Chris Evans or Robert Downey Jr.; these people become these characters people fall in love with," he said.

"I don't think there's going to be a Tilly Norwood Batwoman or Black Widow," he added. "You can't tell me you're going to make an AI character that can do what Robert Pattinson does. You can't."

He cited Zack Snyder's "300" (2006), shot almost entirely against green screens in a warehouse with digitally constructed landscapes, as a prototype. "It was basically our early AI movie. If you want your movie to look that way, go for it. But, again, how do we connect [to it] as humans?" The audience for such films, he argued, is "limited by age, gender, and also by social interaction."

"Nobody's going to make 'Sentimental Value' with AI," he said. "I don't think there is going to be a time when we as a society turn our backs on cinema because we need it."

How is he testing AI with Darren Aronofsky?

Libatique's longest creative collaborator, "Black Swan" director Darren Aronofsky, launched the AI studio Primordial Soup last year with Google DeepMind. The pair are now "testing" the technology ahead of their next film together.

"We've discussed it. We're doing a test soon," Libatique said. "I have a belief that the more you give to the system, the more it's gonna have what you're looking for. He wants to see how little you can do; we both want to learn more about it."

He would not reveal details of the project but promised the film will remain "human." "We're gonna make it like a movie. We're gonna stand on set. Darren is gonna get on his knees, and he's gonna move everything around with his fingers, and he'll do what he usually does. But it's a different thing, the AI. I don't think it's replacing what he does, but he's interested."

The duo is exploring "using the camera the way we use the camera and then see what this technology can do." Libatique added: "[Aronofsky] has been given money to be able to explore this, so I applaud him for that. I feel I need to understand it better. I think you have to."

What about post-production jobs?

Libatique has used AI in post-production himself, including for correcting glare. "The machine learning how to do that is helpful to me, rather than sending it to another country so that some people who are getting $2 an hour can do it," he said.

Asked about AI stripping jobs from post-production experts, he acknowledged the reality. "I feel for them. It's insensitive for me to revel in the fact that I can do some of the things in a room that we can do now because it definitely took some work away. But that work was taken away from people in our industry anyway, and it was given to basically sweatshops in other countries," he said. "I guess the question is when does it end? When does it start really replacing people?"

He recently shot Dustin Yellin's short film "Goodbye Lamby," which used AI to imagine a world inside one of the artist's sculptures. "It was relatively successful because you're not dealing with reality there," he said. Notably, the AI prompter asked him to physically light a space before she could prompt her scene. "It was easier to place a light in the hole in the roof than it is for her to try to convince [the machine] to do what she wants." The takeaway: even AI-driven filmmaking currently depends on hands-on craft.

Why does copyright worry him?

On two occasions, people have sent him AI videos prompted to "shoot in the style of Matthew Libatique." "How come everything I do is out for grabs? That's absolutely offensive," he said. "I am flattered that somebody sent me this video, but it's horrible."

He rejected the idea of a signature style that AI can distill. "I don't try to impose myself on a movie. I only impose myself in the sense that I'm trying to understand who the director I'm working with is so that I can use my skills to help that vision, whether it's Olivia Wilde or Jodie Foster or Jon Favreau," he said. "AI is all the same; it's so plastic."

He closed with a critique of visual homogeneity. "Lighting has become homogeneous in films. Everything is like a Temu David Fincher," he said. "What matters is the end result, and I haven't seen anything created by AI that's really impressed me – and I am not sure I will." His test with Aronofsky's next project will show whether AI can serve that human result rather than flatten it.