Connect with us

Entertainment

Opinion: When unregulated AI re-creates the past, we can't trust that the 'historical' is real

Published

on

Opinion:  When unregulated AI re-creates the past, we can't trust that the 'historical' is real

A furious political leader shouting a message of hate to an adoring audience. A child crying over the massacre of her family. Emaciated men in prison uniforms, starved to the edge of death because of their identities. As you read each sentence, specific imagery likely appears in your mind, seared in your memory and our collective consciousness through documentaries and textbooks, news media and museum visits.

We understand the significance of important historical images like these — images that we must learn from in order to move forward — in large part because they captured something true about the world when we weren’t around to see it with our own eyes.

As archival producers for documentary films and co-directors of the Archival Producers Alliance, we are deeply concerned about what could happen when we can no longer trust that such images reflect reality. And we’re not the only ones: In advance of this year’s Oscars, Variety reported that the Motion Picture Academy is considering requiring contenders to disclose the use of generative AI.

While such disclosure may be important for feature films, it is clearly crucial for documentaries. In the spring of 2023, we began to see synthetic images and audio used in the historical documentaries we were working on. With no standards in place for transparency, we fear this commingling of real and unreal could compromise the nonfiction genre and the indispensable role it plays in our shared history.

In February 2024, OpenAI previewed its new text-to-video platform, Sora, with a clip called “Historical footage of California during the Gold Rush.” The video was convincing: A flowing stream filled with the promise of riches. A blue sky and rolling hills. A thriving town. Men on horseback. It looked like a western where the good guy wins and rides off into the sunset. It looked authentic, but it was fake.

Advertisement

OpenAI presented “Historical Footage of California During the Gold Rush” to demonstrate how Sora, officially released in December 2024, creates videos based on user prompts using AI that “understands and simulates reality.” But that clip is not reality. It is a haphazard blend of imagery both real and imagined by Hollywood, along with the industry’s and archives’ historical biases. Sora, like other generative AI programs such as Runway and Luma Dream Machine, scrapes content from the internet and other digital material. As a result, these platforms are simply recycling the limitations of online media, and no doubt amplifying the biases. Yet watching it, we understand how an audience might be fooled. Cinema is powerful that way.

Some in the film world have met the arrival of generative AI tools with open arms. We and others see it as something deeply troubling on the horizon. If our faith in the veracity of visuals is shattered, powerful and important films could lose their claim on the truth, even if they don’t use AI-generated material.

Transparency, something akin to the food labeling that informs consumers about what goes into the things they eat, could be a small step forward. But no regulation of AI disclosure appears to be over the next hill, coming to rescue us.

Generative AI companies promise a world where anyone can create audio-visual material. This is deeply concerning when it’s applied to representations of history. The proliferation of synthetic images makes the job of documentarians and researchers — safeguarding the integrity of primary source material, digging through archives, presenting history accurately — even more urgent. It’s human work that cannot be replicated or replaced. One only needs to look to this year’s Oscar-nominated documentary “Sugarcane” to see the power of careful research, accurate archival imagery and well-reported personal narrative to expose hidden histories, in this case about the abuse of First Nations children in Canadian residential schools.

The speed with which new AI models are being released and new content is being produced makes the technology impossible to ignore. While it can be fun to use these tools to imagine and test, what results is not a true work of documentation — of humans bearing witness. It’s only a remix.

Advertisement

In response, we need robust AI media literacy for our industry and the general public. At the Archival Producers Alliance, we’ve published a set of guidelines — endorsed by more than 50 industry organizations — for the responsible use of generative AI in documentary film, practices that our colleagues are beginning to integrate into their work. We’ve also put out a call for case studies of AI use in documentary film. Our aim is to help the film industry ensure that documentaries will deserve that title and that the collective memory they inform will be protected.

We are not living in a classic western; no one is coming to save us from the threat of unregulated generative AI. We must work individually and together to preserve the integrity and diverse perspectives of our real history. Accurate visual records not only document what happened in the past, they help us understand it, learn its details and — maybe most importantly in this historical moment — believe it.

When we can no longer accurately witness the highs and lows of what came before, the future we share may turn out to be little more than a haphazard remix, too.

Rachel Antell, Stephanie Jenkins and Jennifer Petrucelli are co-directors of the Archival Producers Alliance.

Advertisement

Entertainment

Trevor Noah caps off ‘generational run,’ will host Grammys for sixth and final time

Published

on

Trevor Noah caps off ‘generational run,’ will host Grammys for sixth and final time

Trevor Noah is gearing up for one last Grammys hurrah.

This year, the comedian and former host of “The Daily Show” will helm the awards show for the sixth and final time, CBS announced Tuesday. Noah has emceed the ceremony every year since 2021.

“I am beyond thrilled to welcome Trevor Noah back to host the Grammys for his sixth, and sadly, final time,” the show’s executive producer Ben Winston said Tuesday in a statement to the Hollywood Reporter.

Winston went on to call Noah “the most phenomenal host.”

“He’s so smart, so funny, and such a true fan of the artists and music,” the producer said. “His impact on the show has been truly spectacular, and we can’t wait to do it together one last time.”

Advertisement

The official Grammys Instagram account also confirmed the news.

“It’s music’s BIGGEST night and he’s on a generational run,” the caption reads.

The 68th Grammy Awards will return to L.A.’s Crypto.com Arena on Feb. 1, and will broadcast live on CBS and stream on Paramount+ starting at 5 p.m. PT.

In addition to marking Noah’s final turn as host, this year’s show will be the last to air on CBS, its home network since 1973. After that, it kicks off a 10-year run with Disney. The Grammys will air on ABC, Hulu and Disney+ beginning in 2027.

Kendrick Lamar led the 2026 Grammy nominations with nine, including album and record of the year. Trailing just behind were Lady Gaga and producers Cirkut and Jack Antonoff, with seven nominations each.

Advertisement

Noah himself is also up for a Grammy Award this year for his audio narration of his children’s book “Into the Uncut Grass.”

Continue Reading

Movie Reviews

Unpaarvayil Movie Review: A By-The-Book Psycho Thriller That’s Blind To Its Flaws

Published

on

Unpaarvayil Movie Review: A By-The-Book Psycho Thriller That’s Blind To Its Flaws
0

The Times of India

TNN, Jan 13, 2026, 1:24 PM IST

2.0

Un Paarvayil Movie Synopsis: When her twin sister dies under mysterious circumstances, Bhavya goes on a hunt to find the murderer, but the fight isn’t easy as she loses her vision.Un Paarvayil Movie Review: The opening sequence of Un Paarvayil reminds one of a few finely written scenes from films about twins like Charulatha (2012) or Thadam (2019) where we learn about their special bond. In Un Paarvayil, Bhavya (played by Parvati Nair) gets on stage to receive the Best Business Woman award. Parallely, her twin, Dhivya (also played by Parvati Nair), is stuck in a dangerous situation. As the latter faces difficulty, Bhavya, who is on stage, also feels like she is being choked and struggles to breathe – an instant telepathy of sorts that suggests her sister is in danger. Without a lot of words or too many scenes, this one sequence conveys the bond between the sisters Bhavya and Dhivya. However, this narrative creativity is never seen on screen again throughout the film’s run time.Everything about Un Paarvayil is right on paper. With a textbook formula, Un Paarvayil has the right recipe for a psycho thriller – a scary bungalow, a loving but mysterious husband, and a psycho killer. But that’s about it. The stage is set, writing is done, and actors deliver the dialogues, but these don’t come together cohesively. In most scenes, the dialogue delivery is bland, and the writing becomes increasingly predictable. For instance, Bhavya is informed very early on in the film that Dhivya has a best friend with whom she shares all her secrets. However, the writing is so contrived that until the last moment, Bhavya never thinks about reaching out to this friend to learn more about her sister. It’s as though Bhavya forgot that piece of the puzzle.Which is why it feels like the film suffers from progressive amnesia. For instance, at one point, it looks like the cops give lethargic explanations for a murder, but we are not sure if they are just lethargic or are partners-in-crime with the psycho killer. And we keep wondering – but we never get to know that because the film has forgotten such a sequence existed. Likewise, Bhavya learns about an important CCTV evidence and pursues it. Still, before she uncovers the truth, she begins to track down another clue, and the CCTV evidence is never mentioned again. Remember how we see the twins share a unique connection in the opening sequence? It is also depicted only once and gets forgotten. Just like this, the film keeps jumping from one sequence to another, with all the old clues left behind and forgotten, before another new clue randomly reaches Bhavya. So, the next time we find a missing puzzle, we are no longer curious about it.That said, the film did have some interesting scenes. Whenever the psycho killer is on screen, the tension rises, and we are hooked to what’s next – but such sequences are very few. By the book, it might look like the film has a perfect premise, and some really good performances from Parvati Nair and Mahendran do make things intriguing, but the film turns a blind eye to its basic cinematography and contrived writing, leaving us in the dark for the most part.

Continue Reading

Entertainment

Record exec L.A. Reid settles sexual assault lawsuit

Published

on

Record exec L.A. Reid settles sexual assault lawsuit

Record executive Antonio “L.A.” Reid has settled a sexual assault lawsuit from former employee Drew Dixon, avoiding a jury trial that was set to begin Monday.

In 2023, Dixon filed a lawsuit under the New York Adult Survivors Act, alleging abuse from Reid including sexual harassment, assault and retaliation while she worked under him as an A&R representative at Arista Records.

Dixon alleged in her suit that Reid “digitally penetrated her vulva without her consent” on a private plane in 2001, and groped and kissed her against her will in another incident months later. She claims in her suit that Reid retaliated against her after she spurned his advances, berating her in front of staff after she brought in a young Kanye West for a label audition.

Reid said in court filings that he “adamantly denies the allegations,” but they contributed to the former mogul’s declining reputation within the music industry, after Reid left Epic Records in 2017 following separate claims of harassment.

Reid’s attorney Imran H. Ansari said in a statement to The Times that “Mr. Reid has amicably resolved this matter with Ms. Dixon without any admission of liability.” Terms of the settlement were not disclosed.

Advertisement

In a statement to The Times, Dixon said that “I hope my work as an advocate for the Adult Survivors Act helps to bring us closer to a safer music business for everyone. In a world where good news is often hard to find, I hope for survivors that today is a ray of light peeking through the clouds. Music has always been my greatest source of comfort and joy. Even as a kid, I had an uncanny knack for predicting the next cool artist or album, the more eclectic the better. While I have focused on sexual assault advocacy in recent years, I have never stopped fighting for my place in this industry.”

The jury trial was slated to have testimony from some high-profile figures including John Legend, whom Dixon had tried to sign to the label. Dixon also accused the Def Jam mogul Russell Simmons of sexual assault in a 2017 New York Times article and in the 2020 documentary “On The Record.”

Continue Reading

Trending