AI and Chatbots as Story Elements -- "Vince Gilligan has licked that cupcake"

[GreatGazoo]

The showrunner of a project I am writing on and I got into a debate about AI, specifically chatbots, as a story element. She told us all that she had just made rounds in LA and heard about many AI themed projects in the pipe. Fine. But I think that two years from now, when these projects that are being written now will come to screens, AI as a theme will be somewhat played out. AI as a story element will be where dementia is now, DOA.

Five years ago there were so many dementia and Alzeheimers projects that many festivals rejected them all or told applicants up front not to submit any more. I think AI is on a similar path to saturation although ‘Pluribus’ was well timed. It got made quickly because Vince Gilligan is Vince Gilligan but the rest of us are closer to the back end of the cue.

I think plots that involve protagonist and chatbots that isolate, twist, delude them, etc. will be played out quickly. Plus I dislike anything that makes the audience read text on the screen because it isn’t cinematic, it breaks tension and pace. ‘All acting is reacting’ means that you don’t have any acting going on while the camera is on text messages. You have to intercut the text with a reaction, eg shot reverse shot between actor and phone screen and the phone screen is lifeless.

I really think that two years from now projects that consciously avoid AI will be trending. A kind of backlash. I think a glut of AI slop will have audiences looking for the alternatives – things that are OBVIOUSLY not created by or with AI. That will include projects set in the pre-AI era, especially the 1990s and the aughts. But also some of the great stuff that is coming into PD right now: Agatha Christie, Hemingway, Fitzgerald, etc. The reaction and audience (141 million views) for ‘Adolescence’ for me confirm where we are headed. Audiences want raw human vulnerability. Intimacy and everything else that AI cannot deliver. More ‘Adolescence’ Less ‘Pluribus’

Curious to know what others here think about any of this.
- - - -

For reference the trailer for 'Pluribus' (and the show is very good. That is part of my point. Something done well 'licks more cupcakes' than something that leaves room for something better):

[Gaugamela]

1. Pluribus isn't explicitly about AI, although of course it can be viewed as a kind of

allegory about AI. It can also be viewed as commentary on tribalism or social contagion (MAGA, political correctness, fashionable opinions).

To me, Pluribus is a meditation and thought experiment on privilege and inequality. The main character, Carol, lives a sheltered life of wealth and privilege by writing vapid romance novels which allow her fans a brief escape from their usual grind and worries. Once the virus hits the tables are turned. The global population escapes from suffering and want, but Carol is trapped in what she considers their vapid reality. She wants to return to the way things were at everyone else’s expense, to an existence where she felt comfortably insulted and superior to those around her. This was highlighted in the 7th episode when the guy from Paraguay confronts the Darien Gap. We see the scattered clothing and plush toys the children had to leave behind. In this new world no one is so desperate as to need to undergo this ordeal.

But of course no utopian ideal is attainable or sustainable. Since the new order won’t even kill plants for food, the population is projected to die out in a little over a decade. I expect as the show evolves Carol will grow emotionally and cognitively out of her limited worldview, and start to see the bigger picture. The Paraguayan will be interesting to watch. He seems to be meticulously ethical, refusing all assistance from the people on the one hand, and leaving cash for the gasoline that he siphons from abandoned cars on the other. As Carol represents the worldview of privilege, I expect the Paraguayan will represent the ethic of the common man, possibly a socialist. We will see a dialectic emerge in their interactions.

The problem with shows about AI is that it’s just about one thing, and presents only one narrative possibility. What makes a show like Pluribus so good is that it offers many possible interpretations. Incidentally, I also see this quality in Severence and The Truman Show. I’m sure there’s others but these two come to mind.

[GreatGazoo]

2. To me Carol is cynical and contrarian

Only saw up to ep 4 but the Paraguayan, like Carol, does not want to join the hive mind. I take her resistance as coming from being contrarian and wanting to feel independent and in control. That is where I see her writing coming in -- as a writer she is showing a preference for being alone and in control of the world of her books / stories. It sets up the dynamic where she and the Paraguayan are the resistance. She has anger management issue that play into the rules of the new normal. I don't see that we are supposed to condemn her as vapid or wealthy. She lives in a tract home and is only a modestly successful author. She is the first author character that Gilligan has used so I think he identifies with many parts of the character, eg is mixed-sympathetic. But I think we agree on the "trapped in what she considers their vapid reality" part.

That's why I see it as specifically about AI -- the hive mind, too pleasant, irrational ways that the infected act. The grenade episode to me was about AI being irrational about danger. It fit directly with the criticism of AI that says "The problem is that machines are very good a doing exactly what we ask of them but humans are not good at asking for exactly what they want."

I could also see Carol's arc as being that she thought of herself as smarter than most everyone else and then the curse is now that everyone agrees with her, she doesn't like that either.

[Gaugamela]

3. I don't condemn Carol, in fact I find her sympathetic and even likable. She values individuality and

creativity, and her complaints against the hive mind are legitimate. She rebels against the manipulation of humanity by an outside force. I like her determination and resourcefulness, and I often find her irreverent attitude amusing. To me she is emotionally defensive and a bit immature, which is why she can only manage mediocre and cliched writing. I see the show heading towards an affirmation of individuality and diversity, together with a recognition of the interdependence of people and society.

It occurs to me that our respective interpretations are not mutually exclusive. I can easily see an overlap between the two.

To maintain the story there will inevitably be conflicts between Carol and the Paraguayan. He seems to snap at people a lot. As I recall he says something negative about his mother. I expect he will also prove to have a complex and cynical worldview, one which will open up in the course of the narrative.