After Dark: Johanne Sacrebleu, Incention, Sundance Online, Apple Vision Pro
Added 2025-01-31 17:41:44 +0000 UTCThe Filmcast: After Dark is the bonus show where we talk about a variety of random topics that didn't make it into the main podcast - including your questions and what's going on in our lives.
In this episode, David, Devindra and Jeff discuss the saga of Johanne Sacrebleu, dive into Dave Goyer's new venture, preview some of the films they'll be watching at Sundance, and discuss their current usage of Apple Vision Pro.
PATRONS: You can get this audio in your podcast app by going to patreon.com/filmpodcast, going to the "My Membership" section, and copying and pasting the RSS link to your podcast app.
Comments
I titled David Goyor’s first theatrical feature. It was originally called “Dusted”, but ended up with one of my alternative title suggestions: “Death Warrant”. No one acknowledged me for that :(
J Hay
2025-02-17 05:20:03 +0000 UTCMakes sense. Just pointing out that people's uses of technology often change, as Jeff's did. If they don't change for a particular thing (at least going past the break even point), then a lifetime sub make sense
Papool Chaudhari
2025-02-06 18:43:39 +0000 UTCA TiVo lifetime subscription paid for itself if you kept it longer than 3 years if memory serves right. They also allowed you to transfer it to a new box. As someone who used a TiVo lifetime subscription for over 10 years it was well worth the money.
Joshua Johnson
2025-02-06 18:41:43 +0000 UTCAnyone else want a "Don't worry, even our holes are white" tshirt?
Armando Ferrari
2025-02-06 02:00:57 +0000 UTCI’m a trans woman I think given Davindra’s constant comments in support of our community over many years, that he is not suddenly being transphobic here.
April Reid
2025-02-04 14:07:56 +0000 UTCNot being on any social media the comment sections on the Filmcast Patreon is as close as I get to the joys of it and once again the comments section didn’t disappoint
Mark P
2025-02-04 07:07:28 +0000 UTCBy Jeff and Devindra*
Wil Johnson
2025-02-04 01:50:54 +0000 UTCI recently watched True History of the Kelly Gang and for some reason remembered Dave mentioned it years ago when it came out and searched for the episode. While looking for the part where Dave talked about the film I heard a part where Dave said he never finished Parks and Rec and was rightfully shamed by Dave and Devindra. He did say that he was motivated to finish it and now 6 years later I am wondering if he ever did?
Wil Johnson
2025-02-04 01:50:23 +0000 UTC"Actor" is a gender-neutral term.
Hahmstrung
2025-02-04 01:37:53 +0000 UTCVery interesting how Devindra calls Karla Sofia Gascon, a transWOMAN, a “shithead” but describes HER as a lead ACTOR instead of an ACTRESS. Yes. Shocking. 🙄
Ink Ribbon
2025-02-03 14:57:13 +0000 UTCJeff [AI Robot Voice]: Don't worry, even our holes are white. All: [10 seconds of uncontrollable laughter] These are the moments I listen to several times in a row, because I find them so delightful.
Sarah T.
2025-02-02 10:59:25 +0000 UTC@Mike Mulvaney, I appreciate the response and while diffusion models are very novel at simulating human choices, at the end of the day it's just a more advanced version of what I described. No matter how seemingly creative the output is, the "AI"/diffusion model/whatever you wanna call it does not bring personal experiences, complex thoughts or emotions to the process. It is still combining existing patterns with no ability to create something truly novel. It can be a very convincing trick, but it's still a trick nonetheless.
Hahmstrung
2025-02-02 00:44:36 +0000 UTCThe personhood is what makes art art and precisely what "AI" lacks. That's what allows us to create new ideas from old. The mechanics may be similar in the broadest of senses, but the "AI" can never learn the way humans do. Humans bring their own experiences, thoughts, wants, emotions to the art they're exposed to, all things "AI" doesn't have, preventing it from creating something transformative. That's what people have issue with. When something human-crafted is a blatant rip-off of another artist's work it's usually called out for the soulless trash it is. At best "AI" can only produce similar soulless material. It may look pretty but there's nothing underneath the facade. And true, I don't agree that humanity is fresh out of creativity.
Hahmstrung
2025-02-02 00:32:31 +0000 UTC@Hahmstrung That's not how diffusion models work, in the sense they are a bit different to how a text model does things. I understand where you're coming from, but in my opinion there are things happening in the generation process that aren't covered by your definition of creating art. Diffusion models are quite interesting, both in how they work and how they were "discovered". Looking Glass Universe has a great video about it. There are aspects of decision making in the diffusion process that can be compared to a human making a creative choice. I can acknowledge they aren't spontaneously creating something from nothing, at least not the models we have access to as the public. but I can easily liken a prompt to being similar to a how a human might be inspired by external stimulus, or creative brief in a commercial art scenario.
Mike Mulvaney
2025-02-02 00:10:06 +0000 UTCYou're talking about personhood which is not really part of my argument. I don't agree that humans are doing something "new" and AI isn't. I'm saying there's nothing new under the sun regardless of who/what makes the art or how. We seem upset that AI operates by creating a pastiche of existing art; but tolerant of the fact that humans are doing the exact same thing. You may disagree but I see very little distinction in the raw mechanics regardless of personhood.
DarmineDoggyDoor
2025-02-01 23:25:15 +0000 UTCYou guys MUST post a YouTube video of Dave demonstrating his skull size issues to Jeff.
Eric Webster
2025-02-01 23:23:47 +0000 UTCThe key aspect you bring up is that human artists are creating something new, which an "AI" cannot do. When humans create art, they are communicating something to you, an emotion or thought. Their art style may be heavily influenced by what they've studied, but they are transforming that influence into something uniquely them. They can interrogate what they've studied and make choices based on personality, ideals, etc.. An "AI" art program scrapes a database consisting of human-made art and pieces them together into a collage facsimile of said scraped art according to somebody's programming. There are no thoughts or ideals, no way for it to transform the existing art into something new and creative. It just copies.
Hahmstrung
2025-02-01 20:56:50 +0000 UTCDevindra: “AI is trained on stuff that already exists”… So is a human artist dude! So much of the gen AI debate is based on the false premise that humans are creating new ideas out of thin air. When in fact, all human art is built on what’s come before. Just like AI, humans have consumed tons of art, music, movies, television, novels, comics etc, and those *pre-existing* ideas are constantly being re-ordered, re-combined, synergized by humans into something that is made of familiar elements but novel enough to be considered “new.” And unless that idea meets a legal threshold for copyright infringement and is successfully prosecuted, humans aren’t expected to compensate the creators of the art they have consumed. So why should AI be persecuted as “stealing art” when humans have used an analogous process for all of time? There’s plenty to debate about AI but we need to stop pretending there’s such a clear distinction between the human creative process and gen AI. They’re quite similar.
DarmineDoggyDoor
2025-02-01 17:59:28 +0000 UTCRe Sundance, my very long time friend and fellow Aussie Michael Shanks wrote and directed Together which sold for a record 15m to Neon after being a big crowd favourite. He is an amazing talent and such a fresh voice. I would LOVE to hear you guys talk about his work!
Kess Broekman-Dattner
2025-01-31 22:21:08 +0000 UTCLifetime subscriptions for anything related to electronics makes no sense even beyond the company or service might not last forever. It doesn't make sense because our electronics usage changes over time. Jeff doesn't use his TiVo lifetime subscription because his TV viewing habits have changed rendering the TiVo unnecessary to him. Has nothing to do with the life of the company or the service.
Papool Chaudhari
2025-01-31 20:39:43 +0000 UTCThere's so much discussion of where the Sundance film festival should be. But at the end of the day, people just want the location that is most convenient to them, period. Lol
Papool Chaudhari
2025-01-31 20:13:13 +0000 UTCGents, have you ever rawdogged a movie? https://redd.it/1i821gw
Mountain of Conflict
2025-01-31 20:05:36 +0000 UTCI’d buy $1000 a list no doubt
Asher Maitin
2025-01-31 19:07:17 +0000 UTC
