When you think of Lionsgate Films, you probably think of John Wick, The Hunger Games, Saw (until recently), or other breakout film franchises. But if vice chairman Michael Burns has his way, Lionsgate might be at the forefront of AI filmmaking. Last September, Lionsgate struck a deal with the AI research company Runaway, and Burns told New York Magazinethat he sees AI as a way to apparently make whatever kind of films he wants. “We can’t make it for $100 million, but we’d make it for $50 million because of AI… We’re banging around the art of the possible. Let’s try some stuff, see what sticks,” Burns said. “Now we can say, ‘Do it in anime, make it PG-13’. Three hours later, I’ll have the movie.” These comments not only downplay the hard work that goes into making into a movie, but they also paint a terrifying path that studios shouldn’t go down.
Lionsgate Using AI To Alter Films Spits in the Face of the Filmmaking Process
The most galling element about Mark Burns’s comments is the fact that he, and other studio heads, think that AI will make filmmaking as easy as pushing a button. That’s not the case; films appeal to people because of the hard work that goes into them. Creed, Black Panther, and Sinnerswouldn’t be the cultural phenomenons they were if Ryan Coogler wasn’t behind the camera. Gladiatorbears the epic heft of a Ridley Scott film, while Interstellarhas all the hallmarks of a Christopher Nolan film—including the non-linear unfolding of time. Even major franchises can sign in the right hands. John Wick, for example, rewrote the book on action films thanks to Chad Stahelski and David Leitch‘s work, not to mention Derek Kolstad‘s standout script. AI can’t even begin to scratch the creative depths that these filmmakers have plumbed.
It’s also insulting of Burns to suggest that a film can be transformed into an anime or trimmed down to PG-13. Ignoring the fact that he’s once again downplaying the hard work that goes into creating animation, not to mention the work that editors do turning hours of film into a coherent narrative, he’s outlining the major issue that creatives have with AI—it’s ruining the original creative vision. If a filmmaker wants to make an animated film, they should be able to; likewise, if a filmmaker has an R-rating in mind for their film, they should definitely be able to make an R rated movie. A great example is Predator: Killer of Killers, as Dan Trachtenberg developed it as an animated anthology and kept the bloody violence that defined the Predator franchise. In contrast, Burns’s vision of filmmaking feels less like actual filmmaking and more like the soulless “Ghibli filter” that attempts to recreate Hayao Miyazaki‘s signature style.
Lionsgate’s Decision To Pursue AI Filmmaking Is Another Bad Decision in a String of Bad Decisions
Mark Burns may be all in on AI filmmaking, but a good chunk of the industry definitely isn’t. In fact, voice actors are currently on strike over AI being utilized in the video game industry; if Lionsgate or other film studios attempt to go through with using AI in their films, they could trigger another actors’ and/or writers’ strike, and they’d have no one to blame but themselves. Those strikes have a major impact on films, as blockbusters including Blue Beetleand The Marvelswere negatively affected due to not having actors available for promotion. Is Burns really willing to alienate talent for the filmmaking equivalent of a shiny new toy? It wouldn’t be the first time that Lionsgate has made immensely bad decisions, as the studio had a massive string of flops in 2024. That includes infamous flops The Crow and Borderlands; both suffered from labored productions and were met with scathing reviews upon release. But whatever you can say about The Crow or Borderlands, both of them were made by actual people who worked hard to bring these worlds to life.
When Lionsgate first announced its deal with Runaway, Mark Burns said on a conference call: “We think this is very much going to enhance filmmaking and become an incredible tool for the community.” But going full tilt into AI is demeaning to filmmakers, shows a staggering lack of creativity, and a full on contempt for what makes the experience of watching a film special.
