Two visions, one industry: Hollywood’s 2026 reckoning with AI

by
Alyssa Davidson

Posted: Jun 30, 2026 9:32 AM Updated: Jun 30, 2026 9:32 AM

by Anastasia Oh

Edit and fact check date: June 30, 2026, 9:32 AM

We sometimes use automatic translation plugins to improve your local language experience. The automatic translation may not be accurate, so please read the original text for accurate information.

In a week in June 2026, two announcements from opposite ends of the entertainment industry demonstrated exactly how unresolved the film industry’s relationship with AI remains.

On June 22, Google DeepMind said it had invested $75 million in A24, the indie studio behind Hereditary and Everything Everywhere All at Once, in what it said was a “first-of-its-kind” research partnership.

DeepMind CEO Demis Hassabis characterized this as collaboration rather than coercion, arguing that “the way to build tools that empower artists is to work directly with them.” A24 argued that the deal was defensive in nature. Communications representative Sophia Shin later explained that the studio wanted a “seat at the table” for creators to create AI tools rather than having them applied from the outside, while partner Scott Belsky emphasized that what emerges will not resemble rapid-fire creation slop.

Notably, the deal does not grant access to A24’s content library or audience data. This is a workflow partnership rather than a content licensing agreement, and the first tool being developed is an AI storyboard generator rather than a text-to-video system.

The very next day, an almost polar opposite gesture unfolded in the European Parliament in Brussels. Cate Blanchett, along with MEP Eva Maydell and filmmaker Steven Soderbergh, launched the RSL Media Human Consent Registry, a free and public tool that allows anyone to declare whether and under what terms AI systems can use their name, image, voice, likeness or movements.

Blanchett, who co-founded RSL Media last May with Nikki Hexum, Doug Leeds and Eckart Walther, described the initiative as a response to the “pervasive and essentially unchecked” expansion of AI, framing identity itself as intellectual property suitable for an explicit consent architecture.

The registry is built on the open “Really Simple Licensing” protocol with support from a significant roster of actors and creators, including Meryl Streep, Tom Hanks, Viola Davis, and Javier Bardem. Crucially, this tool is voluntary. There is no legal enforcement mechanism, and the actual impact will depend entirely on whether AI developers refer to this tool.

Read it together. These two moments are no coincidence, but rather snapshots of an industry attempting two contradictory survival strategies simultaneously. One is based on proximity and influence, the other is based on denial and rights infrastructure.

Fragmented industry, camp by camp

The DeepMind-A24 transaction and Blanchett registration sit on top of a much broader and increasingly challenging environment. Organized labor was placed in a protected position. The studio’s 2026 agreement with SAG-AFTRA allows synthetic performers only if they add “substantial additional value” to the project and requires advance notice before an actor’s performance can be licensed for AI training.

Union leaders called it a victory, while internal critics, including former technical committee co-chair Erik Passoja, argue the standards are vague enough to allow studio lawyers to define them however they want without being given a compensation floor.

In addition to labor, distinct camps emerged. Pragmatists, exemplified by filmmaker Paul Trillo, treat AI as a tool that will absorb tedious production tasks while putting human creative judgment at its core.

More provocative technological optimism surfaced when screenwriter Paul Schrader predicted that fully AI-generated protagonists would soon become box office successes. This claim was met with notable skepticism, even among AI-friendly industry audiences.

Opposing this is an organized resistance movement. Everything Everywhere All at Once director Daniel Kwan has built an industry-wide coalition of creators on AI, arguing that filmmakers, not tech experts, should set the terms for adoption. Justine Bateman’s “No AI” certification initiative, Credo23, on the other hand, has brought together figures like Sean Baker and Gus Van Sant as outspoken opponents. Even A24’s famed director Kane Parsons has publicly rejected the very technology his studio has invested in.

The catalyst event behind this year’s urgency was the February viral spread of an AI-generated video depicting a rigged match between Tom Cruise and Brad Pitt, created through ByteDance’s Seedance 2.0.

Disney issued a cease-and-desist order over possible unauthorized use of copyrighted material, and SAG-AFTRA accused the clip of ignoring “laws, ethics, industry standards, and basic consent principles.” It’s a language that has become the connective tissue between virtually every subsequent AI initiative in Hollywood, including Blanchett’s registrar.

The fight is also legislative. Even as advocates push the No Fakes Act through Congress and capital continues to pour into AI studios at breakneck speeds, a Justice Department task force has challenged state-level performer protection laws that could be preempted federally.

Polarization as the new normal

What emerges in this situation is not a coherent industry position, but a serious structural contradiction.

While studios are publicly advocating for artist-centric AI development, they are also quietly building tools whose long-term implications for workforce displacement have yet to be addressed. While its creators decry unregulated use of AI, some institutions are entering into equity partnerships with the very companies developing the technology.

Consent registers promise individual entities but do not guarantee enforcement, while collective bargaining agreements provide enforcement mechanisms that are fraught with interpretative loopholes.

In other words, Hollywood isn’t choosing whether to embrace or reject AI. You’re doing both simultaneously, often within the same studio, in the same union, and even within the same film.

Rather than a single deal or declaration, these contradictions may be the truest expression of the industry’s current moment.

As a dedicated journalist at MPost, Alisa specializes in the broad areas of cryptocurrency, AI, investing, and Web3. With a keen eye for new trends and technologies, she provides comprehensive coverage to inform and engage readers about the ever-evolving digital financial landscape.

• 
  
  

more articles