Why A.I. Entertainment Feels Empty Even When It Looks Impressive

Every new wave of headlines about artificial intelligence in entertainment arrives with the same promises: faster production, lower costs; limitless creativity. Tech firms present automation as the next inevitable step forward. Meanwhile, studios frame it as liberation from old constraints.

What rarely gets discussed is why those constraints were present in the first place.

A.I. is not being introduced to enhance storytelling or elevate artistic ambition. It is being rolled out to solve managerial problems. After all, schedules need filling. Catalogs need expanding, and most of all, predictability needs enforcing. Automation answers those needs cleanly and without argument.

That alone explains why so much A.I.-driven entertainment feels empty.

Modern entertainment was already drifting toward administrative thinking long before automation entered the picture. Scripts passed through layers of notes designed to eliminate surprises. Visuals were pre-approved to fit brand templates. Characters were reworked according to audience response metrics. Art became less about making a statement and more about avoiding mistakes.

A.I. fits into this scheme seamlessly because it has no reason to resist it. An automated system does not question why a scene exists. It evaluates whether similar scenes held attention elsewhere. Nor does it care if a story contradicts itself. It checks whether the output resembles previously successful inputs. Risk-taking is replaced with pattern matching.

Read the full post on Substack!

Access it free for the first two weeks, then find it in the paid archive.