Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

20th Century Fox Is Using AI To Analyze Movie Trailers, Find Out What Films Audiences Will Like (theverge.com)

Posted by BeauHD on from the connecting-the-dots dept.

20th Century Fox is using AI to predict what films people will want to see. According to a recently published paper, researchers from the company are using machine learning to examine trailer footage and compare the objects and events it identifies with data generated for other trailers. "The idea is that movies with similar sets of labels will attract similar sets of people," The Verge reports. From the report: As the researchers explain in the paper, this is exactly the sort of data movie studios love. (They already produce lots of similar data using traditional methods like interviews and questionnaires.) "Understanding detailed audience composition is important for movie studios that invest in stories of uncertain commercial," they write. In other words, if they know who watches what, they will know what movies to make.

To create their "experimental movie attendance prediction and recommendation system" (named Merlin), 20th Century Fox partnered with Google to use the company's servers and open-source AI framework TensorFlow. In an accompanying blog post, the search giant explains Merlin's analysis of Logan. First, Merlin scans the trailer, labeling objects like "facial hair," "car," and "forest" (taking into account how long these objects appear on-screen and when they show up the trailer). By comparing this information with analyses of other trailers, Merlin can try to predict what films might interest the people who saw Logan.

123 comments

  1. The problem is the measurement by alternative_right · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "People" are not a fungible quantity; they differ greatly as individuals, groups, and even between regions. Instead of trying to make a movie to make a generic consumer happy, make a quality movie that people who like quality cinema can recognize. Others will emulate them.

    --
    Alternative Right.
    1. Re:The problem is the measurement by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 2

      Instead of trying to make a movie to make a generic consumer happy, make a quality movie that people who like quality cinema can recognize.

      They don't want to make quality movies. They want to make movies that make money.

      A quality movie might come out as a waste product.

      But then, it depends on how you define quality. Run Run Shaw was once asked, "What type of movies do you like best?"

      He answered, "Those that make money."

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    2. Re: The problem is the measurement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      They want to make trailers that sell.

    3. Re:The problem is the measurement by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      make a quality movie that people who like quality cinema can recognize.

      How big is that market segment?

      They are trying to make money, not win an award at Sundance.

      This is what the AI is going to recommend: Fast and Furious Nine

    4. Re:The problem is the measurement by youngone · · Score: 2

      This is what the AI is going to recommend: Fast and Furious Nine

      Of course it will. They want to be able to churn out widgets exactly like the music business figured out how to do 15 years or so ago.
      In the music industry's case they discovered that what Simon Cowell likes on his various TV "talent" shows can cheaply be packaged up and sold for a brief period before the next sound-alike comes along and starts the process again.
      The movie industry wants to be able to do this too, and Fast & Furious 9 (or 10 or 11) is perfect for them.

    5. Re:The problem is the measurement by CohibaVancouver · · Score: 1

      make a quality movie that people who like quality cinema can recognize

      There are many dozens of "quality" movies released each year - Great story, great acting, great cinematography. Most of them go bust because they majority of the movie viewing public wants "The Fast and the Furious Part 11" not "Children of Men."

    6. Re:The problem is the measurement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem as I see it is that some movie studio becomes popular (and wealthy) because they make quality, popular movies. Over time it's realized that if they take a [quality] movie and put a few tweaks here and there based on research, they'll not only have a [quality] movie but one that drives in more movie goers. At some point they have a movie that's based entirely upon adding tweaks to movies ignoring that "[quality]' as a base isn't there, so while you'll drive in a segment of the population that goes purely on tweaks, they won't drive any actual growth and they'll be subject to substantial volatility in viewership as other, similar movies with the same list of tweaks from other movie studios are released.

      In short, they've already got the Intelligence but they think somehow Artificial Intelligence will do better while ignoring the core aspect of what makes consistently good viewership numbers--quality. It's not just quality in the special effects or in the director or in the script writer. It's all those things and more. I don't think AI will be any better than I in judging quality, or at least, I don't think movie studios will be any more inclined to listen to it than they already listen to people who presumably know better.

    7. Re:The problem is the measurement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem as I see it is that some movie studio becomes popular (and wealthy) because they make quality, popular movies. Over time it's realized that if they take a [quality] movie and put a few tweaks here and there based on research, they'll not only have a [quality] movie but one that drives in more movie goers. At some point they have a movie that's based entirely upon adding tweaks to movies ignoring that "[quality]' as a base isn't there, so while you'll drive in a segment of the population that goes purely on tweaks, they won't drive any actual growth and they'll be subject to substantial volatility in viewership as other, similar movies with the same list of tweaks from other movie studios are released.

      In short, they've already got the Intelligence but they think somehow Artificial Intelligence will do better while ignoring the core aspect of what makes consistently good viewership numbers--quality. It's not just quality in the special effects or in the director or in the script writer. It's all those things and more. I don't think AI will be any better than I in judging quality, or at least, I don't think movie studios will be any more inclined to listen to it than they already listen to people who presumably know better.

      So it's just like anything else. Movies and video games are slowly becoming like the generic sitcoms of TV.

    8. Re:The problem is the measurement by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      Is it really so difficult, they want a good story well told. They probably don't want the same story told over and over again, often told worse than it was before. You can cheat, scope out all other media and check out what stories people liked and tell them in the movie format but remember to tell them well, so fuck off the nepotistic no nothings, that make things look good but tell really shit, clumsy, stupid stories because that is the limit of their intellect and they are to egoistic to hire smart people with knowledge who can improve the quality of the story told.

      Mostly now they rely on bullshit marketing, baked reviews, and some absolutely insane SJW bullshit to get themselves out of trouble when they fuck it all up with their lame arse egos.

      Well, too fucking late, animation will fuck them all up. High quality animation tends to take the nepotism out of the equation and pushes the story tellers much closer to the content creation, the writers and animators working together. Hugely reduced cost with greater automation in animation means much more content and that content being produced all over the world generating loads of competition, yeah the old publishers are well and truly fucked. Real life animation will totally wipe them out, sold to streaming library's to be distributed to the end user upon what ever agreed contract basis all commercial free, apart from of course product placement or sponsored content.

      Sponsored content being paid for, like in the old days a soap company, hence soaps, so at the beginning this content sponsored by '?' for ever and seen but no heard.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    9. Re:The problem is the measurement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Facebook's stock price says different

    10. Re:The problem is the measurement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is the metaphorical problem with trying to produce a film by ticking boxes on a checklist.

      If you want to make a film that appeals to the widest appeal (note this is observation, like really, look at the average score of films on imdb, the most popular stuff are childrens action movies (mostly disney), and the least popular things are movies filmed to appeal only to women and/or christians, with even mockbusters from Asylum films do better than religious-toned films )

      Visible:
      - No white lead (any leading white characters should be female and/or gay)
      - No male lead (any leading male characters should be gay and/or black)
      - At least two visible minority races (any minority which are more typically white skinned (eg Jews and Russians) do not count), which means at least one recognizably Asian character, and one recognizable Black character. They need to have a name and more than one line, and they must talk to each other once.

      Pace:
      - No dead air
      - No jump cuts
      - No breaking the 180 degree rule
      - No shakey-cam
      - No "lost footage"
      - No POV

      The important part is that something needs to always be happening, even if it's happening in the background. If two people are sitting on a corner of a street, the street better have some moving cars. When the camera moves, it needs to zoom, dolly or pan, it can not jump without a transition or action.

      Busy-ness of the scene:

      Despite what is said above,
      - The leads must always be in focus unless there is going to be a big boom, or a large zoom out (eg to the exterior of a building, ship or city)
      - The leads must never be separated (thus turning the moving into two movies with half the length, it's fine to see who's on the other side of the phone, it's not fine to make a movie about 16 characters walking to mordor and each group breaks into 4, and thus we have 4 movies of 4 characters side-plots sewn together.

      As the cast gets bigger (looking at you MCU) it becomes harder for people who haven't seen the entire movie franchise to date to figure out who characters are, especially if they age significantly since last time, or are even recast. Spiderman (Marvel) is a whole lot of confusion since it's been rebooted twice since x-men came out, as well as Superman (DC). Likewise Spiderman, X-men and Avengers all exist in the same continuity as far as the comics go (I think?) that means the movie universe (which apparently has canon cross overs with the tv shows, of which none other than Agent Carter I was in to) is way too hard to follow without someone drawing a map.

      DCU is probably a little worse. The TV shows and the movies have separate continuities (for a good reason, the DC Movies basically suck.) But they also put in a good reason for them to make sense. The Flash (TV show) indicated the 52 universes. It also put in a good reason for Flashpoint to have been a thing that breaks the worlds.

      Overall however, because of the amount of effort by douche-bros on the internet, what happens is that they get all crybabyish about what happens to their beloved comic/film/tv franchise. This creates this tone-deafness seen by DC/Warner/AT&T (Yes those guys), and the end result is that people are just turned off by the tonedeaf movies.

      As long as a movie is making money, someone will be willing to produce it, but knowing how current AT&T (formerly Cingular) operates, they are absolute asshole penny-pinchers. To the point that nobody enjoys working for them and only do so begrudgingly because it's one of the few jobs that you don't get fired for being terrible at.

    11. Re:The problem is the measurement by tlhIngan · · Score: 2

      Is it really so difficult, they want a good story well told. They probably don't want the same story told over and over again, often told worse than it was before. You can cheat, scope out all other media and check out what stories people liked and tell them in the movie format but remember to tell them well, so fuck off the nepotistic no nothings, that make things look good but tell really shit, clumsy, stupid stories because that is the limit of their intellect and they are to egoistic to hire smart people with knowledge who can improve the quality of the story told.

      And you can join the filmmakers barely making it.

      FIrst off, there's a reason why the summer blockbusters season is called blockbuster. It makes a TON of money. Even in their bad years. People want explosions and disasters and big robots and tons of CGI with comic book characters.

      A movie is an escape - a chance to transport someone away from their problems in the world for a couple of hours and into a new world. Sometimes to let someone else do the driving, other times to numb the brain from all of today's problems.

      There is plenty of room for movies that "make sense" or "tell a good story" but you'll generally be limiting yourself and your audience to people who want to think and analyze. The vast majority of people want to sit down, be entertained, and stop thinking for a while.

      For a movie, its goal is to "put asses in seats". Entertaining them is how you do it, especially in this age where there are multiple options for spending a couple of hours.

      Of course, you can share wonderful stories, but you'll find your reach awfully short - limited to art houses or film festivals. If you're lucky you'll get a mention somewhere and a bit of buzz but still won't reach a lot of people because the theatres showing your movie are few and inconvenient.

    12. Re:The problem is the measurement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A move that "sell", is a movie that appeal to lots of people. All of them thinks it has qualities worth the ticket price. Quality movies are the only ones who sell - using the public definition of quality.

    13. Re:The problem is the measurement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      There is plenty of room for movies that "make sense" or "tell a good story" but you'll generally be limiting yourself and your audience to people who want to think and analyze.

      Yes, but this smaller audience is still worth catering to, as many of them simply won't go seeing those robot/explosion movies. Smaller audience merely means smaller budget, but that is hardly a problem. Use decent but unknown actors - they are cheap. This kind of movie don't need much special effects or props, also cheap.

    14. Re:The problem is the measurement by Mashiki · · Score: 2

      A friend of mine owns a small chain of theaters here in Ontario, they're in mostly small cities/towns, where the old theaters died out and they never replaced them. For him, this was the first fiscal year in the last 20 where he's operating on a loss. Roughly, he had 35% less "asses in the seats" then the previous year. People are tuning out on movies, too many remakes of poor quality for example. Or too many trying to push an agenda. These things are either not creating that escape, or they're simply jamming the crap they are trying to escape down their throat.

      Bonus points if you can figure out the theater chain.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    15. Re:The problem is the measurement by Cederic · · Score: 1

      Children of Men was commercially successful and will continue to generate revenues for decades.

      The Fate of the Furious (to pick the most recent in the franchise) earned far more money far more quickly so I can understand investment going into films like that but it certainly doesn't preclude making good films.

    16. Re: The problem is the measurement by Type44Q · · Score: 1

      But that requires talent and talent costs more.

    17. Re: The problem is the measurement by houghi · · Score: 1

      That is not how they make money. They make money by people going to the movies and advertising.

      Much easier to do with some random Marvel than e.g. inception. If you said inception before the movie came out, you needed to explain it. That costs money. If you say Marvel, people already know.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    18. Re:The problem is the measurement by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2

      Fast and Furious Nine

      Honestly I'm looking forward to that. 7 was great. The Rock took out a drone by landing an ambulance on it.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    19. Re:The problem is the measurement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Roughly, he had 35% less "asses in the seats" then the previous year. People are tuning out on movies, too many remakes of poor quality for example.

      Me, I simply don't go to see movies in the theatre any more, and haven't in years.

      My big-screen TV is in my nice comfy basement, where I have a beer fridge, a leather recliner, a fireplace, and surround sound. By end of winter I hope to have a bathroom and a galley kitchen down there. It's simply more enjoyable to watch them at home.

      For movies I really really want to watch, I'll buy them on Blu Ray where I will also watch every special feature, commentary, and behind the scenes stuff because that stuff interests me. Nobody gets analytics data on how many times I see the movie, and once I've bought it, there is no further contact with the studio.

      For everything else, if it doesn't eventually show up on Netflix, then I likely won't see it at all.

      I predict this won't lead to better movies. It will lead to trailers heavily designed to make a film look far better than it actually is ... or bad movies made according to the formula the AI gave them.

      At this point, for people like me, the movie theatre isn't really ever going to be an option again.

    20. Re:The problem is the measurement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Forget all that, just film part of it in China and you'll have 10 times the appeal of anything else because China. The bad guys are in Shanghai! The only one who can help us is in Hong Kong! Let's go to Beijing for no obvious reason!

      I mean, just look at the Transformers movies. They break every single one of your rules, are absolutely terrible movies, and somehow appeal to half the freaking planet.

      And if you want confusing continuities, Marvel and DC have nothing on Transformers (which was published by Marvel for a while). And yes, someone in Japan did draw a map, but good luck following it. Not that it matters because it relies on cartoon and toy canon that is only valid in Japan. That's right, on top of the mix of comic, cartoon, and movie continuities, the toys themselves add to and contradict canon and it is inconsistent between countries.

      The movies are largely separate, but the basic plot and characters are based on those from other sources and the comic and toy extensions tie all sorts of things together (while filling in backstory and attempting to close glaring plot holes). The end result is an incoherent mess of a money-making machine. That's the model the studios want to follow.

    21. Re:The problem is the measurement by Mashiki · · Score: 1

      At this point, for people like me, the movie theatre isn't really ever going to be an option again.

      Well you're not a minority in this by any stretch. To me it looks like movies are now following the path of TV, engaging in simply making shit and expecting their audience to lap it up. I'd laugh my ass off if the Star Trek:TNG prediction about "that form of media not living past the mid 21st century" turned out to be true. (or was it early 22nd century? been a long time since I watched that series)

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
  2. examined footage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Lawrence of Arabia was an okay movie but it really could have been great if it had facial hair, car, and forest.

    1. Re:examined footage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and women

      As to trailers...i.e. spoilers...I strictly avoid watching them.

  3. Justification by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They are using AI to hide behind non-pc opinions.
    Chinese market doesnt go see movies with black people, but their racism brings in money, so studios remove black people from movie posters or downplay their roles in advertising. But it's ok to be racist in non-American markets.
    Much like how the rest of the world is tired of PC garbage being foisted on us all, this will allow the executives who have continually churned out garbage to save face without admitting all of their decisions were against what the public wanted. Pc shit doesnt sell.

    1. Re:Justification by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Meh, they'll just slam the AI as 'problematic' and try to shut it down. Movie studios will cave under threat of twitter lynching.

      Depressingly, crusading sjws and their fear of objective reality might be the only thing standing between us and the impending AI dystopia.

    2. Re: Justification by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is no objective reality. Quantum mechanics says so

    3. Re:Justification by bagofbeans · · Score: 1

      I guess they won't see the new Star Wars then as John Boyega is one of the most underated actors to hit Hollywood from UK for a while. See "Attack the Block", amazing low budget SciFi, very intense performance.

  4. Kind of pathetic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That that there's soo many bad movies now that the producers don't know what is what and have to use "AI" (machine learning, there is no AI yet) to figure out if their work is garbage or not. Sad... Just sad.

    1. Re:Kind of pathetic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Using AI to analyze trailers to find out what people 'like', so they can make more movies with the same themes, until all they need is one single script that has all the popular bits, and they can just push it through a word processor and change all the nouns to crank out cookie-cutter westerns, sci-fi, horror, drama, and romance at will... and then people will stop going to the theaters because the movies are all the same, and the MAFIAA (Music And Film Industry Association of America) will blame this on file-sharing and lobby for even more draconian measures.

  5. Simple by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 2

    In other words, if they know who watches what, they will know what movies to make.

    Make movies that don't suck *or* halve the admission price -- problem solved.

    --
    It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    1. Re:Simple by Kaenneth · · Score: 1

      The people that would only watch movies at half price won't buy overpriced waste corn and sugar water.

    2. Re:Simple by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 2

      Make movies that don't suck *or* halve the admission price -- problem solved.

      I've never understood why good movies cost the same as bad movies.

      Also, movies should cost more on the opening weekend, and then decline in price each week.

    3. Re:Simple by DaHat · · Score: 1

      Up until the 80's that was the case, with A movies & B movies, the successes of B movies like Star Wars and others through the late 70's/early 80's erased the line.

      The same thing can be said for length of movie. Something like Lord of the Rings being ~3x the length of some kids film, yet the price is the same at the same theater.

      --
      Help Brendan pay off his student loans
    4. Re:Simple by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 1

      Make movies that don't suck *or* halve the admission price -- problem solved.

      I've never understood why good movies cost the same as bad movies.

      The movie industry financial folks have calculated that the demand curve is extremely inelastic. Even if they lower the price . . . more people won't go to see bad movies. Those folks will probably have a complex linear programming model to support this, but, in general, people tend to suspect that anything steeply discounted isn't top quality.

      Try these two propositions on your mate:

      "Let's have a fine bottle of wine with dinner, and then go see a good movie.

      "Let's have a box of Walmart wine with dinner, and then go see a cheap movie.

      With wine, a lot of folks will rather pass as opposed to drinking Walmart box wine. Is it really worth all the effort to go out to see that cheap, bad movie . . . ? Just the fact that the movie folks offer it cheaper indicates that even they know that it is bad.

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    5. Re:Simple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Star Wars wasn't a B-Movie. The term originates in low-budget films made to show as the second-billing movie in a double-feature. Later, it came to refer to low-budget movies in general. Star Wars was a high-budget film, with a budget almost as high as the James Bond film that aired that year. It wasn't a B-Movie by either definition.

    6. Re: Simple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dude, you have beer and nachos at the budget theater, pizza if the girl isn't more likely to barf it up.

    7. Re: Simple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They halved the price at my local cinema, which makes me more likely to use it.

    8. Re:Simple by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      I've never understood why good movies cost the same as bad movies.

      Because they rely on people not knowing that a movie sucks and wasting their money on it. Before the internet existed it often took a while for word of a bad movie to get around. Nowadays that information spreads at internet speed. They haven't caught up yet.

      Just look at movie trailers. They really don't want you to know the truth about most movies. Charging less for bad ones would just signal to people to avoid seeing them.

      Also, movies should cost more on the opening weekend, and then decline in price each week.

      Hollywood hates anything that devalues movies over time. Discounted DVD sales, rentals, TV broadcasts. They love things that keep the prices high, like DRM infected digital downloads and cinema tickets. They will always resist anything that drives down prices.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    9. Re:Simple by TheCastro1689 · · Score: 1

      That's a pretty incorrect comment. Movie theaters have manatee and weekday cheaper tickets that sell out and people buy lots of concessions. There are cheap theaters near me that show movies a few months old and they make all their money on concessions. People want cheaper tickets.

    10. Re:Simple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My college ran into this problem when they tried showing movies for free - people just didn't bother to show up. Attendance increased when they charged $2 instead because of the increase in perceived value. And then everyone complained about having to pay $2 for a movie when they were already paying a mandatory social fee.

    11. Re:Simple by bobmagicii · · Score: 1

      "in world, where all the movie trailers are the same, giving away the entire plot and all the best jokes of the movies, which are also all the same" kinda feels like we are already there.

    12. Re:Simple by ConceptJunkie · · Score: 1

      Does the manatee ticket come with a garbage bag full of popcorn and a 128-ounce drink? If so, I'm there.

      --
      You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
    13. Re:Simple by RespekMyAthorati · · Score: 1

      I didn't know anybody was making movie for big slow-moving marine mammals.

  6. Re:Alt-reich is a retarded quality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Always funny watching the erstwhile party of OWS jump to the defense of zillion-dollar corporations just to spite people they've been indoctrinated to hate (usually by the very same zillion-dollar corporations).

  7. bigdatadayla.com by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    This was already mentioned that 20th Century Fox was using AI for trailers in the Big Data Day LA (bigdatadayla.com) symposium this year in 11 August 2018 at USC. I sat in on this particular session, towards the end of the day. It was hosted by Miguel Campo, SVP Data Science and Analytics, 20th Century Fox. He showed one trailer that was a control (without modification) and that had been recut using "Collaborative Filtering". Impressive, to say the least. Yes, still along way to go, but positive.

  8. LOL by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

    If you liked "Spiderman" you will probably like "Spiderman 2" or any of the awful super hero movies that have been out in the last 10 years. Genius.

    1. Re:LOL by Kjella · · Score: 1

      If you liked "Spiderman" you will probably like "Spiderman 2" or any of the awful super hero movies that have been out in the last 10 years. Genius.

      That's what I'm thinking too, this algorithm will state the obvious but if you're trying to pick one of these five super hero movies to make next I really don't think the algorithm will capture what's actually a good character and story arc compared to what's not. I mean it doesn't really make sense to have a superspiderbatman, they're the same but they also have to be uniquely different. Even doing a prequel/sequel it has to build on the lore and character of the first movie. I can understand trying to analyze trailers to see what makes a good trailer. I really don't see how that makes a good movie.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    2. Re:LOL by youngone · · Score: 1

      As far as the superhero movies go, they're not trying to make a good one, they're trying to make another one the same, because the previous one made lots of money.
      They've succeeded too. Batman/Spiderman/Ironman/Whateverman is just the same movie released a couple of times a year since the mid 1990's.

    3. Re:LOL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But will you like "S. Piderman," the thrilling tale of a teenager who finds himself thrust into the high stakes world of intellectual property law after being bitten by a radioactive (well, maybe not radioactive, but she was kinda hot) legal clerk?

    4. Re:LOL by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      No-one liked Spiderman 1. They just really wanted a good Spiderman movie and were hoping that Spiderman 2 would be better.

      Transformers is the worst of that. I so want it to be good... And now the new one has the proper G1 character designs, I don't think I can resist watching it.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    5. Re:LOL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yet that rarely seemed to be the suggestion from NEtflix ?!?

      How is the 1st suggestion NOT always the next show/movie in series?!? lol

  9. Sounds great, do more! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Given my love for Hollywood and their spreading of cultural smallpox, I can only hope that they invest everything they have into this project. It is my sincere hope that it is just as successful as Amazon's / Best Buy's / Netflix's / etc. recommendations algorithms. You know, the ones that recommend you look into "The Human Centipede" since you watched and enjoyed an insect-focused episode of Discovery channel?

  10. Easy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We like not getting ripped off. And we like good, creative storytelling.

    1. Re: Easy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Every movie has a big fan somewhere

    2. Re: Easy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That huge untapped market of Air Bud fans, it must be the cross-over from Full House (Mmmm D.J. Tanner, so babelicious).

    3. Re: Easy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is a trailer I ain't never watching again. No movie dog will move the needle for date night.

  11. Adverts that dont ruin the movie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    When I watched Simpsons, the adverts ruined every joke in the movie. Start with not doing that. During skyfall, here in Australia, they actually reviewed skyfall before the movie.. Why?

    Then how about releasing a few original movies?

    Also why not release movies to Netflix or online faster? If the cinema/theatre experience is genuinely better (its definitely more expensive), people would still go instead of watching at home. Instead, people probably pirate them because they don't want the movie to get spoiled by other people, but dont want to cough up the money to watch it at the cinema.

    Finally, Blu-ray SUCKS. Stop with all the cyptographic protection DRM BS. It isn't preventing piracy. All its doing is annoying genuine customers. That's why nobody still owns a Blu-Ray player

  12. Re:Alt-reich is a retarded quality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    WHO defended them? I just said they're going to do what they do, and for a "free market" alt-reichtard to be against that or trying to "pick winners and losers" is antithetical and not going to happen either, so go fuck yourself lol.

    They make money because your idiot children go to their movies anyway. Don't like it? Don't watch them. That's your option, that's your own criteria. Do fuck off and stop trying to twist the words of others you dishonest cur.
    You're not selling much.

  13. Great trailers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's just what we need, more trailers that are way better than the actual movie.

  14. Facial Hair, Car, Forest by Marc_Hawke · · Score: 1

    That seems like exactly wrong way to do it. If you liked Logan, you would have probably liked it if it took place in the desert with a donkey, and he shaved.

    Maybe though, they aren't talking about liking the movie, but rather if the trailer will hook them enough to go see the movie.

    Even then, I think their analysis is pretty stupid. (BTW, I didn't read the article.)

    --
    --Welcome to the Realm of the Hawke--
  15. AI then asks the audeince and profits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Profit oh yeah!!

  16. How to make a good trailer by AHuxley · · Score: 1

    Put all the plot in the trailer. People will want to go to see the movie if the trailer was so creative.

    --
    Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    1. Re:How to make a good trailer by complete+loony · · Score: 1

      Don't forget to include all the jokes!

      --
      09F91102 no, 455FE104 nope, F190A1E8 uh-uh, 7A5F8A09 that's not it, C87294CE no. Ah! 452F6E403CDF10714E41DFAA257D313F.
  17. Sounds like a Disney/Kurt Russell movie.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sounds like a remake of the Barefoot Executive, but with computers instead of a monkey. https://disneymovieslist.com/movies/the-barefoot-executive/

  18. Bad idea. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Streamlining the movie trailer process into a "What works most" will inevitably make all trailers look and act alike, making all movies indistinguishable...

    Often what works is people sparking interest at something new. Trying to make them all "optimal" will make them ordinary.

    Probably after that, the most notable and popular advertisements will be the terrible ones that break convention.

  19. Consider the alternative by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    which other studios do. They tell you what to like, and what you're going to consume. They have an agenda, and are not interested in what you like.

  20. Easy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    No SJW, no diversity quotas, no feminist appeasing, no kids.

    1. Re: Easy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry, but people loved Black Panther.

    2. Re: Easy! by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

      Cartman hated it

    3. Re: Easy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Anyone I know recognizes Black Panther as crap disingenuous virtue signalling from the left.

    4. Re: Easy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Black Panther? A film where the hero was a hereditary monarch and against allowing refugees into his country? Doesn't sound very SJW to me.

    5. Re: Easy! by TimMD909 · · Score: 1

      ORANGE MAN BA.... hey, wait a minute...

    6. Re: Easy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's a difference between a "box-ticking" exercise to appease the twitter outrage brigade and a quality movie that stars a minority character. Unless you are a racist, you likely will have no issue with the latter. It's the former that gets grating, and even for most of the women/minorities that they are pretending to satisfy with them because they can recognize a "fuck it, throw a women into this, and make her a lesbian, that oughta sell" cynical attempt at appeasement when they see it.

  21. Pointless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hollywood solved the piracy problem by making stuff nobody wants for FREE.

  22. fake left by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We don't want traitorous far left communists telling us what we like. Using AI to ascertain what people want is indeed more libertarian like and respectful of people.

    That's all the hate filled fake ass liberal fascists do, they don't want to find out what you like, they want to indoctrinate you to think like they think and like what they like, and watch the crap they watch and clap like a dumb NPC. Total misery and humiliation for all!!

    1. Re:fake left by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "AI" i.e. trillion dollar companies telling you what you like is libertarian?

      This is beyond ridiculous. Although, what "libertarian" means anyway is : a libertarian fox in a libertarian hen house.
      You're also conditioned to throw the "fascist" and "far left" and "communist" buzz word with no idea what they mean. Are the Democrats far left fascist? No, they're right-wing liberal. They're Goldman Sachs and Obama and Clinton and Lockheed Martin (and W. Bush not far off at all). When right-wing nuts were saying Obama was a new Hitler, while I saw that was bullshit now I think they weren't that wrong.. but at the same time saying he was both Hitler, Stalin, Marx and Lenin was nonsense. Which it is? And if he is Hitler, why isn't Obama your idol?

      Want someone fascistic but ostensibly far left? It's Kim Il Sung, but he's definitely illiberal.
      You want to be a libertarian, i.e. a brand of right-wing liberal. What are you whining about then?, Clinton, W. Bush, Obama, Trump are right-wing liberals just like most of the billionaires - they're conservative too, but that's because liberalism is conservative, since conservatives want to conserve things and the status quo has been right-wing liberal for decades.

  23. Measuring the wrong thing by chrism238 · · Score: 1

    This approach measures whether people (may) like the trailer, not whether they'll like the movie. Movie studios will make tens of trailers for each movie, and let the AI decide which to present to the public. Then the public may be disappointed, and complain that the fantastic trailer was nothing like the terrible movie.

    1. Re:Measuring the wrong thing by jaa101 · · Score: 1

      This approach measures whether people (may) like the trailer, not whether they'll like the movie.

      Came here to say this. Maybe the studios think that a good trailer will drive attendance even for a bad movie. For the opening day or two this is more likely to be true, especially if they can pay off enough reviewers who are our only alternate source of information. Sadly for the studios, internet reviews make word of mouth very fast; if they don't have simultaneous worldwide releases then many audiences know in advance to avoid a stinker, however alluring its trailers may be.

  24. There is probably no way to measure audiances by bobstreo · · Score: 4, Interesting

    by analyzing movie trailers. Modern trailers for upcoming movies usually spoil anything possibly good or interesting about new movies. I seriously avoid watching trailers for movies I want to see. Although for other movies, trailers can convince me which movies to absolutely avoid.

    Data analysis of movie revenue based on actors/scriptwriters/directors would be a better start, but that would cost way more money, because you'd have to work around "Hollywood Accounting" practices to figure out how much money movies actually created.

    This type of analysis will create another miasma of Spiderman//Superman movie "reboots" because "This Time for Sure" Isn't there another Robin Hood movie coming out soon?

    1. Re:There is probably no way to measure audiances by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Modern trailers for upcoming movies usually spoil anything possibly good or interesting about new movies.

      It's not just movies. Half of the shows on Discovery start with a short clip of the end of the episode, completely ruining any big reveal. "Will they find the treasure?" "Hey guys, we found the treasure!" They'll usually even start the season with a teaser that includes every significant scene from the upcoming episodes, usually revealing that the season will be largely disappointing if there isn't anything beyond that (which there isn't). I guess people have such a short attention span these days thet they can't be bothered to watch something without knowing how it ends beforehand. Yet they still go through with watching it? I don't get it.

  25. Already done by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Disney sort of tried this with John Carter ... to tune the trailers to make audiences excited .. except the execs did not listen to the AI and the trailers sucked .. and the movie flopped. Many heads rolled on this one.

    John Carter and the Gods of Hollywood:

    https://www.amazon.ca/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?field-keywords=0615682316

    1. Re:Already done by bagofbeans · · Score: 1

      Good film though.

  26. Well that's unsurprising by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And the race to the bottom has now reached its logical conclusion.

  27. Awesom-O by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    PRODUCER
    Watch this: AWESOM-O, given the current
    trends of the movie-going public can
    you come up with an idea for a movie
    that will break a hundred million box
    office?
                            CARTMAN
    Um... okay. How about this: Adam Sandler
    is like, in love with some girl, but
    then it turns out that the girl is actually
    a ...golden retriever, or something.
                            STAFFER 2
      Oh, perfect!
                            STAFFER 3
    We'll call it "Puppy Love"!
                            STAFFER 2
    Give us another movie idea, AWESOM-O!
                            MITCH
    Yeah yeah!
                            STAFFER 3
    Let's hear it!
                            MITCH
    Yeah, we wanna hear it!
                            STAFFER 3
    Come on, come on!
                            CARTMAN
    Okay, how about this: Adam Sandler...
    inherits like, a billion dollars, but
    first, he has to, like, become a ...boxer,
    or something.
                            STAFFER 3 ...Yes, it's flawless!
                            MITCH
    Punch-Drunk Billionaire!

  28. Originality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeh but they all want originality, something new, something outlier.

    And tensorflow needs training data, something repetitive, non-original, something non-outlier.

  29. Re: Alt-reich is a retarded quality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You are a real shit head. And you know shit about movies. No surprise since you are full of shit.

    Everything in every movie now is heavily focus group analyzed.

  30. Re: Alt-reich is a retarded quality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Andrew Blightbarf

    Is this that sophisticated, cultured, intelligent liberal humor I've been hearing about?

  31. I guess that woukd work. . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    . . . if there were any such thing as homegenous taste. It is hysterical what engineers think 'AI' is capable of. Granted, movies are of such generally poor quality these days I've been at times convinced they were written by algorithms. Nope, just robot-like humans, it turns out.

  32. Re: Alt-reich is a retarded quality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nah, it's just better than rightwing chanting of dogma from Tiny Hands Trumpfuhrer.

    Seriously, even Grindelwald has better lines.

  33. To hell with imaginative new titles! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Full speed ahead! Let us use AI to make some random determination on why person X wants to see content focused on topic Y. An AI algorithm to predict a non-AI response... pure.. unadulterated genius!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=STeVTzWelns

  34. I hate trailers by Snotnose · · Score: 1

    I show up 20 minutes late to avoid both them and the commercials, which seems to piss off half the women I take to the movies (they know I set the time for x:20, instead of x, where the movie 'starts' at x).

    Then again, the 50% that don't get pissed off I seem to get along better with. huh.

    Why do I hate trailers? Long time ago there was a movie where Forrest Whittaker (first time I noticed him) was a chick with a dick. Those last 4 words were the entire movie's pivot. And a fucking trailer gave it away. If memory serves the whole media campaign was "don't give this away", yet the trailer gave it away.

    Dont get me started on the comedies where the funniest lines get cut out of the movie, only surviving to the trailer.

    1. Re:I hate trailers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I show up 20 minutes late to avoid both them and the commercials, which seems to piss off half the women I take to the movies (they know I set the time for x:20, instead of x, where the movie 'starts' at x).

      I hate the ads and trailers too, but I also hate showing up late for anything, especially when seating is involved.

    2. Re:I hate trailers by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Look at it this way: watching the trailers means you don't have to waste your time watching the actual movie.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    3. Re:I hate trailers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Look at it this way: watching the trailers means you don't have to waste your time watching the actual movie.

      That's probably why I never go to the movies.

  35. Well Sure, Mr Smarty Pants... by Slugster · · Score: 2

    Most of the data is probably going to point to more Police Academy sequels, but I'm still hoping that a follow-up to Popeye isn't off the table yet.

  36. How can AI work in this project? by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 1

    How can Artificial intelligence natural stupidity? Movie goers are dumb. They pay 9$ for a bucket of stale pop corn and 11$ to grungy dirt caked seats...

    --
    sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
  37. That only applies when you're making something by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    that stands out as truly special. Such a product is going to be a poor earner because the extremes you'll have to go through to stand out are going to turn off some viewers (to say nothing of censors in China).

    When it comes to maximizing profit you can absolutely look at people and their tastes in aggregate form. Focus groups work. They produce a mediocre product at best, but it'll make the optimal amount of money.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:That only applies when you're making something by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I recall communist times still. It was probably more difficult for moviemakers than book writers but the censorship was good for the good directors - it forced them to go above and below and make story that was multilevel enough for censors to miss shit. In other words you could see ideology in it if you were looking for it but you could just miss it or look elsewhere. That is of course not acceptable for modern day justice warriors. But thankfully they are no better than censor of the past.

    2. Re:That only applies when you're making something by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Go back to Moscow, Ivan. We don't need you here whining.

  38. Ignorant producers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes, if they go down the AI path all we will get is the same old crap that they currently produce. What a bunch of morons! Where is their imagination?

  39. Apocryphal story by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... movies with similar sets of labels will attract similar sets of people.

    An apocryphal story: The last think-tank discovered the labels 'royalty', 'medicine', and 'sex' to be universally popular. They recommended a show be named "Lady Chatterley's liver".

  40. Thatâ(TM)s easy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Donâ(TM)t make woke shit.

  41. No wonder their films suck! by Chas · · Score: 1

    Humans are not AI.

    And while AI is great for figuring out lots of things, human response is one of those tricky things.
    Especially as film hype and enjoyment change with saturation of awareness.

    Take the Zamboni scene from Deadpool.

    Funny as shit.

    Now stick it in every last trailer and play them non-stop in the weeks before the movie comes out.

    Interest and response to this particular joke have dived off significantly.

    AI simply doesn't capture that...

    --


    Chas - The one, the only.
    THANK GOD!!!
  42. Or they could just ask us movie-goers by ShoulderOfOrion · · Score: 1

    Spaceships, lots of weapons fire, scantily-clad women. Otherwise not worth my money seeing on the large screen.

    No expensive AI needed.

    1. Re:Or they could just ask us movie-goers by Magnus+Pym · · Score: 1

      Bullets, Bombs and Boobs... the 3 B's of cinematic excellence.

  43. Another case of writing by committee? by 91degrees · · Score: 1

    Hollywood keeps trying this sort of thing. It doesn't work. The idea superficially makes sense. These successful films contain elements X, Y and Z, so if we make a film with elements X, Y and Z it will be successful.

    The problem is, it doesn't work. This is a way to get bland generic pap. It will probably be pleasing enough but nobody will care if they see it or miss it. it's predictable and repetitive.

    1. Re:Another case of writing by committee? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On the other hand, I saw Eposide 8 before Episode 7 and I have to say, Episode 8 was better. I shit you not!
      It was still boring, I probably had a better time watching Gods of War 4 cutscenes on youtube.

  44. so... by Tom · · Score: 1

    So given AIs mix of awesome success and amusing failures, we will soon see a feature-length movie featuring disembodied facial hair floating through a forest for two hours, mixed with special effects and a blasting soundtrack ?

    --
    Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
  45. Keep SJWs away from the script..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    More Tarantino needed, less soy boy....

  46. great by sad_ · · Score: 1

    they will find the perfect trailer formula and then all trailers will look the same, except for the title of the movie.
    ofcourse, this has to a large extend, already been applied to movies as a whole, that's why every movie is basically the same.

    praise the indies!

    it's amazing how much the video games and movie industry is similar.

    --
    On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
    1. Re:great by syn3rg · · Score: 2

      This explains why all movies now "feel" the same..

      --
      The contents of this message have been doubly encrypted by ROT13
    2. Re:great by iggymanz · · Score: 1

      I think this will result in trailers that look fantastic but the movies will be total shit.

      oh wait, we have that now so essentially you're right.

  47. 20th C.F. must drink their coffee black by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just saying

    1. Re:20th C.F. must drink their coffee black by syn3rg · · Score: 1

      Well played! +1
      I read in reverse order, so I haven't gotten to that story yet.

      --
      The contents of this message have been doubly encrypted by ROT13
  48. Coming Soon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    20th Century Fox notices that it uses physics, maths, network switches and laptops so decides to tell the geeks on /. how to work on those things. After all, if it's OK for geeks on /. to tell Hollywood how to make movies...

  49. Innovations of AI by Justinevans1 · · Score: 1

    No doubt AI has bring the tremendous change in the world of technology. Since it plays an significant role in the development of technology. As the trends of virtual realities lies under the AI of the world of technology. I have read an article: https://mobinspire.com/company...

  50. Same with games by HalAtWork · · Score: 1

    When they make a huge budget game that tries to please a mass audience, few succeed and it is a make or break endeavor for the studio/publisher.

    Those who focus on their niche and try to please their core audience will foster loyalty and have guaranteed repeat sales that sustain them for the long term.

    --
    Twinstiq, game news
  51. Deep voice naration by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    +10 points for that deep voice narrator.

    "In a world where..."

  52. The Metallica Problem by alternative_right · · Score: 1

    I think of this as "The Metallica Problem" referring to what this band faced after they first started to get big (Master of Puppets era).

    They could sell out, and get huge instantly, or keep making material in line with their past efforts, and be niche.

    The advantage to being niche is that you do not then have to maintain huge band status, and get more of a chance to do what you wanted to without being obligated to the desire of your audience for your music to always become simpler, dumber, and more exuberant.

    Either way, they would have ended up rich. Perhaps not mega-rich with the second, but when you are counting in millions, does anyone really care that much?

    --
    Alternative Right.