Moderated by Michel Zgarka, President and CEO of Hitlab, the panel featured a trio of deeply experienced voices: Vanessa Shapiro, CEO of Nicely Entertainment; Toma de Matteis, Managing Director of Fiction at France.tv Studios; and Leif Host Jensen, Dean of Film, TV and Games at Norway’s Inland University.
The session was less about whether AI would transform the entertainment industry and more about how, how fast, and at what cost — both creatively and ethically.
Vanessa Shapiro explained that her company has been using AI across all stages of production — from development to filming — primarily as a cost-reduction tool. While acknowledging Hollywood’s current “love-hate” relationship with AI, she emphasized the importance of finding a balanced approach that embraces the technology without compromising creative integrity.
Leif Host Jensen, both an academic and a producer, emphasized that the true challenge isn’t the technology itself — it’s the industry’s reluctance to change. “Our industry is far too expensive, too slow to adapt,” he said. “We’re dinosaurs protecting our current roles. AI is fundamentally altering our value chain, and we need to unlearn how we’ve been working and training for decades.”
As dean of one of a film and games schools, Jensen sees the generational divide up close. “Our game development students are fluent in AI and machine learning — they’ve used these tools for years. But at the film school, there’s a visible fear. Professors and producers alike feel their monopoly on expertise slipping.” His message was clear: “Either we get on top of this, or we will be replaced.” He shared that AI-generated content is already prevalent on platforms like TikTok and Snapchat, and full AI-assisted film production is quickly becoming a reality.
Toma de Matteis emphasized that while AI can now generate countless visual shots, the true skill lies in assembling them into meaningful, emotionally resonant narratives. He believes future filmmakers must blend technical proficiency with artistic vision — not just knowing how to use the tools, but understanding storytelling and audience connection. The goal is to train both technicians who can solidify the process and artists who grasp the deeper purpose behind each scene, moving beyond just executing instructions to creating impactful cinema.
For De Matteis, the AI revolution is not unlike previous disruptions. “When Collateral came out, people said you couldn’t shoot a film like that with HD cameras. But it worked — beautifully. New tools have always been part of this evolution. We just have to stay curious and adapt.”
The next generation of creators, the panel agreed, is already embracing AI as second nature. “For them, it’s organic,” said Shapiro. “I had students proudly showing me digital art they spent months creating. It’s beautiful — but now an AI can generate something similar in five minutes. That’s the reality they’re facing.” Still, she emphasized the human role: “What AI can’t replicate — yet — is the unique emotional perspective of a storyteller. That spark is still ours to own.”
But as creativity accelerates, so do legal and ethical complications. Licensing faces, voices, and likenesses of actors is fast becoming a necessity. “We’re already using background crowds generated by AI — replacing what used to be 100 extras,” said Shapiro. “That’s cost savings, sure. But what happens when it’s the lead actor being synthesized?”
Host Jensen shared a real-world example: “In one experiment, a 72-year-old director created a short film using AI tools for just €500. He joked that he can finally ‘work with his favorite actor’ — no tantrums, no scheduling conflicts, just a single photograph. That kind of shift was unthinkable a year ago.”
Host Jensen emphasized the importance of the professional industry taking ownership of AI integration rather than leaving it to less experienced or non-professional creators. He warned that while audiences still relate to familiar faces and traditional formats, the economics of production are shifting rapidly. By embracing AI tools — particularly in areas like visual effects — the industry can dramatically cut costs. As an example, he compared the massive expense of staging a real cliff jump for Mission: Impossible in Norway to generating a similar scene with AI and VFX, estimating it could be done at a fraction — potentially 1/1000th — of the cost. His message: to stay relevant and financially sustainable, professionals must adapt and learn to use AI effectively.
Despite the rapid change, all panelists agreed: AI isn’t about erasing the human artist — it’s about amplifying them.
Toma de Matteis stressed that creators, not the tools, are ultimately accountable — and blindly using AI-generated content risks unintentionally copying existing works. If that happens, legal consequences are inevitable. “Use your brains in order not to get confronted to that “ he said, the key is to remain vigilant and use AI as a support, not a substitute for human judgment and originality.
De Matteis cautioned that while AI tools may seem widely accessible now, their high operational costs could eventually limit them to major studios and professionals with the resources to sustain their use.
Leif Host Jensen stressed the importance of establishing clear legal ownership in the age of AI-generated content. As international legal frameworks evolve, he urged creators to meticulously document their work — including scripts and prompts — to prove originality and protect intellectual property rights. The tools are here to stay, he noted, but creators must be proactive in asserting authorship.
As the panel ended, one thing was clear: the entertainment industry is standing on the threshold of a new era. The challenge is no longer whether to engage with AI — it’s how to do it ethically, creatively, and with vision.
(Lühr-Martin Lemkau)
