Disrespecting Talent: AI and The Oscars
- Sasha Jayne
- 11 hours ago
- 4 min read
This year’s Oscars should have been a night of cinematic triumph, a celebration of the best storytelling, acting, and filmmaking of the past year. Instead, it became a showcase of Hollywood’s ongoing descent into artificiality—both literally and figuratively. AI-augmented performances loomed large over the ceremony, not just recognized but actively rewarded. The night felt less like a tribute to artistic vision and more like a forewarning of a future where cinema is no longer made by human hands.
From the moment the nominations were announced, it was clear that artificial intelligence had left its fingerprints all over this year’s contenders. Several of the most celebrated films incorporated AI-generated elements—not just in minor background details but in central aspects of their storytelling. And while industry executives continue to champion AI as a “tool” for efficiency and innovation, the reality is that it has become a blatant shortcut at the expense of human creativity.
One of the most controversial moments of the night was Adrien Brody’s win for Best Actor. While Brody is undoubtedly a talented performer, his victory felt less like a celebration of acting and more like a warning sign for the future of the craft. The issue? AI had a heavy hand in shaping the performance that won him the award. While digital touch-ups are nothing new in Hollywood, the scale of AI manipulation in Brody’s performance in The Brutalist crossed into unprecedented territory. Brody was purportedly unable to achieve an authentic accent while speaking Hungarian, so movie producers made the decision to use an AI voice generating program, Respeecher, to augment Brody’s and fellow actor Felicity Jones’ accents.The use of AI shortcuts disrespects both the actors who put real effort into perfecting accents for their roles, and—given that producers and actors decided to not put the time and effort into being able to master the nuances of the language—Hungarian itself.
The Brutalist wasn’t the only nominated and award-winning film to use AI. The musical Emilia Perez used the same AI tool, Respeecher, to expand the vocal range of the main actress Karla Sofía Gascón for her musical performances. While Emilia Perez was already facing backlash due to highly offensive tweets by Gascón, public opinion dropped even further when its AI-augmented music won the Oscar for Best Original Song. Additionally, A Complete Unknown used AI to make a stunt double’s appearance more similar to the star, Timothee Chalamet.
There were, however, some well-deserved wins that proved that genuine artistry still has a place in Hollywood. Wicked triumphed in the technical categories, winning Best Costume Design and Best Production Design, thanks to its dazzling visuals and meticulously crafted world-making. This victory highlighted the film's commitment to both spectacle and detail. Meanwhile, The Substance impressed with its horrifying body transformations, securing Best Makeup and Hairstyling. The film's ability to create such memorable and metamorphic looks was a testament to its artistic vision and technical expertise, and was a rarer recognition of horror and psychological thrillers in the Oscars.
Ultimately, the essence of acting is in human expression—the subtle twitch of an eyebrow, the natural cadence of a voice, the imperfections that make a performance feel real. When AI is used to “enhance” or “fix” an actor’s work, it raises questions about authorship and authenticity. Was Brody’s performance truly his own, or was it shaped by an algorithm trained to maximize accuracy? Did Brody fully deserve the Best Actor win, or should the AI Respeecher have joined him on stage for the acceptance speech? More troubling is what this means for the future of acting. If studios can tweak performances after the fact, what stops them from creating entire AI-assisted performances from scratch? The use of AI in Brody’s case suggests that actors are no longer in full control of their own craft. A performance can be altered and even partially AI-generated in post-production, undermining the very concept of live-action filmmaking and depriving it of the human spirit. And the fact that AI use was not only permitted and nominated, but was celebrated through the awarding of an Oscar is absolutely deplorable and discredits the legitimacy of the Academy. Simply put, it is an actor’s job to be able to perform their roles on their own merit. If they struggle to fulfill the requirements of a role, it is up to them to work to improve their performance, not rely on AI. If an actor can’t do the job on their own, they shouldn’t be winning one of the most prestigious film awards of the year. The use of AI in films undermines the value of actors with real talent and ultimately hinders artistic creativity in favor of a palatable computer-generated formula for success.
Rating: INDY
Sasha Jayne is a sophomore in the College studying Psychology, and is one of the current Commentary editors. Their true loves and passions are metal and punk music, The Rocky Horror Picture Show, and wearing excessive amounts of black clothing.