Anurag Kashyap slams Chiranjeevi Hanuman producer for backing AI in films, sparking debate on creativity, profit, and the future of Bollywood.
The world of Indian cinema has always been driven by passion, creativity, and the tireless work of the artisans involved. With an elevated debate about the role of artificial intelligence (AI) in the world of film, recently, director Anurag Kashyap was at the forefront of this, giving increased importance to the producers of the AI film Chiranjeevi Hanuman – The Eternal. Kashyap specifically made comments about the actions taken by Vijay Subramaniam, which have since sparked heated discussion across whether Bollywood, Kollywood, emotionally down cinema, or just left-indie-turned-no-budget cinema.
The Controversy: Kashyap vs Collective Artists Network
Anurag Kashyap is someone who will not hold back his opinions, and in this case, rightly so. He commented on the actions taken by Vijay Subramaniam, producer of Chiranjeevi Hanuman, the eternal, and head of Collective Artists Network, which is a talent business supporting actors and artists.
Kashyap remarked that Collective Artists Network and companies like them are willing to partake in AI to replace human artisans and creativity in favor of profit. This legitimate dispute resulted in Kashyap saying “spineless” and judging Subramaniam by suggesting he “should be in the gutter” for supporting this.
“This is the future for spineless and cowardly so-called artists in the Hindi Film industry.” – Anurag Kashyap
His use of strong language reinforces the tension in the film industry—if AI tools become too educated and trained, will that put its roundtable creatives—writers, directors, and actors—out of business altogether?
Importance of this Discussion
The issue of concerns around AI-generated content is not just in films. Automation is coming for the creative industries across the globe, including in music, advertising, writing, and the like. AI has positive points, including speed, affordability, and possibilities; however, it also raises questions about ethics, and at times, the very core of existence.
Are AI machines going to replace human creativity?
How will humans earn a living in art if studios just hire AI for cheap labour?
If machines generate content, what do originality and storytelling mean?
In the world of cinema, where human narratives are driven by emotion, honest imperfections, and lived experiences, it can feel unsettlingly real that machines would replace it altogether.
Vikramaditya Motwane’s Response
Filmmaker Vikramaditya Motwane reinforced Kashyap’s fears when he countered, “Who needs writers and directors, if we can just make a film in AI?” If the world decides to use AI for film media, then the question becomes, where does that leave humans as storytellers?
AI in film also provides potential positives:
Cost Reductions: Human-based big-budget VFX and animations might become cheaper with AI-inhabited options.
Efficiency: AI could generate scripts, storyboards, and visual effects, all a record speed.
Possibly the way forward for independent creators is by using AI to create films at lower costs than employing expensive crews.
The Main Issues
Loss of Jobs: Writers, cinematographers, and possibly actors are being replaced by AI.
Cultural Authenticity – Machines do not have human lived experiences to connect to stories.
Ethical Questions – who owns the AI work? The programmer? Or producer? Or The AI?
A Global View: Hollywood vs Bollywood
As you can see, this is not an issue just India is facing. In Hollywood in 2023, there was a massive writers’ strike because the Writers Guild of America (WGA) collectively bargained for writers to be protected from AI replacing writers altogether. All writers in Hollywood fear that producers will utilize AI to create scripts without writers and paid labour, and even cause writers to become eventually irrelevant.
India and the entertainment business are now at a point where thousands of lives and livelihoods have come to depend on the entertainment industry, as near Hollywood and Bollywood consider it. With the project Chiranjeevi Hanuman – The Eternal, it appears that the Bollywood debate has officially begun.
Anurag Kashyap has always taken to speaking truth to power. Whether it was regarding the censorship board, nepotism in Bollywood, he tends to be the voice of independent artists.
His comment is in line with his feelings that art should generally be about the human angle. He is of the view that movies aren’t about the marginal profit, but storytelling about cutting real people.
The Boom of AI-Generated Content
AI Music Tools: Jukebox AI can produce an entire album.
Deepfake Technology: AI can convincingly recreate the faces and voices of actors.
AI Films: There are already some short experimental movies made using text-to-video AI models.
The development of these technologies is exciting, but it’s also an indication of a future when the boundary between human art and machine creation will be more fluid.
What Does This Mean for Near Future Artists?
If AI technologies continue to gain traction, Indian artists will have problems in a way that mirrors the recent Hollywood writers’ strikes. Here are some possible situations:
Agencies may leverage AI and search for profitability over artistic talent.
Up-and-coming writers and actors could face challenges finding a job.
Audiences may reject AI and any human-created work that is perceived as “soulless”.
Artists must voice their expressed concerns collectively, and it doesn’t matter which voice is the clearest, like Kashyap and Motwane. If they don’t, they’re acquiescing to accept that it is going to be a voice for the future.
Creating Balance Between AI and Human Talent
Some industry experts are saying skills with AI and how to use it properly should be taught by filmmakers, as opposed to arguing against the usage of AI.
Use as a Tool, not a Replacement: For example, if you’re storyboarding an idea, you can use AI to create that story more quickly, but it is still up to the human to tell the story.
Right to your Intellectual Property Protection: If a person uses AI tools to recreate
someone’s intellectual property without permission, then the creator should be compensated.
Are industry guidelines necessary? Just like labor laws, we should encourage clarity in AI use for entertainment.
Will Viewers Accept AI Films?
Ultimately, audiences will be the test. Will people pay to watch AI-generated films, or will they choose stories created by people?
History tells us that audiences appreciate authenticity in performances. Raw emotion, such as that of Irrfan Khan, and storytelling genius like Satyajit Ray, cannot be coded. AI can generate visually stunning experiences, but may not always generate emotional depth.
The Anurag Kashyap vs. Chiranjeevi Hanuman controversy is bigger than a personal attack it should be a signal for the future of Indian cinema. As we lean into AI, the industry must decide whether it wants to accept machines and disregard human imagination or eliminate the human struggle of creativity and find a happy medium.
Audiences appreciate authenticity in performances. Raw emotion, such as that of Irrfan Khan, and storytelling genius like Satyajit Ray, cannot be coded. AI can create spectacular visions, but it may not create authentic emotional depth.
FAQs
1. Why did Anurag Kashyap criticize Chiranjeevi Hanuman – The Eternal?
He believes producers are profiting from the destruction of creativity and that money is prioritized over humanity.
2. What did Kashyap actually say?
He called the move “spineless” and believes it is cowardly to support these projects.
