When the initial visuals of JioHotstar's AI(Artificial Intelligence)-generated version of the Mahabharata were released online, there was a strong response, ranging from awe to scepticism. The production values of the visuals, such as grandeur, the elaborate armour design, and highly developed lighting, looked almost excessive for a television series. The viewers were even more shocked when they learned that the entire series had been generated using artificial intelligence. The production did not have any actors performing in front of cameras. The production lacked art directors constructing palace sets, and algorithms generated all the castle's designs.

Every single character, hallway, geographic feature, or battle scene within Mahabharat existed solely within the computer-generated image and would be impossible to recreate in real life. For some people, the absurdity of the computer-generated version was cemented when a modern-day end table appeared in present-day Hastinapur. Others were outraged that they had taken a piece of cultural heritage and turned it into something generated by algorithms, creating plots devoid of context or emotion.

What emerged wasn’t just chaos or memes. It was a moment that hinted at a more profound shift. For the first time, a central Indian platform released a fully AI-generated series, and many wondered whether it was simply an experiment or a sign of where entertainment was headed. Around the world, the pattern looked similar. AI had stopped being a backstage helper and had begun taking on roles once shaped by human creativity—actor, editor, voice artist, even director. The tool had started to become the creator.

Artificial Intelligence-generated content (advertising and entertainment) is increasingly accepted in today’s media landscape. The emergence of AI-generated content has significantly altered the way media is conceived, produced, and consumed. To understand what has contributed to this rapid rise in AI-generated media, we must examine the ecosystem that has enabled AI to achieve its current level of success.

Why AI Has Become the Industry’s New Production Engine
For many years, those working in the film and advertising industries have expressed concern over how much the industry continues to grow and how unsustainable it is for producers. Currently, production costs have drastically exceeded the limits studios are willing to put at risk. Schedules have continued to stretch out, as many crews are short-staffed due to high-demand positions or the long response times required when large external forces create delays in meeting the growing number of demands. The loss of one day on set can result in the need to pay back untold amounts of money. Therefore, every adjustment and rescheduling will result in significant monetary losses, on top of the revenue it would have generated. Thus, under pressure to deliver more quickly and cheaply to keep pace with growing competition, studios have had to find as many ways as possible to speed up production and reduce production costs.

With that said, AI has stepped into that role at the right time. What was once seen as futuristic or impossible is now being viewed as an operational advantage. The business reports on production costs and the potential use of AI to cut costs and production timelines in half, such as those published by Exchange4Media and McKinsey & Co., indicate that producers now use AI-generated instant visualisations of their sets rather than planning and waiting for a physical timeline to be achieved. Also, post-production processes that would typically require hundreds of hours can now be completed with AI in much less time.

Netflix publicly acknowledged this when it revealed its first AI-made VFX scene, proudly sharing how it was created faster and more cheaply than any traditional method would have allowed. And this is only the beginning. Research from Autodesk and ScienceDirect shows that generative AI is rushing beyond simple enhancements. It can now build entire landscapes, animate characters, duplicate human emotions with synthetic faces, and even generate lens behaviour that imitates cinematic cameras.

The economic logic is complex to argue with. Why hire dozens of specialists when a single neural network can perform multiple roles? Why spend on elaborate sets when AI can create them instantly? Why invest in actors for every version of an ad when synthetic humans can perform endlessly and consistently? For advertising, especially, generative AI has become a holy grail. As reports from The Guardian highlight, major platforms like Google and Meta are pushing AI-generated ads as the next stage of digital marketing.

Without individual photographs from various demographic categories across different locations and lighting conditions, or without voice-over talent for each audience type, a company may use artificial intelligence to generate multiple advertisements at once for these diverse audiences. What many members of the target market do not know is that the advertisements or videos they are seeing were created using synthetic intelligence. Marketers view this capability as an incredible opportunity.

However, it's essential to understand that the continued popularity of AI-generated content will not be attributed solely to an economic shift. The second powerful force behind this increased interest and use of AI-generated creative content is technological advancement. AI technology has advanced to the point where it can perform the same functions as a human, and even better than many humans, without any need for human assistance. The divide between "AI-assisted" products and "AI-created" products has significantly narrowed in just a few short years; now, in many creative fields, creative AI can independently create a product just as well, if not better, than a human. AI has progressed from being a tool to being an entire department.

The Arrival of Pure AI-Generated Content
In recent years, there has been a rapid growth in the number of AI-created movies, trailers, advertisements, and short films worldwide. While many of these productions have been poorly finished, some can be considered high-end products. Each of them has something in common: they were all created without going through the traditional creative pipeline. They do not feature actors and therefore do not require a photography studio or a location scout. They do not need any camera operators or light teams, nor do they have to worry about the wardrobe department. Every aspect of the production, from the location to the voiceovers, was created from scratch on the computer.

One of the most innovative and disruptive productions of the last couple of years is Mahabharat, produced by JioHotstar, which is a perfect example of how the creative use of AI can radically change the way film projects are made in India. The Mahabharat project used AI not only to create all the assets needed to complete the production, but also to generate all the assets required for the entire production process (including the whole storyline) through generative modelling techniques.

There was a split amongst viewers of the program. Some were excited about the experiment and considered it a bold venture into an unexplored area of filmmaking. Others, however, felt there could have been better ways to present an ancient Indian epic (such as the Mahabharata) than using AI-generated animations and props. More than just the fact that the product's quality was not what it should have been, there was also the fear that all the work that went into creating it was a bad investment. The willingness of the production industry to take such a bold step into the future with AI alone is proof of its confidence in its capabilities.

The debate became even louder when “The Sweet Idleness,” an AI-generated trailer, made headlines across international media. As reported by outlets like Tribune Pakistan, the trailer sparked backlash from Hollywood professionals who felt the project bypassed creative labour. The trailer itself showcased how AI could mimic cinematic vocabulary: atmospheric lighting, dramatic framing, character expressions, and mood shifts. But to many artists, the technical impressiveness was overshadowed by a growing fear that AI projects were replacing people who depend on creative work for their livelihoods.

With regards to advertising, employers/brands have jumped on the bandwagon and incorporated AI into their advertising strategies. One of the most significant ways they do this is by employing hyper-realistic 'digital' or fully synthetic ‘actors’ to create their ads. While some brands openly disclose that they use synthetic actors, other brands keep it entirely under wraps.

As a result, it is becoming increasingly common for advertising agencies to produce commercials featuring completely fabricated actors that can smile genuinely, speak fluently in multiple languages, and don a wide range of wardrobe items without the hassle of makeup or costume fittings.

Many viewers have no idea that the entire ad is entirely and totally artificial. This has created a perception of ‘blurring’, which, in turn, has generated additional attraction. Agencies have been promoting the speed at which they can create multiple variations of advertisements using synthetic actors and the vast quantities of advertising they can produce. Jim and Jane Actor could be portrayed as 35 years old, happy, calm, etc., as the targeted audience prefers during the testing of the advertisement. As such, given how time and cost are the two most important factors driving decisions in this space, AI will always be the ultimate employee.

Despite the successes above, AI-generated content still exhibits limitations that manifest as strange facial distortions, odd emotional flatness, and other issues, which, when viewed together, destroy the illusion that an artist or a competent third party created the work. Many imperfections will improve over time; however, they lead one to question whether AI has the capacity to fully understand culture, context, and the nuances of our emotions. While the purpose of filmmaking is to document the human experience, can a machine ever fully capture it? Or will AI cinema perpetually exist in the 'Uncanny Valley', appearing deceivingly real but feeling empty?

The Creative and Cultural Fallout
AI-generated content is not only changing how studios operate but also having a profound impact on everyone in the creative community - actors, voice actors, directors, screenwriters, and technicians - all of them are facing a reality that AI can now perform some of the same tasks that were once considered to be part of the human experience.

In India, the conversation has reached a new level of intensity after filmmakers began seeing their films altered by AI and published digitally. One of the most sensational cases involved the release of modified scenes from Raanjhanaa, with an AI-created alternative ending, without the consent of the original filmmakers. Dhanush publicly condemned this alteration, while Anand L. Rai lamented that the original artistic choices are being altered. The Indian Express and Times of India reported on the aftermath of this incident, and many of those involved expressed their frustration not only about the violation of their artistic rights but also about the worrisome ability for someone to change the narrative meaning of a film by simply using AI software.

Veteran writer Javed Akhtar also spoke about this trend, questioning whether society truly understood the long-term impact of AI-generated creativity. His concern touched on something deeper: the loss of authorship and the erosion of creative identity. If every filmmaker’s work can be modified endlessly online, what remains of the original vision? And if machines become capable of creating “new films” in the style of existing directors, where does intellectual ownership begin or end?

Voice artists face similar fears. Hollywood Reporter has documented how AI-generated voices are replacing human performers in India, often trained on recordings taken without proper consent. This shift has caused anxiety among dubbing professionals who rely on steady work to sustain their careers. Meanwhile, studios are drawn to AI voices because they are customizable, cheaper, and can speak in multiple languages with a consistent tone and accent.

Actors have also expressed concern about AI technology. Some well-known Hollywood actors, including Akshay Kumar, have already taken legal action to protect their likenesses from unauthorised use in AI environments. In contrast, there has been a recent rise of AI versions of actors on various social media platforms. Most notably, Sunny Deol produced an AI-generated version of the famous Damini fight scene, demonstrating how well AI can replicate the appearance of a younger version of the actor.

As an indication of how well AI technology can imitate the likeness of famous actors, this demonstration posed a major question for filmmakers: Are we going to continue to see classic films remade using the likeness of actors, even after those actors have passed away or retired? Do the studios have total control of the actors’ likenesses after their deaths?

Directors have their own concerns as to whether AI technology and creativity can substitute for the creative collaboration between the director and composer. Many directors are simply concerned with whether the emotional depth of a story can ever be achieved through AI (Danish Devgn). As such, Kamal Haasan also expressed his concerns regarding the limitations of AI creations in replicating the subtleties of performance (Kamal Haasan).

Additionally, director Lokesh Kanagaraj expressed reservations, stating he could not envision a movie being created through AI technology without composer Anirudh, as he considers the human collaborative nature of filmmaking an integral part of the creative process. While AI technology certainly can replicate style, technique, and melody, it cannot replicate the "relationships" that shape an artist's journey.

The emotional fallout from creativity is just one side of the issue. There are practical implications, too. According to reports on the Reuters news wire, the Hollywood and Bollywood guilds are putting pressure on our lawmakers to regulate AI training models that scrape copyrighted material. Artists have expressed fear that their unique creations — their face, their voice, their script, and their style — may be fed into an AI system, which will generate new works competing with those original creations. This is not a paranoid concern; it is happening as we speak.

The Legal, Ethical, and Regulatory Battle
As AI technology continues to develop capabilities for movies and advertising, it becomes necessary for industry associations and government officials to regulate this evolving technology. However, the speed at which this technology continues to grow and improve makes it difficult to regulate what is continually changing.

The greatest challenge facing legislators, unions, and industry groups is that of consent. Who has the right to own the likeness of an individual? Can an actor's likeness be produced without their approval? Should production companies disclose when they are making material using AI technology? Things that were once purely theoretical are now becoming legal challenges across the board. Several actors are modifying their contracts to restrict the types of uses production companies can make of their digital duplicates. In contrast, others are concerned that their older contract language didn't anticipate AI's ability to generate an individual from a single photo.

Another significant challenge will be transparency. Do viewers of these types of productions (Films) have the right to know if what they see is real or artificial? Most people might say yes, mainly because the intensity of a person's emotional response depends on authenticity, while the audience only cares about the end product. Furthermore, advertising provides another dimension to these obstacles. If a product begins, could it disclose that it is produced using an AI-generated model? As The Guardian's reports indicate, the advertising industry is concerned about revealing this information, for fear of damaging trust or the illusion of an audience.

Another issue that arises is the use of training data by AI models. Most AI models are trained on large amounts of data from thousands of different movies, images, and sounds. Therefore, if all these different types of content include copyrighted material, can these films be legally produced? Policymakers are still working on this. For example, the news agency Reuters reported that groups in both the United States and Canada are representing interests in the production of films in their respective countries and are asking regulators to clarify any confusion regarding these laws. Without a proper regulatory framework governing this new technology, the creative industries could be exploited at an unprecedented rate.

The other primary concern regarding AI products is cultural representation. Films generated solely by AI, especially those based on traditional texts such as the Mahabharat, are at risk of distorting our cultural memory through AI's interpretation of those texts. These are just a few examples of the consequences of AI's lack of understanding of context, symbolism, and cultural nuance, leading to inaccurate portrayals that are widely disseminated and can shape how we see ourselves. Filmmaking, like many forms of creative art, is not only entertainment, but it has historically provided a place for us to connect with our past. Unless a robust cultural framework is in place to guide the creation of AI-generated content, the content's overall artistic impact can have long-term implications.

Will Humans Sit in the Director’s Chair in 2050?
This is the question that hovers anxiously over the entire debate. When ResetMedia asked whether there would be directors in 2050, it didn’t sound like a science-fiction thought experiment. It sounded like a realistic inquiry into the future of a rapidly changing profession.

AI can already generate story ideas, design characters, animate actors, edit scenes, build locations, grade films, and create voices. With additional advancements, it could soon manage narrative pacing, emotional arcs, and continuity with near-perfect precision. So what does a director actually do in such a future?

Some people think that directors of the future will become "prompt designers," whose primary function will be to instruct the AI to create what the director envisions as the outcome of their idea. In contrast, others believe they will function more like curators, selecting the best pieces from what the AI generates.

Optimists contend that, even as technology continues to evolve, human creativity will remain a fundamental part of all art forms, because stories come from experience rather than just from processing information. Emotion, improvisation, cultural understanding and instinct will always remain key factors in this creativity—these cannot be manufactured or programmed. AI can produce works that mimic the means of attendance; however, they cannot actually feel anything themselves. AI can also replicate style, but it cannot understand the creator's individual history.

In contrast, however, some people hope that there will also be films created exclusively by AI, which would be categorised as their own discipline, existing alongside human-produced cinema, similar to how animation, documentaries, and live-action films exist today. This would mean that as technology advances, audiences will have the option to choose which type of film they want to watch, whether it's a human-directed dramatic production one day or a machine-generated sci-fi film the following day.

With the rapid growth of interest in Artificial Intelligence (AI) cinema in India, IndiaAI has published a report about the first-ever AI-enabled film to go into theatres in India. Major technology companies such as G42 have developed advanced multilingual dubbing technologies that significantly reduce post-production time. At the same time, streaming services such as Netflix have begun promoting AI's impact on visual effects production timelines. Marketing professionals have begun exploring new AI-based approaches to distributing film content, enabling them to reach more moviegoers worldwide.

This future isn’t distant. It’s arriving rapidly, sometimes faster than people can process.

The Takeaway
What defines the experience of art created by AI? When watching an AI-generated movie, do the viewers' feelings toward the film remain unchanged from their feelings toward a traditional film? Will viewers feel less connected to an AI-generated movie because it lacks a human touch?

Many viewers are entertained by a film, regardless of how it is made; others feel that simply being entertained is not enough.

Take a moment to consider how an emotional scene draws the viewer into the film. The actor has tears in his eyes; the actor sounds like an emotional wreck; and the camera moves into a close-up at the exact moment needed. You feel the loss of your loved one when the actor's face is no longer there.

Now imagine that the actor never existed; there was no actor. A computer program generated the face that you saw on screen; a computer program created the voice you heard; and what you saw was a conglomeration of thousands of expressions that were created by a computer program.

Your emotional response to the loss does not disappear; however, there is now a feeling of distance from the actor, a disconnection from what once was humanity.

This strange divide between the wonders of AI-generated art and its hollow, emotionless aspects extends to AI-generated films. Over the next decade, we will discover whether society will embrace this division; we will also find out whether AI acts as a partner in the production of creativity or a replacement for creativity.

What’s certain is that AI-generated entertainment is not a passing trend, and it marks a new phase in how stories are made and consumed. The technology can create flawless lighting, perfect faces, and performances that never tire, but it still cannot feel the weight of a moment or understand a character's inner life. That remains human ground. As long as we hold on to that, the future of storytelling may still be guided by us, even as machines sit beside us in the director’s chair.