Screenwriting : Screenwriters, Why AI Will Never Replace You by Aleksandr Rozhnov

Aleksandr Rozhnov I absolutely agree with you.

This is exactly the core theme of one of my screenplays:

human emotions can be restrained, regulated, even caged —

but they always find a way to break through and exist.

That’s where catharsis lives.

And that’s where stories come from

I agree, Aleksandr Rozhnov. AI will never replace screenwriters and start making [great] films on its own. There's a lot of worry in the industry. Thanks for sharing this post!

Well said Aleksandr Rozhnov AI may be powerful but it'll never have the memory, soul, capabilities or filterless expression required to write actually touching, fun and thought-provoking stories.

Also I love that photo XD

Aleksandr Rozhnov what happens however if capable when AI developers are able to crack through this limitation and lack of emotional elements and intelligence required for a screenplay to possess these foundations of a human written script? Is there call for concern for the possibility of this happening at all in the near future?

Personally I think the thing that will kill AI is it doesn't know copyright. Some struggling writer will see a hit and say "Wait a minute, I wrote that." They will hit a studio with a copyright suit and the "but it's AI" won't be a good enough defense. It'll cost the studio a fortune and that will be the beginning of the end. Good riddance.

AI will not take my job; it helps me maximize my potential. When I think about all the questions I ask ChatGPT across different fields—biology, medicine, physics, philosophy...—I realize that without AI, developing these worlds would require consulting entire university faculties just to ask my questions. And they might not have the patience for someone who keeps asking endlessly.

Thank God this tool exists—it allows me to have all those professors in one place and helps me develop everything. It also helps me improve my English, create visuals, and find opportunities. Even Stage 32, I discovered through ChatGPT’s suggestions.

That’s a good point—I was thinking about that as well Bill Albert

I think there are four key points to discuss:

1. Pure language: AI uses English nouns and verbs to describe or discuss ideas, much like humans do when expressing thoughts.

2. Stored data: AI is trained on existing data, which means it can reproduce exact text from well-known works or mimic the style of famous authors and screenwriters.

3. The idea itself: Current models rely on existing ideas and attempt to create new patterns by combining them. In my opinion, this is more about remixing ideas than true creativity.

4. Independent creativity: A future stage where AI gains creativity and begins generating original ideas that are not derived from mixing human thoughts.

I think AI could eventually overcome the copyright dilemma at stage one—by using pure language to express ideas, as humans do, without mimicking others or reproducing existing texts—and at stage four, if it develops genuine, independent creativity.

Whether AI can truly reach that point or not is a question we cannot fully answer yet.

Friends, let me break this down point by point as I see it.

First.

Can a person who writes a screenplay with the help of AI later see that same script on the screen? I don’t think so. Even what we see on screen was written by someone — a human being. To write the same way, another person would have to think exactly like that screenwriter. And that’s impossible. Every person thinks differently. A film might feel similar, but it will always be a completely different film.

Second.

Can scientists make AI truly feel and express emotions? No. Because the physiology of emotion is brain chemistry — serotonin, dopamine, norepinephrine. To recreate that, AI wouldn’t just need to be a computer; it would need to be an entire laboratory. And if scientists could really achieve this, then in theory they would also be able to eliminate the root causes of depression, anxiety disorders, apathy, and similar conditions. And that is simply not possible.

So, friends, relax.

In my view, AI is a powerful tool that can help us sharpen and expand our writing skills. But it cannot fully replace a screenwriter — their emotions, their perspective, their inner vision. And it’s very unlikely to be able to do so in the near future.

So keep writing. Keep growing. Put your feelings on the page the way you see them. Share with the audience the deeper truths you want to express.

Everything will be fine.

I accept AI can never replace me.

I also accept that others could use AI to negotiate fees down.

Sad but —- we shall see.

The good news is that some humans will knock it out of the park because of inventiveness, imagination and guts.

I’d like to add one important point to this discussion — how authorship and copyright could realistically be addressed in court when AI is involved.

As far as I understand, every AI system operates based on explicit user parameters and prompts. These parameters are not abstract — they are technical inputs that define who is actually creating the work.

If a screenwriter tells an AI:

“Type what I tell you and only correct grammar or structure,”

then the creative authorship clearly belongs to the screenwriter. The AI is functioning as an editorial tool, no different from spellcheck or formatting software.

However, if a screenwriter says:

“Write an entire screenplay about two people in love,”

and the AI independently invents the story, characters, structure, and dramatic arcs, then the creative authorship does not originate from the human. In that case, the work is generated by the AI.

This distinction can be examined. Prompt history, system parameters, and interaction logs make it possible to determine whether AI acted as an assistant or as a primary creative generator.

In my view, this is a practical way to resolve copyright questions:

authorship should be determined by creative intent and control, not by fear or speculation.

AI doesn’t erase authorship — it makes authorship traceable.

Used correctly, AI is a powerful instrument. Used irresponsibly, it creates legal and ethical confusion. The solution isn’t panic — it’s clarity.

In my latest installment of the "Revenge of the Robo-Writers" series an AI wins the Oscar for Best Screenplay and this is accepted as evidence of human inferiority.

I told it a joke and it understood the axioms but failed the humor. I called it an aglast and it said thank you.

AI - "Artificial Intelligence", Artificial cannot replace human emotions, touch and feelings! and the AI consists of data and patterns prepared by humans and feed the AI systems with data, patterns.

Here no evil see no evil speak no evil. If ya use AI its no different than having to prove to the judge that you own the pen and paper that its writ on, or the laptop, typewriter, sound recorder..... he wouldnt listen to it and throw it out!

I’ll put it this way: artificial intelligence is a tool, and it simply needs to be used correctly. It’s like an automatic transmission in a car. It’s designed to make driving easier for the driver, but the car is still being controlled by a human being.

After being sent some scripts that have obviously been written by AI, the main thing that stands out creatively is how dull they are.

A good screenplay is about unpredictability.

Artificial intelligence works through algorithms — through logic.

Which means that everything it produces is, by nature, predictable.

I completely agree, our stories come first from us, from our hearts, AI is a working tool.

No — blood comes from the heart.

Our stories come from the brain.

Every unconventional turn we create, every situation that doesn’t fit standard patterns, forms a new neural connection in the human mind — and those connections are constantly evolving.

Artificial intelligence, on the other hand, operates with a fixed wiring system. New wires don’t appear on their own.

That’s why AI can’t truly invent what exists outside the boundaries of logic.

Artificial intelligence writes weak screenplays because it builds plots and character structures from open sources.

And what kind of screenplays are mostly available in open sources?

Mostly amateur and non-professional work. Not necessarily untalented — but far from refined.

You’re unlikely to find the screenplays of Quentin Tarantino, Terry Rossio, or Aaron Sorkin freely available online. Truly professional, high-level scripts are rarely accessible.

As a result, AI writes according to what it “sees” on the internet — and the internet is far from an ideal creative standard.

Friends, here’s one more argument that should put you at ease.

There is no screenplay in the world that goes into production from a first draft. Scripts are always rewritten, refined, and improved.

Even if a writer were to bring in a screenplay written by artificial intelligence, and producers liked it enough to move forward, they would inevitably ask for changes.

And that’s where the real problems would begin — because AI cannot truly rewrite a script.