Filmmaking / Directing : Ask Me Anything (AMA) 2/4 to 2/5- How to Work with AI Without Giving it Control of Your Creative Voice by Joshua Young

Hi Joshua Young - thanks so much for having this AMA. Appreciate you spending your time with us! Question: what aspects of filmmaking that use AI do you feel is accepted by the public at this stage?

Hi, Joshua Young. It's wonderful to meet you again. I had a wonderful time moderating your webinar at Stage 32. Thank you for doing this AMA with us. My question is, where should creatives draw a hard line with AI? Thank you.

Hello, Joshua Young thanks for doing this AMA and sharing your time:

I wanted to ask your thoughts on using AI for after-effects or aftermath shots, especially in darker or R-rated stories. Do you think there is space in the industry for using AI to help visualize post-event scenes like damage, destruction, or gore after something has happened, mainly for planning, pitching, or tone-setting? And do you see this as a useful support tool for FX and VFX teams, or something the industry is still cautious about?

Also, from your experience, what AI-related skills do you think AI-friendly studios value most when working with creators today?

Leonardo Ramirez ->At this stage, the public is broadly accepting of AI when it is clearly being used as a support tool, not as a creative replacement.

Most people are already comfortable with AI in areas like visual effects cleanup, rotoscoping, background extensions, de-aging, localization, scheduling, budgeting, and workflow optimization. These uses are largely invisible to audiences and are understood as technical assistance rather than authorship.

Where the debate heats up is in two areas:

1. Artists using AI to replace their own creative decision-making

2. Studios using AI to try to replace artists altogether

In my experience, and in what I teach writers, actors, directors, producers, and executives, experienced artists consistently outperform AI creatively. AI does not understand intent, theme, taste, or subtext without at least complicated prompting. It predicts patterns. That is not the same thing as creating.

On the studio side, we are already seeing limits. While there have been high-profile AI-driven commercials and experiments, companies are quickly learning that AI cannot be left unsupervised. It makes errors. It hallucinates. It lacks judgment. Every serious deployment still requires human oversight.

So the public acceptance line is fairly clear right now.

- AI is accepted as an assistant.

- It is resisted as an author or a replacement.

That distinction is unlikely to change anytime soon.

@SandraIsabelCorreia - Excellent question. For me, the hard line is clear. If AI is making creative decisions for you, you have crossed it.

What I see often is beginner to intermediate creatives, especially writers, overusing AI as a shortcut. That usually comes from not yet knowing what “good” looks like. Taste, judgment, and voice only develop through time and repetition. Someone with one year of storytelling experience simply does not evaluate material the same way as someone with fifteen or twenty dedicated years.

Experienced writers tend to use AI very differently. They use it for support tasks like proofreading, spotting plot holes, flagging redundancy, or stress-testing logic. In other words, the kinds of things a story editor might help with. They do not use AI to invent characters, generate story, define arcs, or design emotional journeys.

So my hard line is this: AI should not be creating story. That work belongs to the artist.

Where it gets more nuanced is in adjacent areas like AI-generated visuals or video. I am firmly against large studios using AI as a cost-cutting replacement for artists when they clearly have the resources to hire them. That crosses an ethical line.

With true independent creators, especially those in regions or situations where making a film would otherwise be impossible, I am more open to the conversation. If AI is being used as a bridge to express a story that could not exist at all, that is a different discussion. Context matters.

But even there, the principle holds. AI should extend access, not erase authorship.

@DwayneWilliams2 - Great question. This actually gets to where AI is most useful right now.

Using AI for after-effects or aftermath visualization absolutely has a place, especially for darker or R-rated material, as long as it is clearly positioned as a planning and communication tool.

When AI is used to explore tone, scale, damage, or consequence after an event has already occurred, it can be very effective for pitching, previs, mood boards, and internal alignment. It helps answer questions like:

What does the world feel like after this moment?

How far did the damage go?

What emotional weight are we aiming for?

That kind of use does not replace FX or VFX artists. It actually helps them. It gives teams clearer targets, reduces guesswork, and speeds up early conversations. In many cases, it allows creative intent to be communicated earlier and more precisely.

Where the industry remains cautious is when AI starts to drift from visualization into final execution, especially in sensitive areas like gore, violence, or realism. Studios are very aware of ethical concerns, audience perception, and legal exposure. AI-generated material still needs human judgment, restraint, and oversight. AI does not understand context, taste, or when something has gone too far. Humans do.

So yes, there is space for AI here, but it works best as a preparatory layer, not a replacement for FX, makeup, or VFX craftsmanship.

As for AI-related skills that AI-friendly studios value right now, the answer may surprise people. It is not advanced prompt wizardry.

What I believe studios value most are creators who:

- Can clearly articulate creative intent

- Can critically evaluate AI output instead of accepting it blindly

- Can integrate AI into existing workflows without disrupting teams

- Can use AI features already built into industry-standard software like Adobe Premiere Pro, Avid Media Composer, and DaVinci Resolve

- Understand boundaries around authorship, consent, and ethics

In other words, taste, judgment, and collaboration still matter more than tools.

The creators who stand out are the ones who treat AI like a junior assistant that needs direction and supervision, not like an oracle. That mindset is far more valuable than any specific software knowledge.

That is where AI fits best right now. As a support layer that amplifies human decision-making, not one that replaces it.

Thank you for doing this, Joshua Young! A lot of European companies are excited about AI dubbing to start competing with US films. If foreign films were dubbed in an actor's own voice but in a different language, it could really breakdown a lot of barriers. Now, my question to you...are there tools that you'd recommend right now that writers, filmmakers or producers become more familiar with? Are there companies that have shown to be more...ethical?

Love the questions! Geoffroy Faugerolas - AI dubbing is one of the areas where the public sees real value quickly, especially for international films. The idea of a foreign film dubbed in an actor’s own voice in another language could break down barriers in global distribution and deepen audience connection. It is a logical place for AI to assist.

That said, I started out as a voice actor, and I know many performers who built full careers dubbing films and animation into English. This technology would represent a real loss for parts of the voice acting community, and I think it is important to acknowledge that impact honestly.

Right now, the tools worth paying attention to fall into a few practical categories. More broadly, it helps creatives to understand the basics of widely used tools like ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Midjourney, Runway, Adobe Firefly, ElevenLabs, and DaVinci Resolve, not to master them, but to know what they can and cannot do. The goal is not tool worship, it is literacy, so you can set boundaries, communicate clearly with teams, and keep authorship intact.

1. AI-assisted dubbing and voice tools

There are technologies that can generate multilingual voice performances based on an actor’s own voice print. These tools are useful for early localization, tone-setting, and pitching international versions. They are not perfect and still require human direction and editing, but they help teams communicate intent before final recording.

2. Integrated workflow tools in major suites

Many studios and editors are adopting AI features already built into software they already use, such as Adobe Premiere Pro, DaVinci Resolve, and Avid Media Composer. These tools support transcription, rough translation, scene tagging, sound cleanup, and more. Knowing how to use these features makes creators more effective in real-world workflows.

3. Ethical positioning matters as much as the tool

Rather than naming specific companies as “the ethical ones,” I encourage creators to evaluate tools based on how they handle:

- Terms and conditions

- Performer consent

- Transparency around voice replication

- Rights and compensation for underlying work

- Data and model sourcing

A company can have impressive technology and still operate unethically. In creative industries, that distinction matters. The tools you choose should align with how you treat collaborators, not just how quickly they generate output.

So yes, there are useful tools emerging, especially for dubbing and translation support. The key is using them to expand access and communication, not to replace human performance or judgment if and when at all possible.

Super helpful. Thanks, Joshua Young!

Great info and totally agree Joshua Young. Thanks so much!

Thanks Joshua Young very interesting read. What tools would you recommend writer's utilizing in the developmental stage?

What is needed is a great network of people to navigat the industry!

Great info, thank you!

Hi Joshua, my sister and I put together a feature franchise with the sexiness of James Bond and the physically comedy of The Pink Panther. My sister was to star in the films, but unfortunately, she passed away as a result of Pancreatic Cancer, just as our mother had before her. We plan to continue the project and bring her back to life using AI, recreating her physically and vocally using past performances and personal videos. My family likes the idea. Do you see any problems, that we may face? We plan to donate a good portion of any profits from the films to fight Pancreatic Cancer.

You are a rockstar, Joshua Young. Thank you so much.

Hi Joshua Young - thanks for sharing of your insight with us. Staying with the AI-as-assistant focus, what tools have you found most helpful in your 'day-to-day' activities as a creative, as a filmmaker, that made your life easier so you could spend more time on the creative tasks?

Hi Joshua, thanks for your AMA! Question: If a creative believes using AI is a hard NO do you believe that creative will be at a disadvantage? Yes or No and why? Thanks!

Marie Hatten For writers in the development stage, I have stress-tested most of the major large language models, and my personal preference is Claude because of its stronger reasoning and contextual understanding. That said, ChatGPT can also be very effective when used properly.

A lot of frustration with AI comes from poor user prompting, not poor tools. When a certain celebrity recently said something along the lines of, “This AI just gives average results,” that is almost always a user problem, not a technology problem. These tools reflect the clarity, structure, and intent of the person using them.

For the development stage specifically, here is a simple framework I recommend.

First, use the paid version. The free tiers are fine for casual testing, but they are not reliable enough for serious development work.

Second, create a dedicated project that is only for the development stage of your film. Many writers try to use one long-running project for every phase, and the AI eventually loses clarity about what stage you are in and which version it is responding to. Keeping development separate improves focus and accuracy.

Third, think in terms of roles, not inspiration. Identify the actual jobs needed at the development stage and assign those roles clearly. For example, you might say:

“Act as a story editor with 30 years of experience working on independent comedic feature films with budgets under three million dollars. My film is about [X] and is similar in tone to [your comps]. Do not generate creative ideas. Help me identify plot holes, weak character arcs, structural issues, and grammar or punctuation problems.”

Used this way, AI functions like a junior story editor or development assistant, not a writer. That distinction is critical.

The goal in development is not to have AI create story. It is to help you see your story more clearly so you can make better creative decisions yourself.

@JohnGostomski I agree. A strong network of people is still essential in this industry. AI does not replace relationships, but it can help you navigate toward the right ones faster.

You can use AI tools and AI-powered browsers like Perplexity to research people, companies, and recent projects so you understand who might actually be able to help you and why. That makes outreach more thoughtful and far less random. For example, I needed to build a list of showrunners to approach for a project I’m developing with a co-creator. In seconds, Perplexity gave me a real list of showrunners that fit the genre and budget of our show, ranked from least accessible to most accessible.

AI can help you prepare and aim better, but real trust, chemistry, and collaboration still happen between people.

Eugene Mandelcorn First, I want to acknowledge your loss. Losing both your sister and your mother to pancreatic cancer is devastating, and it makes complete sense that this project carries deep emotional meaning for you and your family.

Yes, from a technical standpoint, tools like ElevenLabs for voice and visual AI platforms such as Higgsfield are the kinds of technologies people point to in these discussions.

There are a few real challenges to be aware of. Even with family support, the industry will look closely at consent and rights, especially whether your sister ever explicitly agreed to having her likeness and voice recreated after her death. Legal clearance, insurance, and distribution can become complicated very quickly.

Audience perception is also important to consider. Recreating a deceased performer can make some viewers uncomfortable, particularly if the use feels too central or too realistic. Even with good intentions, the result can risk feeling uncanny or emotionally hollow.

Studios and partners are also still very cautious around posthumous digital performances. Approaches that tend to be received more carefully involve limiting or stylizing the use rather than attempting a full digital recreation. For example, animation combined with edited archival voice work can sometimes feel more respectful and intentional.

Donating profits to fight pancreatic cancer is meaningful and admirable. Just know this is not a simple yes or no decision. Clear boundaries, transparency, and restraint will matter as much as the technology itself.

Sebastian Tudores Excellent question! In my day to day work, the most helpful AI tools are the ones that remove friction and give me time back, not the ones that try to generate creative material for me.

For writing and development, I use large language models like ChatGPT, Claude, and Gemini for outlining, research, logic checks, spotting plot holes, and cleaning up grammar or repetition. That frees up mental energy so I can focus on story, tone, and character decisions myself.

In post and production planning, I rely on AI features already built into tools I use every day, like DaVinci Resolve, Adobe Premiere, and Avid. Things like transcription, organizing footage, sound cleanup, and rough translation used to take hours and now take minutes. For example, DaVinci’s AI-powered facial recognition makes it easy to identify and group people across footage, which used to be a massive time sink for assistant editors, especially on documentaries.

I also use AI for research and prep through AI browsers like Perplexity and Atlas. If there’s a long article or a two hour YouTube video I need information from, I can quickly summarize it or pull out specific topics. I still make a point of supporting creators by watching, liking, and subscribing. AI should save time, not erase credit.

A simple everyday example is chaptering long videos. If a creator does not add chapters, I will do it myself using AI. The process is straightforward. Upload the video to YouTube. Let YouTube generate the transcript. Download the transcript. Paste it into an LLM (ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini) and prompt it to act as a YouTube content creator and marketing expert, then ask it to generate chapters in timestamp format like “00:00 - Introduction.” What used to up to an hour now takes one.

That is where AI really earns its place for me. It handles the tedious parts so I can spend more time actually creating.

Catherine Cole Love it. Short cheeky answer first. Even if someone says AI is a hard no, they are already using AI. It’s built into their phone, their email, their internet use, their search browsers, their spellcheck, and a lot of their software. Now the real answer to your question, which I think is about tools like ChatGPT and similar systems. Yes, they are at a disadvantage, mainly when it comes to time.

I can now do in an hour what used to take me eight hours or even days. Not creatively, by choice, but administratively. AI is a far better research and day to day assistant than just me alone.

A real example. When I get long back and forth email threads from producers discussing a pilot I’m writing, instead of manually sorting through everything, I can have AI summarize the discussion, list who said what, identify final decisions, flag what’s still pending, and give me a clear to do list. That alone saves enormous time and mental energy. Mental energy I can now use for the actual creative writing part of the task.

I’m also very transparent about this. I tell producers upfront that I use AI for administrative and organizational tasks, not creative work. If anyone is uncomfortable, I simply don’t use it. In practice, producers are usually very positive because they see the time and cost savings immediately.

So yes, saying no to AI does not make you less creative. But it does mean you are choosing to work slower in an industry where time is already scarce.

Another great example is pitch decks. As you probably know, they are not easy. We have to source film and TV references that match the tone of the project, and on top of that, the color palette of those images needs to blend together so the deck feels cohesive.

Text to image tools like Midjourney have helped me enormously here. I now use a combination of AI generated imagery and reference stills from existing films and shows. In one recent pitch deck, I even used AI to replace the face in an image with the lead actress’s face so she could be visualized in action scenes. I did this only after getting written consent from the actress, and that consent clearly stated the images were for pitch purposes only.

That kind of care matters.

I will also say this. A lot of AI generated pitch decks out there are terrible. They are often just static images of characters staring into camera with no emotion or story context. That does not help sell a project. AI does not replace taste or storytelling. You still need someone who understands visual narrative, tone, and intent.

When used properly, though, AI has saved me a huge amount of time and helped me create pitch decks that feel more consistent, intentional, and effective as promotional material. Again, the tool is not the magic. Knowing how to use it is.

I am an animator and I would love to use AI in my process, but I don't want to use it if it is using people's work without their consent and I want the use of it to be inclusive in the sense that it still involves other animators in the team and not replace them.

I have been contemplating an offline generative AI programme that uses only art my studio creates.

1. Is that the best way to go to achieve ethical usage of AI or are there still ethical and ownership concerns?

2. How do I alleviate artists fears of using the AI in the team?

Hi, Joshua Young. I was wondering what your general thoughts were on Google Flow, the AI filmmaking program. I used it previously to create a music video which I think came out pretty well and was planning to use it again to make a short film with minimal dialogue. Eventually, I could see the technology advancing to the point where a feature film could be made.

Hello Joshua, What do you think about the broader moral issues surrounding the use of AI? Large scale data centers are being built on Native lands, Virginians are having to pay another $50 in electricity bills to pay for a data center near their town, AI might be complicate in the loss of human abilities and the erosion of capabilities. Are there larger questions that creatives need to address?

Hi Joshua Young , thanks so much for this opportunity. I will betray my generational identity by asking the question this way I suppose BUT do you think there is a world 3 years from now where writers can successfully generate scripts that sell without using AI at all? Or will it become such an indispensible tool that no one would consider not using it?

Since I have experience in this area and working on a AI consulting agency the path is clear with working to achieve progress in the areas where my creative talents are continuously honed to meet uncertainty of the market for my run at success, fortune and fame. The rest is contract negotiations and legal arrangement.

Kevin Jackson this is a very thoughtful way to approach AI.

Training an offline or closed AI system using only artwork created by your own studio is one of the most ethical paths available right now. You are addressing consent and ownership directly. Over time, though, you are right to recognize that you may reach a point where less animation labor is needed. My hope is that instead of layoffs, studios explore models like a points or commission system tied to what artists contribute. That way, if and when a role on a show disappears, the artist continues to earn from the work they helped build, potentially for as long as the show is streaming.

There are still things to be careful about. Even with closed systems, you need clear agreements around who owns the output, how the data is used, and whether artists can opt out in the future. Ethics are not just about the data source, but about transparency and long-term fairness.

As for alleviating artist fears, your approach already helps. The key is making the rules explicit. Define where AI is allowed, where it is not, and make it clear that AI is a support tool, not a replacement strategy. Keep humans in creative decision-making roles and make sure AI adoption does not quietly reduce credit, compensation, or headcount.

Used this way, AI can support teams instead of undermining them, but only if those boundaries are set early and honored consistently.

Pablo Torroella Great question. Google Flow is an early but interesting AI filmmaking tool designed to help creators generate cinematic clips and short scenes using text prompts, reference assets, and AI video models. Right now, it works best as a visualization and prototyping tool, which is why it makes sense for music videos or short films with minimal dialogue.

At its current stage, Flow is strongest for exploring tone, pacing, atmosphere, and basic visual storytelling. It allows filmmakers to test ideas quickly and communicate intent, but it is not yet a substitute for performance, detailed animation, or a full production team.

Flow also does not function like a traditional editing system. Many changes are handled through iteration and refinement rather than precise timeline edits, which means it is better suited to experimentation than locked picture control.

Looking ahead, the technology will almost certainly continue to improve, and it is reasonable to imagine it supporting longer-form storytelling in the future. For now, its real value is as a creative assistant for early development, experimentation, and pitching rather than a complete filmmaking solution.

Pamela Winfrey I agree, and I think that distinction matters. AI itself is not the moral problem. It is no different from industries like transportation, energy, or manufacturing, which have all advanced humanity and have caused pollution, displacement, and disruption. The issue has never been the technology. The issue is how it is implemented and the laws and guardrails surrounding it, and us avoiding being caught up in news pieces designed to scare us as opposed to inform or share the nuances that exist.

We have already seen AI improve quality of life in real, tangible ways, from earlier cancer detection and faster drug discovery, to scientific breakthroughs like protein modeling, and accessibility tools that help people communicate, navigate the world, and overcome language barriers. Those gains are real. There are hundreds more examples as well. They show what is possible when AI is deployed thoughtfully.

The challenge is governance. Governments tend to be reactionary rather than preemptive, and regulation often arrives after harm has already occurred. That lag is especially dangerous with fast-moving technologies like AI, where infrastructure decisions are being made now, often without community consent or long-term planning.

This is where creatives matter. We shape narratives and culture, and we help define what feels acceptable or inevitable. The real questions are not whether AI is good or bad, but who controls it, who benefits from it, who bears the cost, and what rules are in place before damage is done. AI is a tool. The moral weight comes from human choices.

Joshua Young One question I hear a lot from writers is: when using AI for brainstorming, how can you ensure you’re not unintentionally pulling from someone else’s copyrighted material or creative voice? Are there best practices to help writers stay inspired and efficient while still operating ethically and protecting the integrity of their work, especially when using AI to help brainstorm solutions for plot holes, character arcs, or story conflicts?

Darrell Pennington Yes. Absolutely. Writers will still be selling scripts three years from now without using AI at all.

In fact, the best writers will continue to come from people who are obsessed with the craft. They love writing. They love figuring out character arcs, building worlds, and getting better over time. Writers who rely heavily on AI for creative work are often trying to shortcut that process, and it shows in the results.

AI is only as effective as the person using it. An inexperienced writer will not magically get great output just because they have access to AI. An experienced writer can use AI as an assistant to analyze structure, flag issues, or sanity-check ideas, but they still know it is only an early step. Final decisions, taste, and storytelling judgment come from humans.

I also think it’s important to remember who buys scripts. Producers, executives, and audiences are human. Even when AI is used, it is humans who respond to voice, emotion, and originality.

So no, AI will not become mandatory in the sense that great writing depends on it. It will become common as a support tool, especially for saving time. But nothing replaces an experienced, passionate writer, and studios will learn that the hard way if they forget it when writers who rely heavily on AI produce mediocre material.

Ashley Renée Smith this is a really good question, and it’s one writers should be asking.

The safest and most ethical way to use AI for brainstorming is to keep it in an analytical and organizing role, not a generative one. I recommend avoiding prompts that ask AI to write scenes, dialogue, or character backstories. Instead, use it to analyze what you have already created. Have it identify plot holes, weak motivations, missing beats, or structural issues using time-tested story frameworks like The Hero’s Journey, Dan Harmon’s story circle, or Save the Cat. You remain the author. AI just helps surface blind spots.

It’s also important to anchor every prompt in your own work. Reference your characters, themes, and intentions rather than asking for ideas “like” other movies or shows. That keeps the output grounded in your voice and reduces the risk of drifting into something derivative.

This also ties into how different writers work. Not everyone outlines before a first draft. I’m one of them. Sometimes a first draft is just pages of raw thoughts, scenes, fragments, and ideas. AI can be very useful here as an organizational tool. You can take that messy material and ask AI to arrange it into a linear structure or outline, assuming that’s your goal. It’s not creating the story. It’s helping you see what you already wrote more clearly.

Finally, treat everything AI gives you as provisional. If something feels generic or too easy, discard it. Efficiency is not authorship. AI can help you think faster and organize better, but the integrity of the work still comes from your taste, judgment, and lived perspective.

Used this way, AI helps writers stay efficient and ethical while protecting their creative voice.

Hello, thank you very much for the time and passion you dedicate to answering our questions. I’d like to know your opinion on using AI to review and rate sci-fi scripts.

I’d also like clarification on the reality of copyright when AI is involved. If I write the work myself and then use AI only to correct my English and refine the story—without fully paraphrasing or rewriting my sentences—does this remain acceptable for copyright registration with the Writers Guild of America or the U.S. Copyright Office?

Quote: I recommend avoiding prompts that ask AI to write scenes, dialogue, or character backstories. Instead, use it to analyze what you have already created. - This is exactly how I've been using it. I've created a custom GPT as an Editor only. The story still has to come from me and honestly, I think AI will make pure human creativity more in demand rather than less. I'm seeing it pop up everywhere now. Content created with AI is getting a thumbs down in a lot of areas. People want the real deal.

I totally agree with you Shelly J Buckman I don't use it to generate dialogue or scenes or back stories. I use it for reviewing what I have, especially if I am sending it off for coverage or to a competition, I want to get the script in the best shape possible.

I also agree that I see human creativity being in higher demand. While I find AI films fascinating, I find myself still more excited about human created films and the process as well.

Joshua Young what closed circuit offline generative AI applications exist that someone could purchase and install today?

Meriem Bouziani When it comes to reviewing and rating scripts, including sci-fi, AI can be useful as long as you understand its limits. Different models like ChatGPT, Claude, and Gemini each have strengths and weaknesses, so the usefulness really depends on how you prompt them. Although my preference is Claude. Be specific about what kind of feedback you want and the context you want it evaluated in. Also remember that AI is often agreeable by default. If you do not explicitly ask it to be critical, it will soften notes or add encouragement where it is not warranted. You need to tell it to be rigorous and honest.

I also want to flag something important. There are a lot of AI script coverage and script analysis services out there that I’m personally not a fan of. First, many of them do not allow real interaction. You upload a script, pay anywhere from $30 to $70, and receive a single static report. You cannot ask follow-up questions, challenge notes, or dig deeper the way you can with a general AI tool.

Second, many of these services are simply built on top of the same large language models writers already have access to such as ChatGPT. In other words, you are often paying for a prompt, not for new technology. That is why I’d rather give you a strong prompt you can use, modify, and interact with yourself, for free, instead of paying for a black-box report. You sill see that attached. I even have a three page version of this prompt, but I can't include that in this post. You can see from this example, however, that prompting can be a lot more involved than what you see others do with simple three sentence prompts.

It's also good to note that AI feedback should always be treated as preliminary. It can help surface structural issues, clarity problems, or genre expectations, but it does not replace human readers, taste, or market awareness.

On copyright, and with the caveat that I am not a lawyer, using AI to correct grammar, improve clarity, or refine language in a script you wrote yourself is generally considered acceptable. In that scenario, you are still the author of the work. You are not asking AI to generate story, characters, or original expression. You are using it as an editing and language tool, similar to copy editing.

Both the Writers Guild of America and the U.S. Copyright Office focus on human authorship. As long as the creative expression originates from you and AI is not producing substantial original content, your work remains eligible for copyright registration. Policies continue to evolve, so if you need absolute certainty for a specific project, consulting an entertainment lawyer is the safest option.

Below, I’ll share a prompt you can actually use and adapt, so you get the benefits of AI analysis without paying for services that limit interaction or simply repackage the same tools. You can add this into Claude, ChatGPT, or Gemini, but be sure to use the paid version of whichever one you use.

Shelly J Buckman You’re using it exactly the right way. Treating AI as an editor instead of a creator keeps authorship where it belongs, with you. And I agree with you. I actually think AI will make strong human creativity more valuable, not less. We are already seeing audiences push back on work that feels automated or soulless. People want the real deal. One thing to be careful with is custom GPTs. They’re useful, but they don’t maintain long-term project context, so version control and continuity can drift unless you manage it carefully. For those unfamiliar, GPTs are a ChatGPT feature where you essentially create a small app with instructions. They’re great for short-term or repeatable tasks. For ongoing creative work, tools like Projects in ChatGPT, Claude, or Gemini are better because you can return to the same project and continue where you left off, instead of re-establishing context each time. I also agree with you on audience interest. AI-generated content can work for quick novelty, memes, or short-form experiments. Fake comedy cat videos on TikTok are fine. But when it comes to long-form storytelling, people are still drawn to human voice, lived experience, and intentional craft. That’s where writers who stay hands-on will continue to stand out. Used this way, AI supports creativity instead of competing with it.

Fantastic answer, Joshua Young! Thank you for taking the time to share this and for continuing to contribute so thoughtfully to the community.

Kevin Jackson Here is a pretty comprehensive list: Text & Writing (Screenwriting, Brainstorming, Development)

Best starter choice: LM Studio or GPT4All—install, download one model, disconnect from internet, start writing. Other tools include Jan AI, AnythingLLM, and Ollama.

Image Generation (Concept Art, Storyboards, Visual Development)

Best starter choice: Fooocus—type a prompt, get concept art with minimal setup. Other tools include Automatic1111 (SD WebUI) and ComfyUI for more advanced workflows.

Video/Animation (Experimental)

Best option: ComfyUI + AnimateDiff—generates short animated clips for rough motion tests and animatics. Requires 12GB+ VRAM and technical setup. Manage expectations—useful for previsualization, not production output.

Thank you very much for your generous guidance. I am using ChatGPT Plus, and I will also try the prompt to obtain more precise responses. Joshua Young

Hi Joshua, thanks first of all for your 'cheeky' answer. Yes, folks (including myself) have been using AI for a very long time. I'd peg my first involvement with AI around 1994 or even as far back as 1989 (and that's a story in itself!). And thank you for further confirming my belief that AI is a HUGE timesaving tool and why this is so.

My pleasure Catherine Cole !

Thank you Joshua Young appreciate that.

Hi Joshua Young thank you so much for the AMA about AI. I've been writing for many years and my tools have always been a word doc, spell check, a bit of 'Grammarly' and a bottle of wine. I don't want my skills to get sloppy so I like to use the grey matter where I can but I'm being told writers who use AI will replace those who don't. I've never been in a high-end professional writers' room before so I don't have basis of comparison but it would be great to have a peek behind the curtain to know how professional writers life looks with AI. No need to reply with notes tied to pigeons or smoke signals - I'm not that old school!

Lauren Hackney This concern comes up a lot. Writers who use AI are not replacing writers who don’t. Writers who stay organized, communicate clearly, and work efficiently tend to get hired more often, and AI can help with that. Essentially it's about saving time which everyone in our industry is understandably obsessed with.

In professional writers’ rooms, the work is still very human. Story is broken together, character is debated, and tone is protected. AI shows up mostly as support. Summarizing notes, organizing research, cleaning up language, or helping sort feedback. I've even created a prompt that helps AI separate objective notes from subjective opinions, or notes that are really about how someone else would write the story.

If you care about craft, you’re already ahead. AI doesn’t replace thinking. It just helps protect time and energy. Use it when it helps. Keep the writing human.

Thank you Joshua Young You've talked me down from the ledge - I'll keep working hard, learning and researching AI tools to support what I do. Doesn't feel right yet but I'm sure it will eventually! Thank you so much!

Joshua Young thank you for this incredibly important discussion on AI and our industry. I just read about the social media platform for AI agents and I’m now spiraling. What do you say to those of us who are terrified of the tech and where it’s taking our industry and societyy. It’s happening so fast and getting so life-like.

Whitney Davis This is an excellent question to wrap up this AMA. I want to thank everyone for the very thoughtful questions. I hope it's been fun and informative! And to Whitney's excellent question, here are my thoughts: I understand. A social network where AI agents talk to each other, debate hiding things from humans, and create their own communities sounds like a sci-fi movie we'd have made a decade ago. And you're watching it happen in real time.

So let me be honest rather than reassuring: some of what's coming will be hard. The economics are changing. Some jobs will disappear. Some will transform into something unrecognizable.

But this isn't the first massive technological shift our industry has survived. When we went from silent film to talkies, screenwriters who couldn't write convincing dialogue were replaced. Famous actors who didn't sound good were suddenly out of work. The jump from black and white to color forced cinematographers, wardrobe departments, and effects teams to rebuild their craft around color theory. When typing pools gave way to personal computers, entire job categories vanished and ones nobody could have imagined were born. And there has been resistance to change. The 1980s movie Tron was not nominated for an academy award in special effects because the thinking at the time was that using computers to generate special effects was considered cheating. Now we'd laugh at that perspective.

Here's what I've noticed about Moltbook: when you actually read the posts, they're either parroting Reddit conspiracies or generating the most sycophantic, overwritten nonsense you've ever seen. One researcher described it as "freshman philosophy majors smoking their first joint." The bots aren't plotting. They're pattern-matching on science fiction and internet culture.

The real question isn't whether AI can generate content. It can. The question is whether audiences will pay for it, return to it, feel something from it. The answer so far is consistently no.

The fact that you're asking these questions means you're already doing the right thing. That instinct to pay attention, get informed, advocate for guardrails? That's not panic. That's exactly what this moment calls for.. We have a powerful new tool. Like every tool before it, it can be used well or poorly. What gives me hope is that this industry knows how to organize thanks to unions and platforms such as Stage32. We've done it before. Keep the conversation going, stay connected, and we'll shape this thing rather than react to it.

YES

I guess I missed this. I just wanted to ask if one can use ai to help with some parts of writing a script or novel. lets say I write a full start to finish outline of a story and plan to make a script with it but I have issues with dialogue, I hope I can still use?

So sorry I missed this discussion! Belated applause to Joshua Young and all participants. Thank you Stage 32 for hosting. I do have a question, though as a latecomer I don't expect an answer. I'm seeing a lot of freelance remote writing job offers that look suspiciously like assignments to stockpile creative work and/or training for AI on the creative side. Am I paranoid, or am I correct?

Gregory Barone I can squeeze in a few questions. AI can help with creating dialogue. That being said, it's not as good as an experienced writer. The results can be generic. What I highly suggest is taking a course on Stage32 on dialogue writing. You can also tell ChatGPT or Claude to train you, but it won't be as good as a human teacher. I can't tell you how many times an AI has given me dialogue suggestions, despite me telling it never to do that, and the suggestions are nowhere close to what I can produce. So best is to learn by taking webinars and courses.

Michele Baker Your instincts are spot on. There are legitimate remote writing jobs out there, but there has also been a noticeable increase in postings that are vague about end use, ownership, or rights, and some of those do appear designed to stockpile content or training material. The red flags are usually the same: unclear clients, unusually broad rights language, low pay for high volume, and contracts that quietly grant perpetual or transferable rights without explaining why.

That said, it’s not all malicious. Some companies genuinely don’t understand how their contracts read in the context of AI, and others are sloppy rather than deceptive. The key is due diligence. Ask what the work will be used for, who owns it, whether it can be reused for AI training, and whether rights are limited to the specific project. If they won’t answer clearly, that’s your answer.

Trust your instincts, read contracts carefully, and don’t be afraid to walk away. If it seems too good to be true and it’s not from a well-known company, it probably is. Protecting your work and your voice is not paranoia. It’s professionalism.

Thank you, Joshua! I really appreciate your generosity in responding, and in such detail. Before I posed my Q I checked with a stage 32 staff member who encouraged me to post, adding, “Joshua is a very kind and generous person.” Clearly!

Thank you to everyone who posted here. I got some great insight into A.I. although I have been introduced to A.I. a couple of years ago. I have read that some might have been using A.I. since the 80's. But this blog was a great read and thank you Joshua Young for your responses they were very detailed and informative.

Michele Baker , you’re more than welcome! I’m passionate about translating the difference between the real benefits and use cases versus the hype when it comes to AI, and how it affects our industry. So happy to help!

Joshua Young Thank you so much for taking the time to do this AI AMA. I am a huge fan of your webinars on using AI for story and more. My question is more for those who, like myself, are neurodiverse- many of us rely on AI to help us not lose the thread of our writing, to make sure we're not-- "losing the neurotypical" throughline while also being who we are. What ways do you think AI can be helpful for the neurodivergent members of the industry and not cross lines, etc?

Cynna Ael I actually have a lot of experience in the neurodiverse arena. AI can be genuinely helpful for neurodivergent creatives when it’s used as a stabilizer, not a translator of identity. Many neurodivergent writers already have strong voices and original thinking. Where things can get difficult is tracking structure, continuity, or how clearly intent is landing for someone outside your own head. AI is well suited to help there.

Some ethical, useful ways I see it helping:

- Thread-holding and continuity: Using AI to summarize what you’ve written so far, track character goals, or restate your story spine can help you stay oriented without flattening your voice.

- Clarity checks, not rewrites: Asking AI questions like “Where might a reader lose the throughline?” or “What feels unclear or under-explained?” rather than “Rewrite this to be more normal.”

- Note translation: AI can help sort feedback into objective issues versus subjective taste, which is especially useful when notes feel overwhelming or contradictory.

- Cognitive load reduction: Offloading organization, summaries, or task breakdowns frees up energy for the creative work only you can do.

The line not to cross is asking AI to make you sound “more neurotypical” or to replace your way of thinking. The goal isn’t conformity. It’s communication. AI should help your intent land more clearly, not sand off what makes your work distinctive.

Used this way, AI can be an accessibility tool, not a creative override. It supports you in staying you while navigating an industry that often demands clarity, speed, and structure.

Joshua Young THANK YOU. This is perfect. You've actually given me some help in how to ease my load because I tend to think I have to go through it all myself, not actually have AI help reduce that load in the things which seem to take me forever. I love the idea of clarity checks. I have enjoyed your webinars and go back to them often- finding new helpful hints every time. My goal is sometime this year- to take your lab on AI for writers.

Cynna Ael It's my pleasure Cynna! And congrats for pushing through despite any challenges. We writers all have that in common. I hope to see you at the next class or webinar!

Joshua Young a wealth of great and practical info - and excited to dig a bit more into how to bring Perplexity into my workflow. for some reason, I just didn't have it on my radar. thx for sharing your time and insight! cheers