Halloween Horror Nights 2024 (USH) - Speculation & Rumors

[Lucky Planet]

The use of AI, no matter what coast or in how it's used; feels very dangerous to consider the rammifications if it comes down to how severe the material uses AI. Even if Universal did physical touchups on it; it's the principle of how you promote your material that counts.

Really hoping they redo this keyart; a shame to see this occur (I say this, knowing there was equal discourse on Triplets of Terror as-well if they used AI potentially there too). I don't think it's a sign of the quality of the house as per what @DTH thinks; Creative teams and marketing teams operate differently--but this feels like Marketing trying to cheapen out in a way that is gonna bring a bad mark.

It's genuinely just so disheartening going from all the beautiful hand drawn key art for things like Holidayz and Monstruos to this.
Judging by Orlando there definitely seems to have been some kind of budget crunch when it comes to key art, but this is just unacceptable, I would take a logo on a black background over AI slop stolen from the work of others, it's kinda just insulting on every level.

Trust me--I am kind of angered by it myself; but I have to hope there is enough of a response that warrants a change in tactics.

personally just in my opinion but i feel about AI art the exact same way i feel about cgi....cgi came around and ended so many jobs, hundreds of jobs. cgi basically ended the practical effects industry, it affected set design jobs, make up jobs. it literally made the entire movie industry move away from practical.....i can see ai art doing exactly the same. (ai and cgi might be different in nature and execution, but the effects on the industry will be exactly the same, even if you are pay 1 person to do cgi in a movie, that takes away from so many practical jobs ) it's computer technology taking away handmade art.

 

[Jake S]

personally just in my opinion but i feel about AI art the exact same way i feel about cgi....cgi came around and ended so many jobs, hundreds of jobs. cgi basically ended the practical effects industry, it affected set design jobs, make up jobs. it literally made the entire movie industry move away from practical.....i can see ai art doing exactly the same. (ai and cgi might be different in nature and execution, but the effects on the industry will be exactly the same, even if you are pay 1 person to do cgi in a movie, that takes away from so many practical jobs ) it's computer technology taking away handmade art.

no, it’s nothing like that at all — perhaps least of all because many, many people are needed to craft CGI (watch a Marvel movie’s credits sometime!) and again, AI in its current form is just stealing existing work and iterating on it.

 

[Lucky Planet]

no, it’s nothing like that at all — perhaps least of all because many, many people are needed to craft CGI (watch a Marvel movie’s credits sometime!) and again, AI in its current form is just stealing existing work and iterating on it.

yeah but the effect on physical effects and set design and make up design was still pretty negative, what it would take 50 people to create by hand, can now be done by 1 person on computer.
, and i hear that with ai stuff you still need a person writing a description?, which is what ai defenders always bring up. i always hear how "ai art" still needs a person to 'guide" or something? or to write specific commands? something about how 1 human controls the creation of ai? if i understand them properly?

 

[rageofthegods]

AI as a technology works by taking existing images, often copyrighted ones, and spitting out an image based on it without paying the requisite licensing fee. There are numerous examples of AI engines basically spitting out copyrighted materials with maybe a few aspects changed. It's no different from a high schooler changing the proper nouns on an essay they didn't write. Even in cases where this isn't the case, the image would not exist without the work of artists that came before.

They are leeches who feel the rules shouldn't apply to them.

 

[Lucky Planet]

AI as a technology works by taking existing images, often copyrighted ones, and spitting out an image based on it without paying the requisite licensing fee. There are numerous examples of AI engines basically spitting out copyrighted materials with maybe a few aspects changed. It's no different from a high schooler changing the proper nouns on an essay they didn't write. Even in cases where this isn't the case, the image would not exist without the work of artists that came before.

They are leeches who feel the rules shouldn't apply to them.

how does it work with real images or pictures of humans? where does it steal if someone creates something not drawn? and how could universal use it legally? and does any ai stuff fall under "parody" and does royalty free or fair use apply to any of this? if it was used for free?

 

[Clive]

how does it work with real images or pictures of humans? where does it steal if someone creates something not drawn? and how could universal use it legally? and does any ai stuff fall under "parody" and does royalty free or fair use apply to any of this? if it was used for free?

I encourage you to do some research. The true legality of AI has not yet been determined but is moving its way through the courts.

 

[Spookies n' Stuff]

how does it work with real images or pictures of humans? where does it steal if someone creates something not drawn? and how could universal use it legally? and does any ai stuff fall under "parody" and does royalty free or fair use apply to any of this? if it was used for free?

Photographers are artists too. AI images built off unauthorized use of real images, usually professionally taken images, is still art theft.

Basically, the way AI image generation functions is its fed a pool of existing images and data, and based on a text prompt, it takes those existing images and basically grinds them up and regurgitates the shape of a new image based on the existing pre-made images. Even if you constructed a scenario where someone was AI generating images using only source images that they themselves created and hold ownership over, AI models themselves such as OpenAi and others are often trained in the development stages using stolen work, so even if you were technically using AI ""Ethically"" in the sense of it being your own work or royalty free work, the models AI image generation functions off in the first place are often themselves built on theft of other peoples work without authorization. The long and short of it is as it stands, AI image generation in general is pretty much inherently theft. It's too new for there to be any legal precedent or action that can be taken against corporations that use it, but its morally and ethically wrong.

 

[DTH]

I think AI should be used as a tool or a guide. You want a shortcut to an answer? That's fine. But to straight up copy? No no no. Like if they rendered that image and told an artist, "hey could you do a version of this?" 100% acceptable. It cuts the process in half but keeps the work of artists. But to go "hey this picture is rendered, let's add onto it and pass it off as our own." I think that's what most people have a problem with. For "Late Night with the Devil," there are an odd amount of people who refuse to see the movie because of literal 3 seconds of AI images in the movie -- I think that is overkill because those images aren't crucial in anyway to the film -- but also, the images are INSANELY EASY to recreate, that it'd take 30 minutes to draw them, it's almost like, "really, you couldn't find ANYBODY to do this, even for free?" Obviously key art for this might take a bit longer, but there's plenty of artists who would love the opportunity. Throw it to an intern if you insist on it being free, I am sure they could come up with better.

 

[Freak]

I think AI should be used as a tool or a guide. You want a shortcut to an answer? That's fine. But to straight up copy? No no no. Like if they rendered that image and told an artist, "hey could you do a version of this?" 100% acceptable. It cuts the process in half but keeps the work of artists. But to go "hey this picture is rendered, let's add onto it and pass it off as our own." I think that's what most people have a problem with. For "Late Night with the Devil," there are an odd amount of people who refuse to see the movie because of literal 3 seconds of AI images in the movie -- I think that is overkill because those images aren't crucial in anyway to the film -- but also, the images are INSANELY EASY to recreate, that it'd take 30 minutes to draw them, it's almost like, "really, you couldn't find ANYBODY to do this, even for free?" Obviously key art for this might take a bit longer, but there's plenty of artists who would love the opportunity. Throw it to an intern if you insist on it being free, I am sure they could come up with better.

I made a thread in the general discussions regarding AI, but yeah, I don't think AI has a lot of legs the way it's going legally. I linked to a video there where AI has been straight-up stealing information from other blog posts online to steal proprietary info and that's just not gonna hold up legally.

But yeah, hopefully we see more "sincere" artwork from HHN in the future, because that's whack, cheap, and lazy.

 

[Spookies n' Stuff]

I will say, one of the most bizarre things about the choice to use AI in the key art is like, they directly teased the announcement using character concept art of the zombies. It really wouldnt have been *that* difficult to just place one of the concept art zombies in the AI zombies place, like this isn't even pure laziness its practically going out of their way to do something morally wrong when perfectly good human-made art exists and was shown to us first.

 

[Lucky Planet]

I think AI should be used as a tool or a guide. You want a shortcut to an answer? That's fine. But to straight up copy? No no no. Like if they rendered that image and told an artist, "hey could you do a version of this?" 100% acceptable. It cuts the process in half but keeps the work of artists. But to go "hey this picture is rendered, let's add onto it and pass it off as our own." I think that's what most people have a problem with. For "Late Night with the Devil," there are an odd amount of people who refuse to see the movie because of literal 3 seconds of AI images in the movie -- I think that is overkill because those images aren't crucial in anyway to the film -- but also, the images are INSANELY EASY to recreate, that it'd take 30 minutes to draw them, it's almost like, "really, you couldn't find ANYBODY to do this, even for free?" Obviously key art for this might take a bit longer, but there's plenty of artists who would love the opportunity. Throw it to an intern if you insist on it being free, I am sure they could come up with better.

you mention an artist doing it for free, and that's where my comment about royalty free images came to, instead of using AI, could have universal just picked an existing drawing of a zombie from a free website and use it? but if they are using free art or free work from an intern, they might be like " what's the point?" lol

 

[KlownzNskullZ]

Other

you mention an artist doing it for free, and that's where my comment about royalty free images came to, instead of using AI, could have universal just picked an existing drawing of a zombie from a free website and use it? but if they are using free art or free work from an intern, they might be like " what's the point?" lol

last time they did character photos like this one… it’s always done based off a photo of a real person then edited. Hollywood Harry is a good example

 

[rageofthegods]

For all you Scream-heads out there

 

[chris.g]

Same old song and dance every year. Wake me up when its finally officially announced, if ever.

 

[HHN Maddux]

For all you Scream-heads out there

Would love to see it on either coast, but I don't think Universal (or really any other studio) is gonna wanna try to touch Scream for a while.

 

[Freak]

Would love to see it on either coast, but I don't think Universal (or really any other studio) is gonna wanna try to touch Scream for a while.

Yo think with the next installment in development purgatory, you really think Spyglass would probably be willing to play ball?

 

[Viator]

For all you Scream-heads out there

I think the most interesting out of the responses that comes from the source of this; is oddly this one.



For those curious: Patrick Doody was one of the main writers of Konami's Silent Hill: Homecoming, and I believe has been rumored to of been the writer of the upcoming Return to Silent Hill movie. Might be kind of funny if the way SH comes back is by flirting between Murdy and those who work at or with Konami.

 

[Lucky Planet]

For all you Scream-heads out there

Would love to see it on either coast, but I don't think Universal (or really any other studio) is gonna wanna try to touch Scream for a while.

Yo think with the next installment in development purgatory, you really think Spyglass would probably be willing to play ball?

Orlando had an entire Scream house built years ago and I think at the very last minute, the studio said that it had to be based on the TV show and not the movies. and then universal had to turn the Scream house into the Purge. had to reuse the sets built.
I think they tried again years later and it was even worse. had worse problems. little cooperation or something.
I'm sure someone else knows about it better.

 

[Paulio]

Orlando had an entire Scream house built years ago and I think at the very last minute, the studio said that it had to be based on the TV show and not the movies. and then universal had to turn the Scream house into the Purge. had to reuse the sets built.
I think they tried again years later and it was even worse. had worse problems. little cooperation or something.
I'm sure someone else knows about it better.

I still remember that almost a decade ago. Made me so angry we almost could have an actual Scream house. So now we have to wait anxiously to see if it comes back years later.

 

[Lucky Planet]

I still remember that almost a decade ago. Made me so angry we almost could have an actual Scream house. So now we have to wait anxiously to see if it comes back years later.

but that's the thing, the rumor was that they recently tried a couple years ago, and the experience was allegedly worse.... I don't remember all the rumors, but I remember that it was said that they had worse luck than with the purge house.