In the annals of cinema history, there are films that leave an indelible mark on the cultural landscape before they even flicker to life on the silver screen. “The Last Screenwriter,” helmed by Swiss filmmaker Peter Luisi, has managed to do just that—not through its visual storytelling or performances, but through its very existence and the controversy it has ignited.
The premise of “The Last Screenwriter” reads like a meta-commentary on the fears gripping Hollywood today. It follows Jack, a successful screenwriter who comes face-to-face with an AI scriptwriting system that not only matches but surpasses his own talents. It’s a plot that could have been ripped from the nightmares of countless writers in Tinseltown, a premonition of a future where the human touch in storytelling becomes obsolete.
But here’s where the lines between art and life blur in a way that would make even Charlie Kaufman’s head spin: the entire screenplay of “The Last Screenwriter”—from plot to characters to dialogue—was penned not by a human, but by ChatGPT, OpenAI’s language model. It’s as if the AI in the film’s narrative reached through the fourth wall and wrote its own story of triumph.
The irony is delicious, but it leaves a bitter aftertaste.
Originally slated for its world premiere on June 23, 2024, at the Prince Charles Cinema in London’s Soho district, “The Last Screenwriter” never made it to its first showing. On June 18, just days before the scheduled screening, the cinema pulled the plug, citing “strong concerns from their audience about the use of AI in place of human writers.”
This cancellation didn’t occur in a vacuum. It comes on the heels of the 2023 Hollywood strikes, where actors and writers took to the picket lines, their placards warning of the unregulated use of AI tools and the threat to their livelihoods. The ghost of those protests seems to have materialized in the form of this public backlash against “The Last Screenwriter.”
The reaction to the cancellation was as polarized as a Wes Anderson color palette. Some lauded the Prince Charles Cinema for its integrity, for standing firm against the tide of technological encroachment. Others decried the decision as an act of censorship, stifling important discussions about AI’s impact on the arts.
In the eye of this storm stands Peter Luisi, the director caught between his creation and its critics. Luisi expressed surprise at the backlash, maintaining that the film’s intention was to spark a conversation about AI’s impact on the film industry. It’s a noble goal, but one that seems to have backfired spectacularly.
Luisi argues that “The Last Screenwriter” could actually support the cause of human screenwriters by demonstrating AI’s capabilities. It’s an interesting perspective, akin to showing a room full of lamplighters the first electric bulb and expecting them to applaud. The fear, of course, is not that AI can write, but that it can write well enough to replace human creativity.
Despite the public screening’s cancellation, Luisi remains committed to his vision. He plans to hold a private premiere for the cast and crew on the originally scheduled date—a ghostlight in an empty theater, keeping the spirit of the production alive. Furthermore, in a move that echoes the open-source ethos of the tech world, Luisi intends to release the film online for free, along with the full screenplay and documentation detailing ChatGPT’s writing process.
This transparency is commendable, but it also feels like opening Pandora’s box and meticulously cataloging its contents. Will it demystify the AI writing process, or will it simply provide a blueprint for more AI-generated content?
The controversy surrounding “The Last Screenwriter” is a small fragment of the larger debate raging in the entertainment industry and beyond. It forces us to confront uncomfortable questions about the nature of creativity, the value of human input in the artistic process, and the ethical implications of AI in storytelling.
Are we witnessing the dawn of a new era in filmmaking, or the twilight of human creativity in cinema? Is AI a tool to augment human imagination, or is it the usurper of the writer’s throne? These are questions that “The Last Screenwriter” poses, even in its absence from the screen.
The irony is not lost that a film about an AI surpassing a human writer has itself become a victim of the very fears it sought to explore. It’s as if the narrative has leapt from the script into reality, blurring the lines between fiction and fact in a way that even the most audacious screenwriter might hesitate to pen.
In the end, “The Last Screenwriter” may never see the light of a projector in a public cinema, but its impact is undeniable. It has become a lightning rod for the anxieties and hopes surrounding AI in the creative industries. It has sparked debates in film circles, in tech forums, and in the court of public opinion.
Peter Luisi’s film, or rather the idea of it, serves as a Rorschach test for our attitudes towards AI and creativity. Some see in it the death knell of human artistry, others a fascinating experiment in the capabilities of machine learning. Some view its cancellation as a victory for human writers, others as a dangerous precedent of censorship.
As we stand at the edge of the latest convergence of art and technology, “The Last Screenwriter” serves as both a warning and a challenge. It warns us of a future where the lines between human and machine creativity are irrevocably blurred. But it also challenges us to define what makes human storytelling unique, what ineffable quality we bring to the creative process that a machine, no matter how sophisticated, cannot replicate.
In the grand tapestry of film history, “The Last Screenwriter” may be but a single thread, but it’s one that tugs at the very fabric of how we conceive cinema. It forces us to question not just how we make films, but why we make them, and what it means to create in an age where algorithms can spin yarns as well as (or better than) humans.
As the debate rages on, one thing is certain: “The Last Screenwriter” has achieved something that many films strive for but few achieve. It has started a conversation that extends far beyond the confines of a darkened theater. In doing so, it has become more than a film—it’s become a cultural touchstone, a reference point in the ongoing dialogue about the future of creativity in the age of AI.
Whether Luisi’s film will eventually find its audience remains to be seen. But in a twist worthy of the best screenplays, “The Last Screenwriter” has already made its mark on cinema history—not through its visuals or performances, but through its very concept and the reactions it has provoked.
In the end, perhaps that’s the most human thing about it.
%20Film%20That%20Never%20Was,%20Speaks%20Volumes){kind=link}