A tough act

The stars walked the red carpet and then walked out. At the UK premiere of atom-bomb blockbuster Oppenheimer the cast left early "to write their picketA group of people who stand outside a workplace during a strike persuading other workers not to enter. signs", said director Christopher Nolan. "And we support them."

On Friday morning, 160,000 Hollywood actors joined writers in the biggest union action in over 60 years. The mega-strikeWhen people refuse to work until their demands for changes have been met. means a global shutdown of the industry. TV shows postponed. Films delayed. The Emmy and Academy Awards left in doubt.

Strikers demand fairer pay deals from online streaming companies and greater protection against artificial intelligence. The Screen Actors Guild (SAG) is worried AI versions of their actors will replace them without their permission.

Cillian Murphy received $10m (£7.6m) for his lead role in Oppenheimer. But most actors earn far less. SAG president Fran Drescher says streaming services like Netflix create a "dystopiaThe opposite of utopia (an imaginary vision of a perfect world). The term dystopia comes from Greek and literally means bad place.", putting profit before people and replacing actors with machines.

But does this matter? In the same week, UK doctors began the longest-ever strike over pay and conditions. Are they more important than actors? And if AI can make movies - why stop it?

It is an "opportunity for more voices to be heard," says actor Tye Sheridan. He co-founded an AI app that makes it cheaper and easier to add computer-generated characters to film. Digital technology will "empower" artists to tell better stories.

"We saw this coming," says Tom Hanks. A younger digital version of himself will appear in an upcoming sequel to Forrest Gump. And he expects his AI avatar "to go on and on" making films long after he is gone.

AI can give dead actors a new lease of life. Star Wars used CGIComputer-generated imagery. to resurrect Carrie Fisher as Princess Leia. Christopher Reeve made a comeback cameo as Superman in The Flash.

For some, this is crowd-pleasing nostalgia. But journalist James Troughton calls it "disgusting ... spoonfed nostalgia" which puts living actors out of work while disrespecting the rights of the dead to own their likeness.

But could a computer take the lead role in a film? Animator Lukas Niklaus doubts it. "Human emotions are too complex for an AI to fully grasp." Even with the best special effects, only a skilled actor can make a character believable.

Without that human touch, AI "plunges us into the uncanny valley", says Film academic Joshua Glick. This is the unsettling feeling we experience when we encounter something almost but not quite human. It can be reassuring to know there is a real live person behind the character.

A world without actors may not need gossip columns, TV interviews and red-carpet premieres. But it is not just about fame and glamour, argues theatre actor Jackie Apodaca. Their "timeless function" is to carry our "frustrations, fears, desires, and hopes". Evidence suggests cinema-going is good for our mental health.¹

In 1960, screenwriters downed tools for 21 weeks. Insiders warn the current strike could last months. So we may soon discover what a world without actors is like.

Yes: "Survival is insufficient," wrote Emily St. John Mandel in Station Eleven, her post-apocalyptic novel about acting. We will always need actors, for they help us understand what it means to be human.

No: Acting is just about making things look real. Computers are better at that than humans. In the future, we will be guaranteed five-star entertainment with AI-made films tailored to our personal tastes.

Or... New technology always changes entertainment. Film actors need different skills from theatre performers. AI will not make acting obsolete, but it may profoundly alter what it means to be an actor.