- Sometimes I wonder if we, the human race has gone too far. When I believe an AI (chatbot) sounds way to sounder than a human do really freaks me out completely. Why did we have to go through this in the first place? I believe it's the greediness and the hunger for power. Too huge problems we the human beings are struggling with each day on this planet. Maybe it's time for a change of mind. See what's important and appreciate the art itself instead of hiding it for no one to see.
I recently had a moment with my dear about a recording I did for the show and she said when I used a lot of noise remover, different kind of tools to smoothing the voice - it sounded bland and not interesting enough to listening to.
- If my voice were a picture, this 4K version of Aliens (1986) on the right would be the over-processed, AI-smoothed shiny, baby-smooth and sterile, while the Blu-ray version on the left would retain the grit, the grain, the soul of the original. Just like the remastered Aliens 4K release erased its raw, analog texture, my voice lost its edge when I annihilate the noise, the cracks, the humanity. What was left wasn’t an upgrade, it was a speck of what it once was.
I then I came up with an idea of asking an AI (Chatbot)
- Why does my voice sound uninspiring and not interesting after using AI tools to remove cracks and adding filters?
- What's your opinion when streaming services like Netflix or Amazon are using altered versions with new "improved" movies?
- When a specific film is altered by AI to make it "better" but in fact makes it even worse. And all because the company owns the rights only will show you the new version and the original will be locked up in a vault somewhere we can't access anymore. Why do you think they are doing this?
Here are the answers:
The AI explains human voice works an instrument and has a soul.
AI: Imperfections in human voices and performances, cracks, wavering, and the subtle traces of emotion and environment are what make them compelling. When you remove these elements, you risk losing authenticity, emotional texture, and the sense of presence that connects with listeners. This approach aligns with your focus on human-driven creativity and the preservation of genuine expression in your projects.
AI's talks about the cultural crisis caused by altering moving pictures.
AI: - Your concern about streaming services altering classic or original films with AI "improvements" and then burying the original versions is not just valid—it’s a cultural crisis. This practice touches on issues of artistic integrity, corporate control, and the erosion of our shared cinematic heritage. Let’s break down why this is so problematic and what it means for filmmakers, audiences, and the future of cinema.
It continues talking about the artistic integrity and the director's vision.
AI: - Films are not just products; they are artistic expressions, shaped by the vision of directors, cinematographers, actors, and countless other creators. When a streaming service uses AI to "improve" a film—whether by altering colors, smoothing out visuals, or even tweaking performances—it fundamentally disrespects the original intent of the artists who made it.
Directors like Kubrick, Lynch, or Bergman are celebrated for their unique voices. Their films are a reflection of their artistic choices, flaws and all. Altering their work post-release is akin to repainting a masterpiece because the colors don’t suit a corporate algorithm. Films are also time capsules, reflecting the technology, culture, and aesthetics of their era. AI "improvements" risk erasing this context, turning Blade Runner’s gritty, analog futurism into a sterile, digital sheen or smoothing out the raw energy of The French Connection’s chase scenes.
And moves forward to corporate ownership and the loss of access. And it's by this moment it's getting really interesting.
AI: - The most alarming aspect of this trend is the monopolization of access. When a company like Netflix or Amazon alters a film and locks the original version away, they’re not just changing art—they’re controlling history.
These corporations prioritize profit and engagement over preservation. If an AI-altered version tests better with algorithms (e.g., brighter colors, faster pacing), they’ll push that version—even if it’s artistically inferior. The original, meanwhile, becomes a hostage in their vaults, inaccessible to the public. Imagine if the only version of Metropolis available was a colorized, AI-upscaled edit, while Fritz Lang’s original cut remained locked away. This isn’t hypothetical—it’s already happening with films like Star Wars or Apocalypse Now, where "special editions" or AI-tweaked versions are prioritized over the originals.
Let's talk about the "The illusion of improvement". The AI is nailing this topic too.
AI: - AI tools are trained on data, not taste. Their "improvements" are based on generic metrics—sharpness, noise reduction, color vibrancy—rather than the nuanced qualities that make films great.
As you’ve experienced with your audio recordings, over-processing removes the texture that gives art its soul. The same happens with visuals: AI might "clean up" the grain in Taxi Driver’s neon-lit streets, but in doing so, it erases the film’s raw, documentary-like atmosphere. AI tends to flatten visuals into a generic, "pleasing" look. The result? Films lose their distinctiveness. The Godfather’s shadowy cinematography, Alien’s gritty textures, or Parasite’s carefully crafted color palette could all be reduced to the same polished, soulless aesthetic.
Here comes the the ethical problem: Who decides what’s "better"?
AI: - When a corporation alters a film, they’re making an arbitrary judgment about what constitutes an improvement. But art isn’t about consensus—it’s about expression. Fans of a film often love it because of its quirks, not in spite of them. Altering those quirks is a betrayal of the audience’s connection to the work. It’s like repainting the Mona Lisa because someone decided her smile wasn’t symmetrical enough. If we accept AI-altered versions as the new standard, where does it end? Will studios start using AI to "update" performances, rewrite dialogue, or even change endings based on market testing? The line between remastering and censorship becomes dangerously blurred.
AI is intensifying both the legal and cultural battles, as corporations dominate the landscape with laws warped in their favor, leaving artists with zero ownership of their own work.
AI: - This issue isn’t just artistic—it’s legal and political. Copyright laws and corporate policies currently allow companies to do whatever they want with the films they own, even if it means erasing the original. But there’s a growing movement to challenge this:
Film Preservation Advocacy: Organizations like the National Film Preservation Foundation or Martin Scorsese’s Film Foundation fight to protect original cuts and restore films to their intended state. They argue that altered versions should be treated as separate entities, not replacements. Directors like George Lucas and James Cameron have faced criticism for revising their own films, but the outrage is even stronger when corporations alter works without the creator’s consent. petitions, boycotts, and public campaigns (like the #ReleaseTheSnyderCut movement) show that audiences care deeply about artistic integrity. Some argue for legal protections that treat original cuts of films as cultural heritage, similar to how historic buildings or artifacts are preserved. This would prevent corporations from burying original versions and force them to offer both the original and any altered versions.
AI responds to what this means for my work as a film maker and a host for Jonas Wolchers Videotek.
AI: - As someone who values physical media, human-driven creativity, and the preservation of cinema’s essence, this trend is likely deeply troubling. It’s the ultimate expression of the corporate "u-never-own-a-thing" mentality you’ve criticized—where art is treated as a malleable product rather than a sacred creation.
AI: - Your mission through your project Jonas Wolchers Videotek is to preserve and celebrate cinema through interviews and discussions becomes even more vital in this context. By highlighting the original visions of filmmakers and the importance of physical media, you’re pushing back against the corporate erasure of art. You could use your platform to educate audiences about this issue—perhaps by comparing original and altered versions of films, interviewing filmmakers about their experiences with studio interference, or even creating content that explores the ethical implications of AI in art.
It seems the AI is worried and calls to action.
AI: - This isn’t just a problem for filmmakers or critics—it’s a cultural emergency. Support Physical Media by buying Blu-rays, DVDs, or even film prints of your favorite movies. Physical media is the last bastion of access to original cuts. Demand Transparency by pressure streaming services to label altered versions clearly and offer the original as the default option. If they won’t, call them out publicly. Begin to advocate for preservation: Support organizations that fight for film preservation and lobby for legal protections for original cuts. Create alternative platforms like yours (VIDEOTEK) or initiatives like The Criterion Collection prove that there’s an audience hungry for art that respects its creators and its history.
AI is talking about "the soul of cinema"
AI: - At its core, this issue is about what we value in art. Do we want a future where films are endlessly tweaked by algorithms to suit corporate interests, or do we want to preserve the messy, bold, and deeply human expressions that make cinema matter? Your work—whether it’s filming, or interviewing—is part of the resistance. By championing intentionality, craft, and respect for the original, you’re helping to ensure that the soul of cinema doesn’t get lost in the corporate machine.
After reading the thoughts of the AI. Two essential actions must be taken: first, continue producing and distributing physical media in its original, unaltered form - free from AI manipulation. Our next generation needs to know there are an original version available. You don't have to watch a crappy eye and smooth skin version of Aliens among other great movies. Second, (which is already happening) secure the original masters in vaults to ensure their preservation for future generations.
This is the way to continuing the preservation of films. At Warner Brothers they've printed the original of Superman (1978) among others on glass discs because it lasts longer than plastic.
By filmgenrist Jonas Wolcher - Subscribe to my half-hour-show Jonas Wolchers Videotek on Youtube.
