Technology should support the story, not become the story: Aryan Santosh on using AI in filmmaking

As artificial intelligence continues to reshape filmmaking, actor-director Aryan Santosh remains cautiously optimistic about its role in cinema. As he prepares to take his latest film Chenkol—a two-part project in which he both stars and directs—to the floors, Santosh says he is open to harnessing AI’s potential, but believes filmmakers must use it with restraint and purpose. He tells us more about the use and restrictions of AI on celluloid:

‘Authenticity and consistency remain key challenges’
AI can be a useful tool for independent filmmakers who want to create a larger canvas despite budget constraints. But creating believable worlds and maintaining consistency remains a challenge. You can prompt AI to generate a 16th-century Indian fort or a magical kingdom floating above water, but it usually gives you a pre-built version of that world. The more prompts you add, the more unpredictable the results become. You may spend months refining prompts to achieve a specific visual. Even something as simple as an eagle flying can be difficult. I would have to specify exactly how it should look, the direction it should fly, and the mood it should convey. There has to be a touch of reality. Audiences must believe what they are seeing.

‘AI-generated visuals often lack the precision and control required for complex filmmaking’
While I play a DJ in the first part, the second instalment of the film is set in 526 AD and revolves around the Mushika dynasty. When you’re building a kingdom, a palace, or a massive fort, you need complete control over the composition. In CGI, we decide where every pillar stands, where the stairs lead, what angle the camera takes, and how the environment supports the story. There is a basic set that’s built physically, and beyond that, CGI helps extend the world and reinforce the theme. But with AI, the entire palace and its surroundings are generated by the system. It often doesn’t feel convincing because everything looks too perfect. Take Baahubali, for example. The reason audiences connected with it was the visual world that was painstakingly created through collaboration between directors, cinematographers, art directors and VFX teams. It wasn’t a world built entirely by AI.

‘AI can create a temporary ‘wow factor’, but spectacle alone isn’t enough’
When I launched the motion poster for Chenkol, I used AI selectively because it needed to blend organically with real footage. If Tom Cruise and Brad Pitt are fighting in a scene, audiences still want to see real images of them performing stunts, riding bikes and interacting physically. They don’t want everything to feel artificially generated.
Similarly, AI can create stunning visuals for something like a temple scene. But when you zoom in, you can often tell the diyas aren’t real from the way the flames flicker. AI can create a temporary ‘wow factor’, but spectacle alone isn’t enough. Our audiences will not accept visuals that are 100 per cent AI-generated. It is a powerful tool that can democratise filmmaking, but technology should support the story, not become the story itself.